Print 19 comment(s) - last by AssBall.. on Mar 27 at 1:13 PM

Company appears a bit confused, CEO Jobs preached "thermonuclear" war with Android

It was one of the most bitter feuds of tech visionary Steven P. Jobs waning years -- Apple versus Android.  The rivalry would come to consume the stricken leader of Apple, Inc. (AAPL) leading him to infamously declare to his autobiographer that he would resort to "thermonuclear war" to deal with Android, which he views as a "stolen product".

I. Apple Tried to "Negotiate" With Samsung (Redux)

But reportedly Apple was wary of creating precisely the kind of drawn out court mess that it would eventually find itself in [1][2][3][4] [5][6][7][8] [9][10][11].  A new filing [PDF] in U.S. federal court have added to the perspective of previous court testimony from Apple's Australian lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KS:005930).

As stated by Richard Lutton, a senior director at Apple and the company's patent attorney, in his Australian court testimony, Apple allegedly tried to inform Samsung of its infringement, with the implied suggestion that a settlement agreement may have been discussed.  The new filing puts these claims on the official U.S. court record and fleshes them out with fresh details

Steve Jobs
Apple in court is again claiming it told Samsung to remove features, but was met with resistance. [Image Source: Wired]

According to the filing, Samsung and Apple first met in July 2010, shortly after Apple smacked HTC Corp. (TPE:2498) with the first lawsuit in the legal conflict.  Apple claims Samsung willfully infringed, despite its July presentation and a handful of follow-up meetings.  It writes [PDF]:

On or about August 4, 2010, Apple representatives met with Samsung in Korea and showed a presentation titled 'Samsung's Use of Apple Patents in Smartphones.' This presentation emphasized Samsung's copying of the iPhone and identified two of the patents-in-suit (the '002 and '381 patents), giving Samsung actual notice of at least these patents, and many more.

On or about August 26, 2010, Apple sent Samsung an electronic archive file containing claim charts further illustrating Samsung's infringement of Apple patents. A presentation document that accompanied these claim charts identified the '002 and '381 patents as two patents that Samsung products infringed, and it substantiated these allegations with text from the patents and photographs of Samsung devices illustrating infringing functionality. Apple later presented these slides to Samsung at a meeting in Cupertino, California on or about September 9, 2010.

Patent '002 was U.S. Patent No. 6,493,002, a patent on "Method and apparatus for displaying and accessing control and status information in a computer system", covers preventing a static toolbar GUI element from overlapping with active windows.  There are several places where such touches could be construed as occurring in Android, including with its notifications bar, which is drawn over the active window.  The patent was filed in 1997 and issued in 2002.  While clearly originally intended for a non-handheld environment Apple claimed the patent was broad enough to apply to mobile devices as well.

Patent '381 was U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381, a patent describing "List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display", offered a much more mobile-centric invention claim.  It covered Apple's "kinetic scrolling" mechanisms, which allowed for faster scrolling within long lists (say an email inbox) on a handheld.  Despite modifying its devices to try to skirt Apple's claims, Samsung's dumbed down scrolling is still being targeted by Apple, who appears to be claiming broad ownership of all scrolling on handheld devices. 

II. The Great Unknown -- What Did Apple Offer Samsung Behind Closed Doors?

While Apple made it clear that it presented the alleged infringements to Samsung, one thing not made clear by the filing is what happened next.  Did it offer licensing?  Did it simply demand the features be removed?

Rumor has it that Apple made Samsung a deal with the devil -- it would not sue, if Samsung voluntarily agreed to pay licensing and, more painfully, agreed to forgo the lucrative tablet market that Apple had just bred months earlier with the launch of the first generation iPad.

Apple allegedly had high hopes that Samsung would back down.  After all it had a long history of bullying open source companies like Sun Microsystems into unfavorable settlement agreements.  But the notorious bully was surprised to find Samsung not cowed like Sun and unafraid of the recent court action against HTC.  Apple had underestimated Samsung -- a company that is itself known as a bit of a "patent bully".

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
Apple and Samsung could not reach an out of court settlement regarding Apple's allegations of infringement.  Samsung claims Apple infringes on its IP. [Images Source: 9to5Google]

Ultimately the fight between the two companies would commence months later when a bitter Apple -- frustrated at lack of cooperation from Samsung -- filed suit in April 2011 in Northern California District Court.  Samsung, which in 2011 ascended to become the world's top Android phonemaker and enter a virtual tie with Apple for the position of the world's top smartphone seller, would go on to escalate the court battle into an international war.

There have been loses on both sides.  In some regions (such as Germany), Samsung has been forced to adopt a clumsy spiral unlock, which is far less easy than the slide unlock that U.S. users still enjoy.  Likewise, where as U.S. customers enjoyed untainted Galaxy Tab 10.1's in 2011, in Germany Samsung was force to put out a revised design in order to regain entrance into the market.  And of course, as mentioned, Samsung was forced to remove certain scrolling functionality and other perks from its Android distribution via updates.

Apple also has had its casualties.  While it has largely blocked Samsung's questionable efforts to slap it with 3G patent violations (which arguably should never have been used in a lawsuit as they were licensed under the "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory" (FRAND) rules), it has been less successfully in fighting Samsung's technology patents.  Samsung has successfully forced Apple to kill push email service to customer in Germany.

III. Despite Reports of Pending Truce, Fight Far From Over

That loss led to reports that Apple was negotiating a licensing settlement, seeking $5 to $15 USD per device from Samsung, HTC, and other Android phonemakers, a similar payout to Microsoft's Android licensing arrangement.

If such a licensing deal is in the works, there's no official sign of it yet.  Ultimately Samsung is still actively suing Apple and Apple is actively suing Samsung (as the document filed in U.S. court illustrates).  Ultimately, most experts agree that an armistice would behoove both gadget makers, but both companies appearing to be holding out, hoping to strengthen their respective bargaining positions with court victories.

King Kong v. Godzilla
Like Japanese movie monsters, Samsung and Apple are slugging it out, leaving a path of sales destruction in their wake. [Image Source: Toho Pictures]

The latest court revelation from Apple and its leaked release to the public is certainly a clever public relations ploy on Apple's part.  It is absolutely in Apple's interest to portray itself not as the aggressor in the global dispute, but as the victim.

But in reality, without knowing what Apple demanded from Samsung, it's hard to say exactly how reasonable Apple's request was.  And one must bear in mind that much of Apple's asserted intellectual property against Android is overly broad non-mobile operating system patents, which cover fundamental GUI elements.  In that regard, the described talks may have been less of a friendly warning and more of a bully's threat of legal blows.  What Apple clearly did not anticipate was that it was talking to a bully who was equally willing to hit back.

The "King Kong" and "Godzilla" of the gadget world should enjoy a fiercely fought 2012, both in the store and in the courts.

Source: SBNation

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

blah... this needs to just end.
By retrospooty on 3/26/2012 1:18:14 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is never going to win, and they didn't invent scrolling and cant own it for all handhelds. Stupid vague un-enforceable patents.

RE: blah... this needs to just end.
By nolisi on 3/26/2012 1:59:14 PM , Rating: 2
The sad thing is, they might be enforceable, depending on how much is spent on lawyers and the judge involved.

RE: blah... this needs to just end.
By Commodus on 3/26/2012 2:09:57 PM , Rating: 2
That's oversimplifying. The patent isn't for scrolling -- it's for a specific approach to scrolling. That kinetic scrolling with the physics-based "bounce" as you hit the edge.

One thing I've noticed is that a lot of the stauncher Android advocates grossly exaggerate what they think Apple was trying to patent to make it look as though Apple wanted to patent breathing. I agree that some of the patenting is a bit contentious, but let's argue based on what's actually going on, shall we?

By stardude692001 on 3/26/2012 2:06:45 PM , Rating: 1
Apple did patent breathing remember, Microsoft has to pay 3,000 dollars per employ for the right to let them breath.

By retrospooty on 3/26/2012 2:48:03 PM , Rating: 3
"That's oversimplifying. The patent isn't for scrolling -- it's for a specific approach to scrolling. That kinetic scrolling with the physics-based "bounce" as you hit the edge."

Still total BS. Apple copies other companies tech far FAR more than it is being copied. The thing that really pisses people off is not really the vague patents themselves, we all know the patent system is far beyond broken. Its the hypocracy of it all. Its OK for me to blatantly copy other products, but if other remotely copy mine, I sue.

If Apple were Palm anda Palm were Apple, Palm would have been suing the pants off of Apple for totally ripping off dozens of smartphone functions, apps, methods etc. Apple copied Palm 10x more than any other company copied Apple ever.

RE: blah... this needs to just end.
By Solandri on 3/26/2012 4:50:56 PM , Rating: 5
The patent isn't for scrolling -- it's for a specific approach to scrolling. That kinetic scrolling with the physics-based "bounce" as you hit the edge.

That "bounce" has been a staple of cartoon animation for over 70 years. The copy of 3D Studio I played with back in the early 1990s (yes, on DOS) had a short video explaining it and demonstrating how to animate it.

You shouldn't be able to take ideas which are ancient and common in one domain, shift it to a different domain, and get a shiny new patent on it. This is yet another stupid "on a" patent. Email... on a phone! Shopping... on the Internet! Light bulbs... on a car! Bouncing... on a scrollbar!

RE: blah... this needs to just end.
By Boze on 3/26/2012 11:27:52 PM , Rating: 2
Oh my god, I remember using 3DSMAX on DOS... man, you make me realize how long I've been using PCs, Sol.

And I couldn't agree more by the way.

By BZDTemp on 3/26/2012 2:56:31 PM , Rating: 2
Apple can not win. It would a major problem if they being they seem heel bent on taking over the world.

I once liked Apple but we are talking pre-iWhatever and these days Apple is worse than even Microsoft.

It's always nice to warn someone first.
By AssBall on 3/26/2012 2:22:45 PM , Rating: 2
I was also warned by the Mexican with the knife that he was going to mug me before he took my watch and money. Very nice of him.

Kudos Apple for warning your competitors before you take them illegitimately to court...

By JasonMick on 3/26/2012 2:32:59 PM , Rating: 3
Kudos Apple for warning your competitors before you take them illegitimately to court...

Ha exactly.

But as much as I blame Apple, I blame the current global patent systems equally. Things are just such a complete mess right now. For example current precedents indicate you can:

1. Have patented some little PC graphical flourish (e.g. preventing windows from overlapping -- WOW!) in the 1990s, then fast-forward to present and sue people in the mobile space.

2. Gain patents on ubiquitous gestures (such as slide to unlock), even though there's already mobile patents on the same gesture, and similar gestures have been used in a non-touch context on the PC for decades.

Granted, my hope is that the courts will narrow these claims, but the real issue is that the USPTO and other global patent offices are granting seemingly RIDICULOUSLY BROAD patents and then relying on the courts having the good judgement to narrow the patent during the inevitable infringement proceedings. This should be done up front at the patent office. The current system waste taxpayer money and is disruptive to the tech industry. Patents need to be narrowed from day one.

That way not only are companies dissuaded from filing junk patents, but it also prevents corrupt lawsuit "cottage industries" from popping up around certain federal courts (in which the local prosperity is predicated on a high rate of successful suits, regardless of merit), such as the East Texas district court. At present, these courts are inclined to offer up clearly biased and astoundingly illogical rulings.

By FishOutOfTheWater on 3/26/2012 3:17:28 PM , Rating: 1
AssBall great name. Just like your way of thinking.

RE: It's always nice to warn someone first.
By retrospooty on 3/26/2012 3:29:00 PM , Rating: 2
"Just like your way of thinking."

The name, the anti-sue stance, or the fact that in his analogy the guy with a knive had to be Mexican? :O LOL

The movie version
By LSUJester on 3/26/2012 1:59:19 PM , Rating: 5
Apple: Since you have violated these patents, I will not sue if you do these two things:

1. Stop selling your phones and tablets forever

2. Pay me 1 billion dollars in "licensing"

If you refuse, then not only will I sue you, but I, Steven P. Jobs, will order my army of acolytes to destroy all of your facilities. And then I will personally break your skulls with this apple made of gold. Also, as I have vast amounts of surplus cash, aka bribe money, there is nothing you or your little friends can do about it.

Samsung: HA! You're a skinny white American with someone else's liver. I know kung-fu!

Apple: *smirks* Prepare to die!

How the conversation really played out...
By abhaxus on 3/26/2012 2:51:36 PM , Rating: 2
Apple: you are infringing on our patents, if you don't start paying us or stop using them we will sue you.
Samsung: You've patented ridiculous things for which prior art exists. Any sane judge will agree with us. Go f yourself.

18 months and several clearly insane judges later...

By retrospooty on 3/26/2012 2:55:31 PM , Rating: 2
"18 months and several clearly insane judges later..."

I don't believe they have actually won anything, other than a one off in Germany. Even then, the judges looked at it and took the teeth out of the decision. I am pretty sure there are several cases that they lost and are appealing, looking for the right judge to rule their way, but they haven't successfully done anything other than piss everyone off and waste legal resources and gum up the court system.

What does the patent say?
By drycrust3 on 3/26/2012 3:43:46 PM , Rating: 3
Looking at the '002 patent, my reading is I can't see how an Android phone infringes upon this because there is no cursor on an Android smartphone. This patent specifically requires the use of a cursor. You only need a cursor when you use a mouse so you can see what part of the screen the computer is specifically going to associate commands with. With a touch screen based computer, your finger touches the part of the screen the computer should associate commands with, so you don't need a cursor.
I was wonder if half the problem for Apple's is they sent presenters who could only speak English to this meeting, not presenters who could speak FLUENT Korean as well. This could have lost them credibility in the sight of the Koreans.

The Devil
By adiposity on 3/26/2012 7:00:00 PM , Rating: 3
Rumor has it that Apple made Samsung a deal with the devil

Is this a round about way of saying Apple is the devil?

Although, I think you mean "offered."

Come to think of it, this may be the first time "making a deal with the devil" has been used in this third party form. How exactly does someone else make a deal with you "with the devil"? Is this like a threesome?


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki