Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31
  1. #21  
    I have to believe that Palm did a patent search prior to developing the current model of the Pre. It's not like they did not know who they were competing with and some of the new team came directly from Apple. So my un-informed hope is they've got this covered.

    Beyond that, as mentioned somewhere by an Apple spokesman on one of these news websites, Apple is served by having another competitor. Who (beyond the faithful) is more likely to switch to iPhone the next generation, someone with iPhone 3g or someone with another vendors product. Personally, I think this "IP" bravado, is just a way to get some of the buzz back in Apple's corner.
    French Pre3, UK Pre2, US Veer, German gsm Pre, 680, garmin ique 3600 & still have my working palm pilot 1000 with the 1 Mb adapter

    Please remove UberCalendar and google sync behavior patches prior to system updates.
    patch Google calendar sync behavior for 2.x.x and TouchPad (Oauth2 and advanced sync requirements enabled)
    Preference guide for MetaView's UberCalendar patch
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    I will not give a patentability opinion on the patent in question. That would be irresponsible. However, the general knowledge I can impart is that you only have to infringe one claim to infringe the patent, and it doesn't have to be the claim that SedahDrol chooses. Generally, you interpret each claim as a whole, all features in combination. A patent has a strong presumption of validity. Even the Amazon patent mentioned earlier (which was not just for a shopping cart, but included a one-click component to allow the user to avoid the shopping cart), still had five claims hold up after the public dragged it through the gauntlet. There is a doctrine of equivalents, which may affect the scope of the claim, often making the claim broader. There is file wrapper estoppel, which may affect the scope of the claim, often making the claim narrower. In district court, a claim is interpreted as broadly as reasonably possible, while not reading on the prior art of record.

    There is a lot to patent law. That's why there are patent lawyers. There are patent lawyers who protect the interests of their clients, and there are patent laywers who protect the interests of potential infringers. And, there are patent examiners who protect the interests of the public while providing good customer service to the applicants, who happen to be their customers.

    It could very well be that Palm infringes the patent. Or, they could have cleverly avoided infringement. Either way, this sort of thing happens all the time. That's why companies get patents in the first place. Some companies, like Polaroid with the instant camera and 3M with the post-it note, use their patents to create a profitable monopoly. Most other companies license or cross-license their patents. Still other companies, like Mercedes with certain automobile safety features, give their intellectual property away.

    I think people here are speculating wildly, jumping to uninformed conclusions, and making a huge deal about nothing.
    You tell us we are wrong yet you refuse to tell us where we are wrong at. You merely hide behind your alleged experience. I'm sorry my friend until you back your statements up with a possible way of interepreting the patent that could hypothetically be a patent infringement you're statements can't be taken seriously. Afterall that's all we are discussing, a hypothetical situation in which Apple sues Palm for infringement. We don't know or have all the facts. In order to debate this issue, one must support it with information at hand and that's all we are doing. The claims I haven't addressed clearly don't appear to apply, 17 and 18 and those that refer to them.

    I've had over 15 years of experience with computer software and hardware architctecture. So in analyzing those aspects of the claims I do have some experience in that I understand what they are saying.

    As I've state in just about every post I've made on this issue. It all boils down to the TrueTouch touch screen that is being provide to palm by Cypress Semiconductors. Since I can't find the exact details of their touch screen and touch screen controller I can't say that the touch screen itself isn't an infringing device. This will probably be what Palm bases their arguement against infringement.

    Keep in mind that apples patent doesn't just apply to phones, it applies to any device that has a touch screen. GPS, Computers of all types, microwaves, refrigerators, tv's, tables lamps, remote controls and it goes on and on and on.

    We all know that the USPTO is overwhelmed and understaffed to properly assess the validity of a patent application, which is why they pretty much take the money and run by lettting anything through and let the courts fix their numerous errors. One of my favorites was a child patenting a method of swinging on a swing. It was actually granted. That there is the joke that is the USPTO.
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by BMIC50 View Post
    Thanks Rhody for breaking it down for us!

    I wonder how Palm's patents can affect Apple if they decided to get litigious?

    Here is another article for your consumption...
    I like that article. it'll be interesting to see what happens when apple gets those patents. But apple can stop the pre from going to market with an preliminary injuction, we got to remember that just because the device isn't out yet doesn't mean palm isn't safe. If they can convince a judge that they would be irreperably harmed by the release of said product the pre could be stopped dead on it's tracks.
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  4. Rhody's Avatar
    Posts
    703 Posts
    Global Posts
    720 Global Posts
    #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by aero View Post
    It is not speculating or uniformed to note that Apple has a history, a proven record of some of the most aggressive and deep pocket legal tactics in using their patents.

    Palm is most vulnerable because it has the most shallow pockets and the lowest margins of error in bringing the Pre device to market, a device which is it sole and only hope for survival.
    That's certainly a good point. Apple's pockets are deeper. That's a significant observation.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by aero View Post
    It is not speculating or uniformed to note that Apple has a history, a proven record of some of the most aggressive and deep pocket legal tactics in using their patents.

    Palm is most vulnerable because it has the most shallow pockets and the lowest margins of error in bringing the Pre device to market, a device which is it sole and only hope for survival.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    That's certainly a good point. Apple's pockets are deeper. That's a significant observation.
    That's a concern of mine.
    Even if Apple gets no where, Palm doesn't need this now.
    Just call me Berd.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by SedahDrol View Post
    One of my favorites was a child patenting a method of swinging on a swing. It was actually granted. That there is the joke that is the USPTO.
    I spat my drink out while reading the patent. lmao.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    I will not give a patentability opinion on the patent in question. That would be irresponsible. However, the general knowledge I can impart is that you only have to infringe one claim to infringe the patent, and it doesn't have to be the claim that SedahDrol chooses. Generally, you interpret each claim as a whole, all features in combination. A patent has a strong presumption of validity. Even the Amazon patent mentioned earlier (which was not just for a shopping cart, but included a one-click component to allow the user to avoid the shopping cart), still had five claims hold up after the public dragged it through the gauntlet. There is a doctrine of equivalents, which may affect the scope of the claim, often making the claim broader. There is file wrapper estoppel, which may affect the scope of the claim, often making the claim narrower. In district court, a claim is interpreted as broadly as reasonably possible, while not reading on the prior art of record.

    There is a lot to patent law. That's why there are patent lawyers. There are patent lawyers who protect the interests of their clients, and there are patent laywers who protect the interests of potential infringers. And, there are patent examiners who protect the interests of the public while providing good customer service to the applicants, who happen to be their customers.

    It could very well be that Palm infringes the patent. Or, they could have cleverly avoided infringement. Either way, this sort of thing happens all the time. That's why companies get patents in the first place. Some companies, like Polaroid with the instant camera and 3M with the post-it note, use their patents to create a profitable monopoly. Most other companies license or cross-license their patents. Still other companies, like Mercedes with certain automobile safety features, give their intellectual property away.

    I think people here are speculating wildly, jumping to uninformed conclusions, and making a huge deal about nothing.
    Thanks, I was curious about all this stuff myself. Very informative..
    Remember, this is my opinion ! We all have a right to our own.....

    Treo's 650-800..NOW,
    Palm Pre
  8. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #28  
    Apple is not the first company to invent multitouch. Even Microsoft had a multitouch commercial screen used in hotels and restaurants.

    http://www.microsoft.com/surface/index.html

    Apple is good at simplifying the user experience. Apple hasn't invented a breakthrough technology. Even the original computer mouse was copied form Xerox's PARC labs by Mr.Jobs.

    Having said that, who cares about all of the inventions, its the application of the technology that is important. APPLE by far is the best company in simplifying things. Kudos to them on improving user experience.

    But you got to give credit where its due, PALM did an excellent job of introducing Pre. I say Pre is a better product if PALM gets rid of that multitouch technology .
  9. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrGuard View Post
    Look I'm sorry but I have to call shenangians on all you guys. Your bias and lust for the Pre is so thick that it is blinding you to the obvious truth.

    And that truth is:

    Apple has every right and reason to deserve these patents.

    I see on this thread over and over again crap about how pinching is not innovative, how the UI advances apple made are mundane and simple.

    Well, why was apple the first do it? If it was so fricken simple, why didn't anyone else come up with it?

    Hell, Palm has been the cell business for a bit and they sure as hell weren't the ones to figure this out first - Apple was.

    And if you're going to tell me some unheard of little company patented something like the pinch gesture back in 1976... well that's something different and perhaps those folks were deserve the patent.

    But baring that, Apple has legitimately earned the right to patent these gesture as they were the first to do so. The law agrees and as of yet no one has sued Apple arguing the contrary.

    Again, if Apple's ideas are so simple and not worthy of patents, why then has no one else beaten Apple to it?
    Apple is not the first company to invent multitouch. Even Microsoft had a multitouch commercial screen used in hotels and restaurants.

    http://www.microsoft.com/surface/index.html

    Apple is good at simplifying the user experience. Apple hasn't invented a breakthrough technology. Even the original computer mouse was copied form Xerox's PARC labs by Mr.Jobs.

    Having said that, who cares about all of the inventions, its the application of the technology that is important. APPLE by far is the best company in simplifying things. Kudos to them on improving user experience.

    But you got to give credit where its due, PALM did an excellent job of introducing Pre. I say Pre is a better product if PALM gets rid of that multitouch technology .
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by SedahDrol View Post
    I like that article. it'll be interesting to see what happens when apple gets those patents. But apple can stop the pre from going to market with an preliminary injuction, we got to remember that just because the device isn't out yet doesn't mean palm isn't safe. If they can convince a judge that they would be irreperably harmed by the release of said product the pre could be stopped dead on it's tracks.
    Given the billions apple has in reserve, demonstrating irreparable harm will be, I think, pretty difficult. The reverse argument (that an injunction would cause irreparable harm to Palm) is far easier to demonstrate.
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    That's a concern of mine.
    Even if Apple gets no where, Palm doesn't need this now.
    First of all, nice lively post here guys. berdinkerdickle makes a good point here. Remember that no legal action has been initiated yet, according to my knowledge anyway. But, just Google "Palm Apple Patent" and you'll come back with 1,5 million hits. It's got EVERYONE talking, especially in the developer community. This is most likely the desired effect that Apple was looking for. Create enough uncertainty and the Pre will lose buy-in from the people who are needed to make it a true iPhone killer.

    Even if this all gets straightened out, it's going to take months. Months that Apple can use to finish their next generation iPhone, or lauch a new revised App Store model, or do whatever else they usually do so well to stay on top. I don't know about everyone else out there, but I was apprehensive about the switch to Sprint to get my Pre in the first place. Until the dust settles and the Pre survives the Apple wars, I'm not making any moves... and I'll bet there's many others out there feeling the same way.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions