backtop


Print 48 comment(s) - last by hexxthalion.. on Nov 24 at 1:11 PM


  (Source: wikipeers.com)
The European Commission is concerned that other firms could mimic Apple and Samsung's patent war and lead to the unfair use of intellectual property rights against rivals

Much of Apple and Samsung's 2011 has been spent duking it out over patents. Apple initially went after Samsung earlier this year and accused it of copying Apple's products when creating its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets. Now, the European Commission is concerned that other firms could mimic Apple and Samsung's patent war and lead to the unfair use of intellectual property rights against rivals.

Throughout the year, Apple and Samsung have gone back and forth with patent issues. Apple claimed that Samsung created its Galaxy line such as the Galaxy Tab 10.1 by ripping off Apple's design. Apple succeeded in killing Samsung's Australian tablet sales, banned the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany, and sought to ban Samsung's phones and Android tablets in Britain. But Samsung did some retaliating of its own by filing a 3G lawsuit against Apple in France, looking to ban iPhone 5 sales (back before it was revealed that the anticipated iPhone 5 was really the iPhone 4S), and modifying its hardware and software to prevent further lawsuits.

Earlier this month, the European Commission started looking into FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) violations associated with the Apple/Samsung patent war. Now, the EU's latest concern has to do with the potential misuse of patents in other areas of the IT sector. 

"We requested information from both Apple and Samsung," said Joaquin Almunia, EU Competition Commissioner. "We have not yet received the answers. We need to look at this because IP rights can be used as a distortion of competition but we will need to look at the answers.

"In particular, in the IT sector, it is obvious it is not the only case. Apple and Samsung is only one case where IP rights can be used as an instrument to restrict competition. Standardization and IP rights are two instruments that in this new IT sector can be used as a tool to abuse."

Source: Reuters



Comments     Threshold


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

The point is...
By Da W on 11/22/2011 2:55:14 PM , Rating: -1
IP right were created to promote innovation.
The common belief being that if an invention was immediatly copied, nobody would want to incur huge costs to innovate.

Android is a copy of iOS. You can say all you want, but apple was the first with a touchscreen-only phone, sliding fingers to move from picture to picture and all that stuff.

Yet, Apple makes more money than anybody would dream of. Samsung, HTC, LG, Acer, Nokia, Motorolla and other all still see the phone buisness as being profitable enough to want to make and continue to make smartphones. The market is big enough for a gazillion firms to want to jump in.

And competition between iOS, Android, Microsoft and laggard RIM is driving innovation at an insane pace.

So...
proof that the electronic / software industry doesn't need IP to innovate. They need brains, and brains are already too few and expensive to come by. That's a natural barrier to entry. We don't need IP, and much less lawyers.




RE: The point is...
By aebiv on 11/22/2011 3:04:23 PM , Rating: 5
Hrm, I recall having a touch screen phone that did a lot more than the iPhone, before the iPhone ever came out...

I believe it was called Windows Mobile.


RE: The point is...
By Shig on 11/22/2011 3:17:54 PM , Rating: 2
The real point is that technology has started to move so quickly, almost everything about the IP system is broken.

The bottom line is that software | technology based IP should have an entirely different rule set than any other form of IP. The IP system works pretty well for mechanical engineering based goods and services.


RE: The point is...
By Da W on 11/22/11, Rating: -1
RE: The point is...
By ebakke on 11/22/2011 5:26:10 PM , Rating: 3
Or rather, someone else who successfully articulated the point you attempted to make, but failed miserably in doing so.


RE: The point is...
By bupkus on 11/22/2011 9:21:36 PM , Rating: 2
You'll never be able to teach everyone how to read well.


RE: The point is...
By Da W on 11/23/11, Rating: -1
RE: The point is...
By Piiman on 11/23/2011 5:33:08 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe you shouldn't have included it then since its so far off base no one wanted to read past it.


RE: The point is...
By BladeVenom on 11/22/2011 3:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
How about the IBM Simon in 1994. I think that also came out before the iPhone.


RE: The point is...
By Flunk on 11/22/2011 3:40:40 PM , Rating: 2
This is why Apple isn't suing Microsoft.


RE: The point is...
By Da W on 11/22/2011 4:23:34 PM , Rating: 2
You needed a stylus.


RE: The point is...
By aebiv on 11/22/2011 5:20:10 PM , Rating: 2
I still want a stylus, aka the Samsung Note.

There are some things that doodling with your finger just can't do.


RE: The point is...
By acer905 on 11/23/2011 12:42:07 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody needed a stylus, it was just more convenient. Skin the display with one of countless free and open software packs, and everything becomes very finger friendly. But as a productivity device, precision input let you get more done.


RE: The point is...
By Omega215D on 11/22/2011 10:44:32 PM , Rating: 3
And there's also this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ8TQ9Rr_7E

And HTC is credited with making WM quite useable compared to the others.

Along with Palm Pilot phone offerings.


RE: The point is...
By phatboye on 11/22/2011 3:27:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Android is a copy of iOS. You can say all you want, but apple was the first with a touchscreen-only phone,

That is a common misconception amongst Apple fan boys. Android starting making the Android OS before Google bought them out and well before iOS was even a glimmer in Steve Jobs eye.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_...
quote:
Android, Inc. was founded in Palo Alto, California, United States in October, 2003 by Andy Rubin (co-founder of Danger),[27] Rich Miner (co-founder of Wildfire Communications, Inc.),[28] Nick Sears (once VP at T-Mobile),[29] and Chris White (headed design and interface development at WebTV)[30] to develop, in Rubin's words "...smarter mobile devices that are more aware of its owner's location and preferences".[31] Despite the obvious past accomplishments of the founders and early employees, Android Inc. operated secretly, revealing only that it was working on software for mobile phones


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_iphone
quote:
The first iPhone was unveiled by Apple's then-CEO Steve Jobs on January 9, 2007,[1] and released on June 29, 2007


RE: The point is...
By Da W on 11/22/11, Rating: -1
RE: The point is...
By ebakke on 11/22/2011 5:36:36 PM , Rating: 3
Touch interface, icon grid, and a dock? That's your criteria for an iOS copy? Lame.

A touch interface was a logical progression as touch screens became easier/cheaper to produce. Much like voice commands will become the next progression as voice recognition improves, background noise mitigation improves, etc.

An icon grid? Umm, my old school Nokia had an icon grid for the menu. It had a nice little pixelated-as-hell icon for text messages, and one for contacts, and one for the WEP browser, and for ... Sure they weren't "apps", but it was still an icon grid for specific functions of the phone.

A dock? Same lame Nokia brick. Had a row on the bottom of the main screen. Two fields (vs the iPhone's four... oh the humanity!) I could assign to whatever action I wanted. Again, I'll concede that it wasn't identical as my Nokia had text and iOS displays text and an icon, but that's hardly a drastic difference.


RE: The point is...
By Omega215D on 11/22/2011 10:45:33 PM , Rating: 2
did someone say touch interface?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8lCetZ_57g


RE: The point is...
By 91TTZ on 11/22/2011 5:50:32 PM , Rating: 4
It seems that you don't really understand what conditions need to be present to bring a product to market.

Nothing is created in a vacuum. For instance, when the first personal computers and video games came out in the mid 1970's, it wasn't because a single innovative company introduced a product and everyone copied it. Rather, it's because some key pieces of technology made the conditions right to introduce those products. The growth of computers and video games in the mid 1970's were largely due to advances in solid state electronics. Microprocessors began to go mainstream in the electronics world in the early 1970's so it shouldn't have been any surprise that computers and video games began to use them. Someone had to be first, but that doesn't mean that they were able to see something that nobody else could. When Apple released their first Apple computer, it wasn't that they invented something that nobody else had, they just bought off the shelf components, packaged it into a kit and made it popular. In reality the innovation that made it possible was the 6502 processor which came out a year prior.

The iPhone was made possible by advances in small touch-screen displays and mobile CPUs. Apple didn't invent either of these things, they just bought off-the-shelf hardware and assembled it into a finished product. At the time it seemed pretty innovative because Apple was able to bring to market a polished finished product based on commonly available hardware and they could sell it for a profit.


RE: The point is...
By sigmatau on 11/22/2011 10:03:00 PM , Rating: 2
Bingo! Apple didn't invent anything. The technology was available for them to buy and repackage.

I find it so ironic that Apple is suing companies for stupid things like how icons are arranged, yet Apple would not be able to sell their products if not for those same companies since they researched and developed the parts in Apple's products.


RE: The point is...
By Da W on 11/23/2011 9:16:03 AM , Rating: 1
That is my whole point.

Knowledge is cumulative. Nobody can create an idea out of thin air. Every idea is based on ideas previously discovered. But the fact of assembling ideas togeter is in itself an idea. So:

1) Yes apple being the first to bring to market a polished finished product based on commonly available hardware IS an innovation, and all the droids coming after it based on the same model are a copy.

2) The IP system actually hinders cumulative innovation, as we can all see with the millions of patent lawsuits in the technology industry, because the IP system is rooted in belief that innovations comes out of thin air and massive R&D spending. But this is not the case. And if every time you "invent" something, you get a patent to block anybody else to improve upon your idea, then we would have no innovation at all, and even the iphone wouldn't exist.

Funny how in a 4 paragraph article i only insert 16 words bashing android and i get gazillions of flaming replies calling me an apple fan boy and almost nobody noticed the rest of my post.

There are WAY too many Google-sheeps out here. YOU RANT AGAINST APPLE SHEEPS BUT YOU ARE YOURSELVES GOOGLE SHEEPS. And that worries me more than southern rednecks that are always voting GOP from father to son or stupid Albertains voting conservative since the dawn of times.


RE: The point is...
By Piiman on 11/23/2011 5:48:58 PM , Rating: 2
"1) Yes apple being the first to bring to market a polished finished product based on commonly available hardware IS an innovation, and all the droids coming after it based on the same model are a copy."

Wrong that is a competing product made with many of the same off the shelve parts and probably other different parts. It may be cheaper it may have more functionally etc etc. Of course it will be a similar product but it is not a copy. A copy is an identical replica of the original.
by your logic everything except the original is a copy no matter whats different.


RE: The point is...
By Piiman on 11/23/2011 5:55:59 PM , Rating: 2
You know way too much about rednecks to be French.


RE: The point is...
By DeluxeTea on 11/23/2011 11:10:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
1) Yes apple being the first to bring to market a polished finished product based on commonly available hardware IS an innovation, and all the droids coming after it based on the same model are a copy.


Huh, so you mean my Vizio LCD TV was copied from Samsung from Sony from LG from Sharp?


RE: The point is...
By nolisi on 11/22/2011 3:33:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
IP right were created to promote innovation.
The common belief being that if an invention was immediatly copied, nobody would want to incur huge costs to innovate.


Being first to market is everything. Even if someone copies your idea, the fact that you got there first gives you mindshare, and in the case of certain companies, you can create a proprietary castle around yourself that guarantee repeat business.

quote:
Android is a copy of iOS.


Then why is iOS currently copying functionality that Android has had for years? A copy is limited to what's found in the original; Android went beyond iOS at its release (OTA updates is the most visible example) therefore it is not a copy.


RE: The point is...
By Da W on 11/22/11, Rating: -1
RE: The point is...
By Gondor on 11/22/2011 4:43:30 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
We can play the longuest dick game for a long time.


You'd lose horribly.

It's about time Eu slaps some hefty fine on Apple for their patent trolling before this nonsense escalates even further.


RE: The point is...
By jRaskell on 11/22/2011 5:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without Apple, your android phone would have a keayboard, no GPS, no gyroscope and still use a trackball to move around icons.


No, it wouldn't, but I see the futility in trying to argue that with you.


RE: The point is...
By kraeper on 11/22/2011 5:42:04 PM , Rating: 1
LG Prada. Google it.


RE: The point is...
By Etsp on 11/22/2011 5:48:32 PM , Rating: 5
Given his anti-Android stance, perhaps you'd have a better chance at succeeding if you asked him to "bing" it...


RE: The point is...
By kraeper on 11/22/2011 6:43:56 PM , Rating: 2
LOL good point.


RE: The point is...
By ebakke on 11/22/2011 5:43:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without Apple, your android phone would have a keayboard, no GPS, no gyroscope and still use a trackball to move around icons.
And I assume without Henry Ford, everything would still be made one-off, by hand. No one else could've possibly figured out how to utilize an assembly line. You, I'm sad to say, are an idiot.

What's most disturbing to me, is that your reasoning abilities are a total epic failure yet you're probably going to vote in the next election with some batshit crazy "rationale" as to why your candidate of choice makes sense. FML.


RE: The point is...
By Omega215D on 11/22/2011 10:48:31 PM , Rating: 2
Sadly this line of thinking is typical of those into Apple products... and there's a lot of them thanks to herd mentality.


RE: The point is...
By Piiman on 11/23/2011 6:05:42 PM , Rating: 1
"Without Apple, your android phone would have a keayboard, no GPS, no gyroscope and still use a trackball to move around icons. "

And you know this how? Do you really think Steve Jobs was the only person in the world to think of that stuff? Heck he probably didn't even think of it himself since he considered himself a great artist, he probably stole them.

If you ask me the only thing Apple has innovated was packaging.

After you buy your over price Apple product you do get a geewiz this must be a good product just look at this fancy packaging! It seems to have worked. I'll give him that.


RE: The point is...
By Piiman on 11/23/2011 5:29:50 PM , Rating: 1
If making a second touch screen type phone is copying then I'm Santa Claus. That's like saying all cars are a copy of the Ford. There is nothing unique about another company making competing products that look and act like another and until Apple and Steve Jobs started crying that every one is copying iPhone it was no big deal. Its called competition.

And why is it bad for others to "copy" Apple to the fanboys but its ok for Steve Jobs to brag about stealing and coping others? Hypocrites. Oh and to claim they invented sliding your fingers to make a touch screen do something obvious is ridiculous.


"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki