Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27
  1.    #1  
    The Playbook is a blatant rip off of webOS and could be good marketing for HPalm! I am no patent lawyer and i am pretty sure that RIM probably covered them selves, but i see a ton of free publicity for palm if they can sue the Playbook into into delays. If you look at the Engadget hands on post all they are talking about is webOS. All this needs is the right spin and for HPalm ro release a better product!
  2. #2  
    This lawsuit stemmed from a number of underlying issues. A core question emerged in the final stages of the suit when a shutdown was considered imminent: Were NTP’s patents valid? Even though in 2002 a federal court established that RIM had infringed on the patents, a review of the patents by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in 2005 and 2006 declared at least some of the patents to be invalid. While RIM and NTP were in court dealing with a possible shutdown and conducting behind-the-scenes settlement negotiations, a possibility existed that the entire exercise might be irrelevant.
  3. #3  
    For those who haven't seen the video, you can check it out here.

    Should HP/Palm Take Legal Action? | webOSroundup

    After you see it, it will be obvious what a ripoff of webOS this is. Getsures, a launcher area, they even mention flipping cards off the screen to close the app. What a shame

    HP should sue, they bought Palm, and own the patents of webOS, card muktitasking, etc. It would also make for great publicity, and hopefully delay the launch of the Playbook.
  4. #4  
    I'm pretty sure palm has violated a couple of RIM's patents as well.

    Most major smartphone makers seem to have violated each others patents.
    Last edited by nimer55; 11/17/2010 at 02:02 AM. Reason: changed HP to RIM
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by johncc View Post
    ^ I guess that you meant RIM's?
    thanks, fixed it.
  6. #6  
    They test each other... and flaunt. remember when WebOS came out with multitouch? And the Apple ******* shouted only we can do that? Apple didn't bite because they KNOW palm had 5 Aces up their sleeve... This is a little more blatant and the public can quickly pass judgment.
  7. Keldog's Avatar
    Posts
    95 Posts
    Global Posts
    258 Global Posts
    #7  
    Sadly, too few people know about webOS and will think Blackberry came up with the Playbook UI all on their own.
  8. #8  
    The best way for HP to counter this is to push its own device and tablet instead of failing to market an OS that everyone else wants to rip off. This is just what happens when you drag your feet.
    screwdestiny
    PSNTwitterLast.FM
  9. #9  
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s72rGDUn2uo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    will a webos tablet be as good with displaying html5 content and flash content?



    from the engadget video, looks like you can do gestures from any side of the screen, instead of having a larger dedicated gesture area. I actually thinks it's nice improvements built on webos' foundation
  10. #10  
    Haaaaaang 'em no wait sue them
  11. doc31's Avatar
    Posts
    707 Posts
    Global Posts
    919 Global Posts
    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    I'm pretty sure palm has violated a couple of RIM's patents as well.

    Most major smartphone makers seem to have violated each others patents.
    That’s besides the point and we won't know which ones they have agreements on but copying a UI is beyond violating patents that front facing customers never see. An UI is almost like a trademark. I think Palm gets away without getting sued bcus they basically have the patent on smartphones.
    I don't care what you say SPRINT kicks
    Treo650/Treo700p/Treo700wx/Treo755/HTC Touch/ Treo Pro/ Touch Pro/ Touch Diamond / Palm Pre / HTC EVO Shift / Nexus S 4G
    My Themes - Prethemer
  12. bennish's Avatar
    Posts
    584 Posts
    Global Posts
    621 Global Posts
    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    I'm pretty sure palm has violated a couple of RIM's patents as well.

    Most major smartphone makers seem to have violated each others patents.
    It's likely that RIM has used more of Palm's patents than the other way around.

    A Blackberry is a Treo with an email server.

    I'm not sure WHAT HP thinks of this... it really seems to have hit close to home, I'm rather surprised there hasn't been any talk. I mean, when you see the screen it *looks* like webos. I saw one pic, and thought someone had photoshopped webos onto it as a joke. But it was the RIM OS.

    The really tragic thing is Keldog is right - people will think that RIM invented it, and will go 'palm? like, palm pilots?'

    I remember having auto-rotate on my nokia smartphone and canon camera, and then about a year later, apple *invented* auto rotate!

    sigh
    [twitter]_____[blog]______[im]__
    For now: Nexus One | iPad 2
    When avail. in Aus: Pre3 16GB | Touchpad 16GB

    This is a forum for WebOS enthusiasts. It is not a place for negative rants about Palm, HP or WebOS.
    Criticism is important but so is a positive environment. Remember, we're here because we love WebOS.
  13. #13  
    I don't like the idea of everyone suing all the time, but it would be bad if HP Palm was late to the party with their tablet and everyone would think that Palm copied Blackberry. They have to sue and at the very least allow their tablet to hit way before RIM puts the Playbook out.


    My Themes:CLICK HERE
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by bennish View Post
    It's likely that RIM has used more of Palm's patents than the other way around.

    A Blackberry is a Treo with an email server.
    I'm not sure how many of those patents Palm actually holds anymore. Isn't it another company that holds the patents relating specifically to PalmOS?

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeisnowonfire View Post
    I don't like the idea of everyone suing all the time, but it would be bad if HP Palm was late to the party with their tablet and everyone would think that Palm copied Blackberry. They have to sue and at the very least allow their tablet to hit way before RIM puts the Playbook out.
    Suing would probably be pretty pointless. I think this would be a similar result to when Apple sued MS over the Win95 interface.
  15. Yoshiaka13's Avatar
    Posts
    6 Posts
    Global Posts
    18 Global Posts
    #15  
    HP are slow sometimes.. Eh hem new mobile device.. But if they were smart they would wait for the BlackBerry tablet to hit market first. Then file suit against them. Let it pick up steam everyone that doesn't know squat about mobile computing (you know 80% of Android users) they will notice this. It'll be on morning shows etc etc.. HP then turns around and files suit makes it very public about it being a infringement on WebOS.

    what that does is shows the public this new user interface has been around and makes Black Berry look like thieves and lose all credibility to the general public and business accounts. HP then turns around orders a sease and disist order and collects a percentage of royalties from the devices that were sold with this set up. Which would inturn drive BB further into the hole they have been digging by not keeping up with the smartphone market with their splendid mobile email reader. Lol

    also honestly I don't think HP can go after them right now because it's not available to the public. BlackBerry can say it's just a concept vehicle like you see at auto trade shows or a research and development device to test out various features..etc etc..

    along with the only people that will know about the suit at this point are people that keep up with tech.. That's a small percentage compared to the prospective customers out there that either don't have a tablet or smartphone yet. HP would want to tarnish BlackBerries name in the general public spotlight instead of tech people spotlight.. Helps to dethrone a competitor... I'm just saying
  16. rkguy's Avatar
    Posts
    803 Posts
    Global Posts
    816 Global Posts
    #16  
    i was wondering if you can litigate before something is released to the public or not but I think so. Someone told me that you have to aggressively defend your patent or else you will actually lose it. Has anyone else heard this?
    ...This programming stuff is actually addictive but really hard :/
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rkguy View Post
    i was wondering if you can litigate before something is released to the public or not but I think so. Someone told me that you have to aggressively defend your patent or else you will actually lose it. Has anyone else heard this?
    HP could file a law suit and ask for an injunction with regards to ALL sales of any future RIM devices using the QNX OS.

    And yes, they must aggressively defend their patents (and trademarks) because failure to do so renders them null and void.

    Also, the patent for the cards metaphor isn't yet granted, but I do believe Palm can still file suit and ask for an injunction on the grounds that RIM bought QNX after wanting to buy Palm AND knowing that Palm filed a patent application for the cards metaphor (and the various gestures).
    Arthur Thornton

    Former webOS DevRel Engineer at Palm, HP, and LG
    Former webOS app developer (built Voice Memos, Sparrow, and several homebrew apps and patches)
    Former blogger for webOS Nation and webOS Roundup
  18. #18  
    you guys make me sick. Yeah we suck so lets sue our competition.

    Blackberry doesn't have cards anyhow. Just windows you can gesture through.
  19. angiest's Avatar
    Posts
    933 Posts
    Global Posts
    952 Global Posts
    #19  
    First off, IANAL, but I learned more than I wanted to about (US) patent law than I wanted to as a result of the SCO lawsuits against IBM and Novell.

    Even without being granted yet, Palm "owns" the "invention" of cards on the mobile device, since they were first to file. The burden of proof is actually on the entity who is charged with infringment; they must either prove they are not infringing or that the patent is voided due to prior art or other defect.
  20. #20  
    I find it interesting that this thread continues to see activity based on an invalid assumption.

    • The consensus seems to be there is no basis for a law suit
    • No lawyer has chimed in to provide any info that would support a claim
    • H/Palm hasn't said or done anything to indicate that they have any issues
    • HP and RIM may have cross-licensing or royalties in place, and none of us would know


    ...just sayin it must be a sign that things get wacky on slow news days (or slow news months if your H/Palm)
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions