Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Aug 2012 22:04 UTC, submitted by C
"Google's Motorola Mobility unit said it filed a new patent-infringement case against Apple claiming that features on some Apple devices, including the Siri voice-recognition program, infringe its patents. The complaint at the U.S. International Trade Commission claims infringement of seven Motorola Mobility patents on features including location reminders, e-mail notification and phone/video players, Motorola Mobility said yesterday. The case seeks a ban on U.S. imports of devices including the iPhone, iPad and Mac computers." Can anybody explain to me how this is a new suit when Motorola and Apple have been wasting tax money and court resources for years now?
Thread beginning with comment 531727
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2010-06-01
Google really try to get those bans.
Patents DO NOT protect anything. As nuclear weapons DO NOT protect anything.
Its matter of fear from using them, that protect if nobody dares to cross the line.
Apple crossed it, and repeatedly stated that they will cross it in the future.
And from those attacks there is no defense.
Google must lunch its own attacks. They will not be defense, but bid to destroy its enemy before enemy destroy Google. Like good nuclear war, it will not work. Both parties will get damaged.
BUT if Google will get even one ban for even one current Apple product in USA Apple stock shares will go down, and with current prices they will go way down. So next CEO will think through his strategy of using patents.
Member since:2007-03-06
Google wouldn't really get that much from destroying Apple.
I'd bet they'll rather prefer Apple over Microsoft as close competitor in the mobile arena, if only because they aren't competitors in the other areas where Google does actually make money (at least not yet).
Edited 2012-08-22 11:14 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
As nuclear weapons DO NOT protect anything.
Its matter of fear from using them, that protect if nobody dares to cross the line.
Its matter of fear from using them, that protect if nobody dares to cross the line.
Yeah... it can be easily argued that they prevented the Cold War from becoming hot - hence effectively, they protected against it.
I remember one cute scifi novel in which the whole Cold War era humanity gets transferred/copied/resurrected (nobody quite knows in the novel) in another galaxy, on a sort of copy of the Earth ...except, it's not a sphere any more, but a flat disc.
The result? Instant Ward War III - because, with the new shape of the "Earth" (sort of greater distances when travelling on a ballistic trajectory without the usual spherical curvature of the planet, different gravitational field), ICBM instantly become ineffective. I'd say that would be a probable turn of events.
Plus, without the push to make ICBMs, we wouldn't have orbital launchers - or at least, not nearly so soon so capable ones (R-7, the very first operational ICBM, wasn't even very good as an ICBM, not very practical - but it turned out to be a fabulous launcher http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GPN-2002-000184.png and eventually "the most reliable [...] most frequently used launch vehicle in the world" http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Delta_Mission/SEM8XK57ESD_0.html - a century of service seems well within its grasp, considering just inaugurated Soyuz launch complex in French Guiana).
All of which gives us very real benefits at the very least in Earth sciences, benefiting humanity (sure, we can say it was incidental - but that's largely how progress works)
Edited 2012-08-29 00:13 UTC
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
So, the Xbox One disaster continues. Microsoft's policy for dealing with the used games market has reportedly leaked - and it's a clear and direct attack to destroy the used games market. Prices for used games will be set at the retail value of a new game, and retailers have to hook into Microsoft's computer systems and comply with Microsoft's terms and conditions.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
At an event earlier today, Microsoft unveiled the next Xbox - the third model, but confusingly named Xbox One. The big focus was TV, integrated Kinect, and all the other stuff we all expected to be forced down our throats. I think it took them 25 minutes to actually come to what should be the core of the story: gaming. Nothing groundbreaking in the gaming department, except for how Microsoft intends to handle the used games market and borrowing games from friends: pay up, buddy!
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
The day has finally come! Jolla has finally announced the launch device for its Sailfish operating system - and by god this is a looker. It's decidedly different from other phones out there, but it has good specifications and carries a relatively reasonably price tag - EUR 399, and it's up for pre-order today, shipping in the fourth quarter of this year.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Why does Google get so much credit in the technology industry? Why, despite the company's many obvious failings, do many geeks and enthusiasts still hold a somewhat positive view on the all-knowing technology giant? A specific talk at Google I/O this week provides the answer.
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
OSNews is a sponsor of this year's O'Reilly OSCON in Portland, Oregon, USA. A lucky OSNews reader will win a free three-day pass, including two tutorials days. To win the pass, post a comment on this story saying something about Open Source Software or OSCON. We'll pick a winner at random next week. If you don't have an OSNews account, you may email us your entry. Part of the conference is the 9th annual Open Source Awards, and today the 16th is the deadline for nominations. If you'd like to nominate an outstanding open source contributor, do it here. Read on for more information about OSCON. Update: The 20% discount code for OSNews readers is "OSN."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
"Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening." That's one way to start an insider explanation of why Windows' performance isn't up to snuff. Written by someone who actually contributes code to the Windows NT kernel, the comment on Hacker News, later deleted but reposted with permission on Marc Bevand's blog, paints a very dreary picture of the state of Windows development. The root issue? Think of how Linux is developed, and you'll know the answer.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
This is one of those news items that's fun to write, fun to read, fun to comment on, and where no one will be able to say anything unkind. It's all just one big ball of awesome fluffiness. TuneTracker, the BeOS radio automation software, has just released something very special: TuneTracker System 5, the first version designed entirely and specifically for Haiku. In fact, it actually includes Haiku in the software package. Better yet, TuneTracker also unveiled several system-in-a-box products - which have Haiku and TuneTracker pre-installed.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Exactly twenty years ago, a document was published that played a huge role in establishing the web as we know it today. Twenty years later, and this simple and straightforward document is proof of an irrefutable fact: while closed technologies can change markets, open technologies can change the world.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Oh multitasking. That staple of computing that got thrown out the window with many modern smartphones. We got some rudimentary thing in its place - but even as multitasking on phone and tablets improves, its user-visible side remains cumbersome. Windows 8 has a neat implementation, and now it's time Android follows in it footsteps.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
They're here! Whether that excites you or not remains to be seen, but the Galaxy S4, which will most likely become the best selling Android smartphone of the year by a huge margin, has been reviewed by all the major sites, and there's lots of interesting conclusions in there - although I think most of you will get the gist.More Features »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2007-08-05
Google is simply trying to demonstrate how silly all the patent stuff is. There is no way the US is going to ban Apple products no matter how much evidence is again them.
I absolutely believe that if the US court system was fair, Apple would lose the case. Of course that will never happen, but Google's goal here is not to have the products banned. It's simply to increase awareness about a serious problem in this country. What better way to do that then go after the "biggest company is US history".