Print 82 comment(s) - last by woody1.. on Sep 28 at 9:43 AM

Google says Apple ripped off Motorola's patented messaging technology

With its crushing court defeat of Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930), Apple Inc. (AAPL) won a key battle in its fight against Google Inc. (GOOG), but the war remains far from over.

I. Motorola Hit Back

Previously, Google (via its subsidiary Motorola Mobility) and Apple had fought each other to a standstill with Judge Richard A. Posner, a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge moonlighting in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago). Posner twice dismissed the pair's suits/countersuits with prejudice arguing that both side effectively just wanted to ban the other's products and wasn't looking for legitimate damages.

That stalemate left Google with limited options.  However, it is now pursuing its biggest and best opportunity to hurt Apple -- a U.S. International Trade Commission complaint.  With the complaint Google is looking to hit Apple hard, banning nearly every single one of its products, including all its best-selling devices.

The ITC independent investigates patent dispute claims.  And as most mobile device makers -- including Apple -- manufacture their products exclusively in China, its panel of judges essentially have as much power as a federal judge and jury, as they can order a blockade on imports -- an effective sales ban -- if they feel infringement occurred.  That's precisely the route Apple used to temporarily stifle the sales of Android phonemaker HTC Corp. (TPE:2498) in May.

Apple products
Google is seeking to ban virtually all Apple's devices [Image Source: Apple]

For its new complaint Google-Motorola was careful not to use one of its 3G or 4G patents, which may be illegal to sue Apple with, given that they were developed for industry standards.  Instead, Google-Motorola is using U.S. Patent No. 6,983,370, a broad patent that describes cross-platform messaging to a "plurality of messaging clients".  The patent was filed in 2001 and granted to Motorola in 2006 by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
Exhibit 27

Apple may be treading on dangerous ground, given how broad Motorola's patent is.  Its best bet may be to try to find cracks in certain Motorola claims and then try to challenge the patent on the grounds of invalid claims construction.  Otherwise it could find almost of its products -- the iPhone, most iPods, the iPhone, the iPad, and Mac computers -- banned from import into the U.S.

II. Vague, Yes, But Motorola Could Win

To be clear Google's patent is almost laughably ubiquitous -- it's basically claiming that any messaging client that uses Wi-Fi or cellular data connections is in violation of its patent.

But again, logic and reason have long since left town in patent land in the U.S.  

For example Apple's big win against Samsung in part came thanks to a pair of patents that were equally ridiculous, if not more so.  One patent was a design patent covering a broad array of smartphone shapes (rectangular with curved edges), while a second was the so-called "rubber-band" patent, which granted Apple exclusively rights to have its graphical user interface mirror a kind of commonly occurring natural phenomena (a transient effect).  That would be like if you patented making a graphical element move in a spiral.

In addition to the messaging patent, Motorola also is claiming iOS and OS X infringe on several other patents -- U.S. Patent No. 5,883,580 (COVERS: geo-tagging and time-stamping messages FILED: 1997 GRANTED: 1999); U.S. Patent No. 6,493,673  (COVERS: markup language for user messages and input FILED: 2000 GRANTED: 2002); U.S. Patent No. 5,922,047 (COVERS: processing control signals from multimedia/telephony apps FILED: 1996 GRANTED: 1999); U.S. Patent No. 6,425,002 (COVERS: interapplication message passing FILED: 1998 GRANTED: 2002); U.S. Patent No. 7,007,064 (COVERS: memory management for wireless communications FILED: 2002 GRANTED: 2006); and U.S. Patent No. 7,383,983 (COVERS: pausing messaging content FILED: 2005 GRANTED: 2008).

Nearly all of Motorola's current claims is built around broad messaging patents.
[Image Source: Scribd]

If you see a central theme it's because there is one -- basically Motorola has patents that cover virtually every single aspect of wireless messaging and it's looking to use that non-FRAND portfolio to punish Apple.

If Apple can win on such confounding patents, it would not surprise for Google-Motorola to potentially score a similar logic-defying win, assuming luck is in their favor at their day in court.

The ITC has voted to investigate the claim against Apple, so the filings are now on the public record and win, lose, or draw Motorola will at least have its day in court.

Sources: Scribd, U.S. ITC

Comments     Threshold

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

By NellyFromMA on 9/21/2012 8:58:08 AM , Rating: 5
Kinda weird that people aren't agitated with Google's pursuit of litigation.

Kind of reminds me of politics. It's not really about who's right or wrong or even facts in general, just that your favorite team wins -_-

RE: ...
By xti on 9/21/2012 9:31:59 AM , Rating: 4
i fear that if i agree with you, i will get burned at the stake too.

RE: ...
By vignyan on 9/21/2012 9:55:45 AM , Rating: 5
Yes, but somehow, I feel like this is intended to bring apple to a limited cross licensing deal so that Motorola can spend more time on design and less time in the courts... like Microsoft.

I hope I am right. Otherwise, I will have to add Google to my list of hated companies - right next to apple.

RE: ...
By polishvendetta on 9/21/2012 12:29:54 PM , Rating: 3
While i see this as more of a self defence type of case im still all for the judges stance that originally threw out the Motorola v Apple case.

Make phones, not lawsuits!

RE: ...
By othercents on 9/21/2012 3:15:10 PM , Rating: 3
Make phones, not lawsuits!

I wish all judges felt the same way, but for some reason the ones in California are very happy to let the Apple suits keep going and going and going and going......

I don't feel as though the lawsuit that Google/Motorola is placing is as baseless as the ones Apple has placed. There are places for lawsuits however to go out of your way to steal someone else's idea then patent it and sue other companies over it is just as bad as the thief that fell through a skylight and sued the home owner.


RE: ...
By crazy1 on 9/22/2012 1:08:39 AM , Rating: 3
Agreed. The patent war should end. Apple should give Samsung it's money back. The USPO should re-evaluate what details should be included in a valid patent.

RE: ...
By StevoLincolnite on 9/21/2012 11:10:35 AM , Rating: 5
You have to remember... Apple started this patent-litigation war... So many people have very little sympathy for them at this stage, honestly do you blame them?

I do want to see Apple on the receiving end of having it's products banned for a short while, just so they know what it is like on the receiving end of the stick.

Plus, this will hopefully bring more proof to light on how BROKEN the patent system really is and get it fixed.

RE: ...
By ritualm on 9/21/2012 12:14:26 PM , Rating: 2
Huh? I thought it was Nokia that ultimately started the tailspin. Apple turned patent trolling into an art form.

RE: ...
By Samus on 9/21/2012 3:56:09 PM , Rating: 4
Nokia was appropriately protecting its IP which Apple copied quite a bit of at a hardware level (we're not talking about frivilous crap like a green "Phone" icon or rubberband effect) but in the end, Apple copied, and perfected, what Nokia started.

RE: ...
By Scannall on 9/22/12, Rating: -1
RE: ...
By NellyFromMA on 9/24/2012 12:40:06 PM , Rating: 2
I'm definitely not an Apple sympathizer and I do get your point (I believe) that Apple initiated this long string of largely idiotic patent litigation particularly the whole 'ban products' aspects.

I just like to keep it fair and especially like to note when I see double-standard-like situations.

I think Apple's recent wins in court are rediculous and foolish at best and of course Google must defend itself.

The reaction in response to Google's decision is just interesting to me though.

I wonder if any serious alternatives to the current patent system are being proposed/drafted/considered.

RE: ...
By aicom64 on 9/21/2012 9:34:24 AM , Rating: 5
If somebody got punched in the face, would you be agitated if they decided to stand up for themselves and punch back?

RE: ...
By Tony Swash on 9/21/12, Rating: -1
RE: ...
By phatboye on 9/21/2012 11:10:59 AM , Rating: 5
You do realize that Motorola was a pioneer in the mobile space. Apple wouldn't even have an iPhone if it was not for the early work done by Motorola, so claiming Motorola stole from Apple is completely bogus.

RE: ...
By morob05 on 9/21/2012 11:22:06 AM , Rating: 2
The thing is that it is pretty much impossible to build a smartphone and not infringe on one of apple's patents!! Apple needs to chill out and be satisfied and content with their great sales-figures... May the better product win, not the better patent or lawyer!!

RE: ...
By Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer on 9/21/2012 11:54:53 AM , Rating: 5
If you believe Steve Jobs was justified in his insane, deluded, megalomaniacal crusade against Android and Samsung, then sure, I guess you would consider Apple to have not punched first.

If, on the other hand, you recognize Apple's actions for what they are, the deliberate attempt to cripple a successful competitor in the market without actually having to compete, then Apple clearly threw the first punch.

So, yeah, in this case I'm rooting for Google, because they're not the company that's actively trying to stifle innovation.

RE: ...
By retrospooty on 9/21/2012 4:00:33 PM , Rating: 5
Tony, just STFU. Not even Wozniak agrees with your disgustingly skewed take on everything.

RE: ...
RE: ...
By bupkus on 9/21/2012 9:45:00 AM , Rating: 1
Does the fact that Apple is going for the absolute maximum not bother you? If that maximum were 10 billions do you think Apple would hesitate to mark that as their cost in damages or if the court allowed for Apple to ask for the keys to all Samsung assets?

Pirates of Silicon Valley Part 2

RE: ...
By bupkus on 9/21/2012 9:54:03 AM , Rating: 3
Pirates of Silicon Valley Part 2
brought to you by the U.S. Patent Agency.*

All rights reserved.
Warning: Copyright infringement of US may result in our coming over to your house and shoving a street lamp up your...

RE: ...
By Camikazi on 9/21/2012 9:39:34 AM , Rating: 2
Seems like they are defending themselves, Apple has gone after their partners and their OS trying to destroy them. I honestly can't blame them for doing the same to Apple, when it comes to companies being the nice guy and turning the other cheek will end up with you going out of business. They are tyring to show Apple that they won't stand down and will fight to protect themselves.

RE: ...
By hugo_stiglitz on 9/21/2012 9:45:25 AM , Rating: 5
Exactly. If Google can win some lawsuits at least this would force Apple into some sort of cross-licensing deal where everyone can compete with their products instead of having their products banned. Apple started this patent-trolling war, that's why there's no sympathy for them.

RE: ...
By nafhan on 9/21/2012 10:22:18 AM , Rating: 2
I'm agitated by it. Given the current legal environment, though, it's probably the best thing for them to do.

I'm REALLY hoping that a few major corporations get stung badly enough by all this nonsense that THEY start pushing for patent reform. More likely situation is that we just end up with a bunch of cross-licensing agreements after years of billion-dollar legal wrangling: incumbents keep what they've already got, and new players have an even more difficult time breaking into the market.

RE: ...
By blueaurora on 9/21/2012 11:10:33 AM , Rating: 5
Did Google even care about doing this prior to Apples highgincks? NO... Has Apple opened pandoras box yes. If google wanted to they could bring down half the mobile industry. Will they. NO. All Google wants is to settle this on the merits that count the sales counter.

I don't think it would be realistic to think that a company with as much capital under the belt cares one bit about suing Apple for monetary damages. They can in essence shut apple down for force them into letting bygones be bygones.

RE: ...
By blueaurora on 9/21/2012 11:18:14 AM , Rating: 2
Nuclear War is the only way to start over in this patent system.

RE: ...
By geddarkstorm on 9/21/2012 12:59:38 PM , Rating: 2
That sounds like something an archvillain in an X-men movie would say. Except this case it's likely true.

RE: ...
By BZDTemp on 9/21/2012 11:22:22 AM , Rating: 2
Not really.

Google is an innovator as opposed to Apple that is mostly about good integration and marketing. And also Google is the that is open to the world which is very different from Apple that do their very best to lock people to their platform.

Is Google perfect - No, but with Apple you don't need to look longer than their lack of USB port on their iPhone/iPad as a great example of them being dicks.

RE: ...
By Dug on 9/21/2012 11:56:36 AM , Rating: 1
Google an innovator?
You do realize they have bought over 115 companies and use their ideas to put into their software.
And you really believe that Google doesn't want to lock you into their platform? And they are open to the world?

You really need to go back in history and read about the cutthroat tactics Google has used over the years.
They have bought some very good software and completely ruined it for the rest of us by not doing anything with it.

RE: ...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/21/2012 12:07:24 PM , Rating: 2
I love all the examples and sourced evidence you provide for these claims.

Look I'll just put this in terms maybe you can understand: Google rocks your dumb face off.

RE: ...
By Dug on 9/21/12, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/21/2012 3:40:55 PM , Rating: 5
If YOU are going to make claims, YOU need to back it up, don't expect others to do YOUR work for you...

RE: ...
By kdogg4536 on 9/22/2012 5:16:19 AM , Rating: 3
Google bought up those 115 companies therefore they are now Google's property. Those ideas that you refer to as "theirs" are no longer "theirs" as Google now owns them. They can do with them as they see fit. WTF is your problem. Companies, software, IP get purchased all the time.

Google is just fighting fire with fire.

By cutthroat tactics, must be referring to whipping out the old wallet.

I wish all software companies locked me into their platform the way Google offering compelling products that I have yet to directly pay a single cent for.

RE: ...
By Solandri on 9/22/2012 2:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
And you really believe that Google doesn't want to lock you into their platform?

What makes you think Google wants to lock me into their platform? There are a bunch of other market apps out there if I don't like Google's Play store. Heck, if Apple wanted to make an App Store for Android, they could. Or I can download and install any app I find on any website via my phone's browser. Or if a friend gives me an app on a CD or I write a custom app, I can easily sideload it because Android devices appear as simple USB storage devices when you connect them to a computer.

And they are open to the world?

They are so open both Amazon and Barnes & Noble took the Android OS source code, made custom proprietary versions, and released very successful tablets based on those custom versions of Android. A healthy user community takes the source code and provide upgrades to the latest version of Android even to devices whose manufacturers and carriers have refused to upgrade. How much more open do you want?

RE: ...
By topkill on 9/21/2012 12:34:15 PM , Rating: 2
Totally wrong. I have nothing against Apple. I'm against whoever is leading the charge to litigation and that is Apple the majority of the time these days.

They've decided to litigate to wipe out competition. If they want to start just producing products again and competing on a level playing field then more power to them.

Google is clearly trying to force Apple to cross license so they can back them off their other law suits.

RE: ...
By BifurcatedBoat on 9/21/2012 1:32:53 PM , Rating: 2
This is the corporate version of a war. After the enemy bombs one of your cities, it's expected that you'll attack back.

At least for the time being, it appears that Google is doing this in a defensive manner. If they started using those patents to attack other companies in an offensive manner as Apple has done, then that would be different.

RE: ...
By GotThumbs on 9/21/12, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By Silvio on 9/21/2012 3:45:11 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, look. We've modelled everything our country does after Football.

RE: ...
By rs2 on 9/21/2012 9:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
It's not weird at all. Apple started the frivolous patent lawsuits.

Granted, two wrongs don't make a right, but it's fitting to see Apple getting a taste of its own medicine for once. And sometimes you just have to fight fire with fire.

So by a score of two idiomatic expressions to one, Google is in the right here.

RE: ...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/22/2012 1:25:36 PM , Rating: 2
Google didn't start this nonsense. But I'm reminded of a Babylon 5 quote with this topic...

"You cannot win this war. You can only survive it! And we intend to."

RE: ...
By OCedHrt on 9/23/2012 6:16:36 AM , Rating: 2
That's because at this point it is just returning the fire.

RE: ...
By tamalero on 9/24/2012 11:27:03 AM , Rating: 2
probably because people sick of apple doing bullsh1t legal actions.
so they are so sick.. they would love to see them getting hit back with the same.. even if its the mighty google.

RE: ...
By woody1 on 9/28/2012 9:43:51 AM , Rating: 2
Google is fighting against Apple terrorism. Given the insanity of the patent laws, the only way to fight is using the same methods. Note that Apple started this war, not Google.

By tayb on 9/21/2012 7:53:02 AM , Rating: 2
I hope it happens. In fact, I hope that ALL of these idiots take each other out and we get to a point where no one can sell anything because of the infinite stupidity of the players in the market. Only getting to such an incredibly ridiculous low point could ever bring about patent reform.

So, I'm rooting for nuclear war and chaos in hopes that things will get better when the dust settles.

RE: Good....goooood...
By retrospooty on 9/21/2012 7:58:26 AM , Rating: 2
LOL. Tool -Aenima.

"I'm praying for Rain, I'm praying for tidal waves. I wanna watch the ground give way, I wanna flush it all away. "

Referring to Los Angeles and/or the idiocy of man, but it fits here too.

RE: Good....goooood...
By vXv on 9/21/2012 8:19:57 AM , Rating: 2
Text Only getting to such an incredibly ridiculous low point could ever bring about patent reform.

Yeah indeed this seems to be the only way to stop this nonsense.

RE: Good....goooood...
By geddarkstorm on 9/21/2012 1:08:05 PM , Rating: 2
Metallo: What are you gonna do, destroy the world?
Vandal Savage: Noting so crude. Half. Two-thirds at the most.

RE: Good....goooood...
By jimbojimbo on 9/21/2012 3:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
This could happen.. but seemingly only in America. We'll be left using landlines again soon enough.

By Camikazi on 9/21/2012 9:41:22 AM , Rating: 2
MS and Apple work together with licenses so they don't go after each other, that is the only reason that MS has not been mentioned in any Apple lawsuits.

RE: Work the body Samsung; Google you work the head
By chµck on 9/21/2012 12:23:21 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't microsoft still own like 10% of apple?

By TakinYourPoints on 9/22/2012 4:47:45 AM , Rating: 3
Microsoft never owned a significant stake to begin with.

The "investment" in 1997 was $150 million in limited non-voting shares created out of thin air by diluting existing stock. Those shares were sold three years later. By comparison, Apple had a $3 billion market cap and $1.2 billion in cash, far greater than the $150 million in funny money.

The substantial part of the deal was the agreement by Apple to drop lawsuits against Microsoft (good to help MS save face since the DOJ was coming down hard on them at the time), for Microsoft to continue making Office for the Mac (put confidence in a struggling platform), and for the companies to enter a very long period of cross-licensing.

It continues to this day, Microsoft makes a lot from Apple by selling Office and ActiveSync licenses. In regards to smartphones, Microsoft has mobile UI and technology licenses from Apple (Samsung refused to license and went to court over it) while Apple uses ActiveSync across all of their devices. Full use of ActiveSync protocols is one of the big reasons why iOS is so much more secure than Android.

Apple and Microsoft are actually very cozy, the marketing and "investment" and such is just a dog and pony show for the masses.

By BugblatterIII on 9/21/2012 4:02:37 PM , Rating: 2
That's why it probably won't happen.

Microsoft also offers protection to any phones running Windows Phone 8, which has probably been part of the reason companies have been making them rather than focusing entirely on Android.

Now Google's finally going to step up and do something similar. Long overdue, but perhaps they're were biding their time until the iPhone 5, when it'll hurt Apple the most.

this will be interesting
By ikeke1 on 9/21/2012 7:52:59 AM , Rating: 4
now, wheres my popcorn :)

RE: this will be interesting
By chmilz on 9/21/2012 10:41:36 AM , Rating: 4
FFS is there any popcorn left?

The real question is...
By hugo_stiglitz on 9/21/2012 11:25:13 AM , Rating: 2
Why did Apple start this patent-trolling/ban hammer war to begin with? If their products are so superior (as their customers and iSheep seem to believe), why does the world's #1 tech company feel the need to ban their competitor's products instead of competing with them? Simple: They fear the same thing that happened to them back in the 80s within the Desktop PC space. This is why they'd rather ban and monopolize than risk going against the competition.

RE: The real question is...
By R3T4rd on 9/21/2012 12:21:45 PM , Rating: 2

Begun the Jobs War have.

RE: The real question is...
By hugo_stiglitz on 9/21/2012 12:34:26 PM , Rating: 2
Apple feels deja vu. They see Android's market share growing while iOS' remains the same. They see that the majority of customers are choosing an open-platform as opposed to their own closed/restricted iOS.

They've seen this happen before with Windows vs Mac. They know how this ends. They refuse to let it happen again, that's why they're throwing down the ban hammer.

A company that tries to stifle innovation, competition and comsumer choice. Sadly, this is what Apple has become.

By p05esto on 9/21/2012 12:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
Most people hate Apple with a hot passion. Their greedy actions and big brother, DRM seeking behavior long with stupid patient cases has them being the bad guys. Apple is exactly the big corporation they used to claim they were not when the underdogs.

Most people now root for Microsoft and maybe Google I suppose. MS has been the class act the last few years. They are like the wise old godfather, infinate in wisdom and patience.

RE: Anti-Apple
By Trisped on 9/21/2012 1:17:36 PM , Rating: 2
They are like the wise old godfather, infinate in wisdom and patience.
Since Ballmer took over they seem (to me anyways) to be the bumbling father who is helplessly out of touch.

That is actually a large exaggeration, but they do seem to be making a number of critical mistakes lately. Hopefully they can turn things around. I think it will be nice to have 3 major OSes (assuming Chromebook picks up and iOS merges with OS X).

RE: Anti-Apple
By Scannall on 9/22/2012 9:50:46 AM , Rating: 2
No, most people don't "Hate" companies, nor do they look at them like sports teams. That's a cute invention of those that think they are more clever than they actually are. "Oh, look I can change backgrounds on my phone! I Rock!"

Most people buy products they like, are reliable and are treated well by the company that sold it to them. Open your eyes Scooter, there's a world much bigger than your basement out there for ya.

Cheese and Whine
By Alchemy69 on 9/21/2012 8:04:11 AM , Rating: 3
Cue Tony Swash with "It's not faaaiiiiirrrrrrr"

RE: Cheese and Whine
By Alchemy69 on 9/21/2012 10:05:29 AM , Rating: 2
What am I saying, he'll have been standing in a line somewhere since last Friday.

Apple is out of ideas
By Gungel on 9/21/2012 8:36:20 AM , Rating: 5
Apple blatantly copied the Swiss Railway clock without their permission. It is an active trademark held by the Swiss railway operator SBB and could cost Apple millions in compensation for using it without a license.

By Chaser on 9/21/2012 10:46:20 AM , Rating: 3
Apple you've just woken the sleeping giant.

By Belard on 9/22/2012 4:04:03 AM , Rating: 2
Actually Sleeping Giants.

Apple has been stupid about this for years. I see them losing customers (like me) as their stupid lawsuits have pissed me off. So for Google/Motorola to go after them... this is the only way to put Apple in its place and to play FAIR. This is what MS and Apple did about 14 years ago.

Apple plays nice, So will the others. Of course THIS was going to happen when Google bought Motorola...

Also, those of us who just BOUGHT Motorola phones... have Google behind our phones, we KNOW we're getting 4.1 :)

So here is what Apple may find themselves up against:
- Google
- Motorola
- Samsung. By the time the iPhone 6 comes out, the GS5 may hit the streets, among 4-7 other Android designs.

By Motoman on 9/21/2012 12:14:47 PM , Rating: 3
To be clear Google's patent is almost laughably ubiquitous -- it's basically claiming that any messaging client that uses Wi-Fi or cellular data connections is in violation of its patent.

But again, logic and reason have long since left town in patent land in the U.S.

These statements are true. But they are true most famously for Apple's own wild abuse of the patent and justice systems. Therefore, it would be immensely fitting for Apple to simply be bankrupted and utterly destroyed by someone else turning their own treachery back on them.

Let them burn.

By xti on 9/21/2012 8:30:06 AM , Rating: 2
fire burns with more fuel.

How nice
By bug77 on 9/21/2012 8:32:33 AM , Rating: 2
Lawyers will make (more) millions and guess who will foot the bill in the end. And then politicians will be wondering why the economy still doesn't take off.

By WinstonSmith on 9/21/2012 9:43:10 AM , Rating: 2
Nearly as ubiquitous as rectangles with rounded corners.

By km4c on 9/21/2012 4:37:57 PM , Rating: 2
To the late Steve Jobs and Tim Cook:
When you declare Thermonuclear war and launch the first bomb (Samsung Verdict) against an opponent that may have more nuclear weapons than you do (Google/Motorola), do not be surprised when you are then the victim of a nuclear device.
To the Apple Shareholders: Steve Jobs was the reason that Apple became so profitable even though he was one crazy, OCD, ADD, Bipolar SOB with may other disorders. It is what made him so obsessively successful. It could have very easily caused him to spend all of your profits trying in his mind to right a wrong. Tim Cook did not make Apple what it is. Tim Cook will not be able to keep Apple at the level it is now. It is one thing for Steve Jobs to go "Thermonuclear", he did build Apple to what it is today. It is another thing entirely for Tim Cook to do so.

I am unbelievably annoyed.
By CZroe on 9/21/2012 5:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
I am annoyed to find that Google-Motorola holds this patent but fails to integrate Google Voice messages like iMessage, Blackberry Messaging, and Windows Live messaging. It's annoying because the option APPEARS to be there with the Android Google Voice app, but "Also receive as native text message" simply forwards the SMS to your number as a billable text message with none of the warnings that you'd get if you enabled it on the website (FOR SHAME, Google). This is also despite the fact that consumer expectations are the exact opposite of what it does. Intentional?

Calling all Fandroid spec heads!
By Tony Swash on 9/22/2012 6:17:15 AM , Rating: 1
Some of you Fandroids love to talk about specs, and about how Apple has to litigate because it can't keep up with Android's majestic trajectory of development. So what do you guys think of the results of performance reviews like this one from AnandTech which shows that the iPhone 5 pretty much smokes all other phones and is easily the fastest phone with the fastest graphics out there?

Maybe it's Googlerola that has to litigate because it can't keep up?

And what do you guys think of this video by Android Authority showing a test comparing the ability of an iPhone 5 and a Samsung Galaxy S3 to survive being dropped. I guess the dude doing the test wasn't holding the phones right when he dropped them.

Personally I think specs lists are really last century but I know lots of you Fandroids get really obsessed with them - so how are you dealing with all this disturbing news?

Of course you can console yourselves with the knowledge that soon version 4.1 of Android will be on more than 2% of Android phones and then Apple will be quaking in their boots!

RE: Calling all Fandroid spec heads!
By BugblatterIII on 9/23/2012 12:01:42 AM , Rating: 2
Try reading the article properly:

"As we mentioned in our earlier post, SunSpider is a small enough benchmark that it really acts as a cache test"

They've been saying for a long time it's an outdated benchmark.

Every other benchmark test that the LG Optimus G appears in it's either close to or ahead of the iPhone 5.

And if there were CPU-heavy benchmarks the LG would annihilate the iPhone 5; it has similar A15-like cores but twice as many and clocked higher.

And the S3 beats the iPhone 5 quite soundly in the GeekBench tests, despite the incorrect figures some sites have been propogating around the web.

To be fair iPhones have always had strong GPUs, which along with a well-optimised OS have helped to compensate for the very weak CPU. The CPU's now less weak but it's still a bit last-year.

RE: Calling all Fandroid spec heads!
By mstrmac on 9/23/12, Rating: -1
Very ubiquitous
By vol7ron on 9/22/2012 9:24:30 AM , Rating: 2
It look like this patent covers almost any form of communication. Which is essentially, how the internet was created (bulletin boards that other computers could read).

This is probably one of those patents that got through before the patent office was technologically informed, as this would stunt business in almost any company/agency today.

Very ubiquitous
By vol7ron on 9/22/2012 9:24:30 AM , Rating: 2
It look like this patent covers almost any form of communication. Which is essentially, how the internet was created (bulletin boards that other computers could read).

This is probably one of those patents that got through before the patent office was technologically informed, as this would stunt business in almost any company/agency today.

By Spookster on 9/22/2012 5:43:05 PM , Rating: 2
The shroud of the dark side has fallen. Begun the Patent War has.

Since the patent is on software
By eldakka on 9/24/2012 1:00:46 AM , Rating: 2
can't apple ship the hardware from China to the US with no software installed, thus bypassing the ITC ruling as there is no software to breech any software patents.

Then install the OS onto the device inside the US in-store as part of the sales process. Viola, no software patents are relevant at the ITCs point of jurisdiction, the border.

By menotu on 9/24/2012 8:39:35 PM , Rating: 2
This is a TOTAL LIE
Apple has and never will copy anything
ba ba ba ba ba ba ba

By Bender3000 on 9/25/2012 5:37:11 PM , Rating: 2
Apparently neither company knows little about the history of text messaging. The patent basically describes text conference calls which was in use starting in the middle nineteen seventies. In my humble opinion the patent described in this article and the accompanying patent description is prior knowledge based upon thirty year old technology. It is simply text conferencing.

Doesn't this also encompass email?
By wbjethro on 9/28/2012 9:21:49 AM , Rating: 2
Even though this patent is considered vague (as a lot of them are), wouldn't this patent also describe email server/multiple client relationships? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the basics of checking my email at work or on the phone and resuming that "thread/conversation" at home sounds just like this. "Messaging" doesn't have to be strictly SMS-style messages. Sounds like this will get interesting.

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

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