Apple Just Sued Competitors for Multitouch Patent Infringements

BREAKING NEWS MARCH 2, 2010 from BG Reports

"After talking to HTC when they were giving us a preview of the HTC
Hero a while back, we asked about multitouch and why they finally
decided to include it. More or less, the response we received was that
HTC and their legal team felt confident about including it, and with
other competitors like Palm including multitouch, everything would be
alright. Fast forward to literally a couple minutes ago, and we now
find Apple filing suit against HTC regarding everything from hardware
to the iPhone’s user interface. Let’s see if you can figure out who
gave this quote:

“We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented
inventions, or we can do something about it. We’ve decided to do
something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors
should create their own original technology, not steal ours.”
"

more at

http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/...t-infringment/

It looks a lot like the Android phones are not going to have
multitouch after all or else Google will have to pay a significant
'Apple tax' on each one for patent infringement.

All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
multitouch GUI from all those Android phones and tablets. :>)

On Mar 2, 10:38*am, iPhone is still twice as popular
<vic.hea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> BREAKING NEWS MARCH 2, 2010 from BG Reports
>
> "After talking to HTC when they were giving us a preview of the HTC
> Hero a while back, we asked about multitouch and why they finally
> decided to include it. More or less, the response we received was that
> HTC and their legal team felt confident about including it, and with
> other competitors like Palm including multitouch, everything would be
> alright. Fast forward to literally a couple minutes ago, and we now
> find Apple filing suit against HTC regarding everything from hardware
> to the iPhone’s user interface. Let’s see if you can figure out who
> gave this quote:
>
> * * “We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented
> inventions, or we can do something about it. We’ve decided to do
> something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors
> should create their own original technology, not steal ours.”
> "
>
> more at
>
> http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/...c-for-patent-i...
>
> It looks a lot like the Android phones are not going to have
> multitouch after all or else Google will have to pay a significant
> 'Apple tax' on each one for patent infringement.
>
> All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
> multitouch GUI from all those Android *phones and tablets. :>)

Apple sues HTC for alleged infringement of 20 iPhone patents
from AppleInsider

Apple on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against rival handset maker HTC over
the alleged infringement of 20 patents related to the iPhone's user
interface, underlying architecture and hardware.

Send in the lawyers...

Motorola next?

Apple sues competitors over Multitouch wrote:

> Motorola next?

Probably Microsoft is next. Microsoft has been selling products with
multi-touch even before the iPhone was announced.

> All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
> multitouch GUI from all those Android phones and tablets. :>)

Ah... that's good to know. What a great "feature".

-Frank

There should be a mandatory patent license royalty system scaled on
novelty/obviousness, wherein low-novelty/high obviousness royalties are
subject to royalty maxima of relatively low value.
Then with luck, no-one would want to bother patenting gestures and the
like - and if they do, would have to wait an EXTREMELY long time before
their investment in patent fees starts to pay off.


Frankster wrote:
>> All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
>> multitouch GUI from all those Android phones and tablets. :>)
>
> Ah... that's good to know. What a great "feature".
>
> -Frank

There should be a mandatory patent royalty system scaled on
novelty/obviousness, wherein low-novelty/high obviousness royalties are
subject to maxima of relatively low value.

Then with luck, no-one would want to bother patenting things like gestures.
And if they did, would have to wait an EXTREMELY long time before
their investment in patent fees began to pay off.


Frankster wrote:
>> All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
>> multitouch GUI from all those Android phones and tablets. :>)
>
> Ah... that's good to know. What a great "feature".
>
> -Frank

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4b8d3aa5$0$1594$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Apple sues competitors over Multitouch wrote:
>
> > Motorola next?
>
> Probably Microsoft is next. Microsoft has been selling products with
> multi-touch even before the iPhone was announced.

Microsloth has been ripping off Apple (and many other companies) for
decades, and getting away with it. :-(

iPhone is still twice as popular wrote:
> BREAKING NEWS MARCH 2, 2010 from BG Reports
>
> "After talking to HTC when they were giving us a preview of the HTC
> Hero a while back, we asked about multitouch and why they finally
> decided to include it. More or less, the response we received was that
> HTC and their legal team felt confident about including it, and with
> other competitors like Palm including multitouch, everything would be
> alright. Fast forward to literally a couple minutes ago, and we now
> find Apple filing suit against HTC regarding everything from hardware
> to the iPhone’s user interface. Let’s see if you can figure out who
> gave this quote:
>
> “We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented
> inventions, or we can do something about it. We’ve decided to do
> something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors
> should create their own original technology, not steal ours.”
> "
>
> more at
>
> http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/...t-infringment/
>
> It looks a lot like the Android phones are not going to have
> multitouch after all or else Google will have to pay a significant
> 'Apple tax' on each one for patent infringement.
>
> All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
> multitouch GUI from all those Android phones and tablets. :>)
>
>

Google can probably buy a license for the patented technology. It may
cost them an arm and a leg. Their negotiating position is much impaired
by the infringement!

Advanced Kitty wrote:
> There should be a mandatory patent license royalty system scaled on
> novelty/obviousness, wherein low-novelty/high obviousness royalties are
> subject to royalty maxima of relatively low value.
> Then with luck, no-one would want to bother patenting gestures and the
> like - and if they do, would have to wait an EXTREMELY long time before
> their investment in patent fees starts to pay off.
>

It will never fly! Who is wise enough to measure novelty and obviousness?

"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in
news:PqSdnWooHM-3GRDWnZ2dnUVZ_g8AAAAA@giganews.com:

> Advanced Kitty wrote:
>> There should be a mandatory patent license royalty system scaled on
>> novelty/obviousness, wherein low-novelty/high obviousness royalties
>> are subject to royalty maxima of relatively low value.
>> Then with luck, no-one would want to bother patenting gestures and
>> the like - and if they do, would have to wait an EXTREMELY long time
>> before their investment in patent fees starts to pay off.
>>
>
> It will never fly! Who is wise enough to measure novelty and
> obviousness?
>

Apple's played this crazy game before....



--
"iPad is to computing what Etch-A-Sketch is to art!"

Larry

On 2010-03-02, iPhone is still twice as popular <vic.healey@gmail.com> wrote:
> BREAKING NEWS MARCH 2, 2010 from BG Reports
> “We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented
> inventions, or we can do something about it. We’ve decided to do
> something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors
> should create their own original technology, not steal ours.�

That's pretty funny, here's what he used to think:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

I guess it depends on who's doing the stealing.

Dennis Ferguson

"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in
news:PqSdnWsoHM_UHhDWnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@giganews.com:

>> http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/...tc-for-patent-
in
>> fringment/
>>
>

I found these patents Apple owns after buying Fingerworks:

Patents filed by Apple before Jeff Han did any multi-touch demos of his
own

20060097991 Multipoint Touchscreen
20060026521 Gestures for touch sensitive input devices
20060022955 Visual Expander
20060085757 Activating virtual keys of a touch-screen virtual keyboard
20060033724 Virtual input device placement on a touch screen user
interface
20060161870 Proximity detector in handheld device
20135048890 Electronic Device Design Patent

Acquired through Apple's acquisition of Fingerworks

20070139395 Ellipse Fitting for Multi-Touch Surfaces
20070081726 MULTI-TOUCH CONTACT TRACKING ALGORITHM
20070078919 MULTI-TOUCH HAND POSITION OFFSET COMPUTATION
20070070052 MULTI-TOUCH CONTACT MOTION EXTRACTION
20070070051 MULTI-TOUCH CONTACT MOTION EXTRACTION
20070070050 MULTI-TOUCH CONTACT MOTION EXTRACTION
20060238522 IDENTIFYING CONTACTS ON A TOUCH SURFACE
20060238521 IDENTIFYING CONTACTS ON A TOUCH SURFACE
20060238520 USER INTERFACE GESTURES
20060238519 USER INTERFACE GESTURES
20060238518 TOUCH SURFACE
20060232567 CAPACITIVE SENSING ARRANGEMENT
20060032680 Method of increasing the spatial resolution of touch
sensitive devices


Fingerworks is at http://www.fingerworks.com/

Apple just bought them to own the technology and destroyed the company.

You can still download the Fingerworks multitouch software for
OSX/Linux/WIN 2000/XP

Apple didn't invent any of this. They bought it.


--
"iPad is to computing what Etch-A-Sketch is to art!"

Larry

Dennis Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:slrnhor3e7.56.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com:

> That's pretty funny, here's what he used to think:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
>
> I guess it depends on who's doing the stealing.
>
> Dennis Ferguson
>
>

He's talking about the old Apple, before the greed set in.



--
"iPad is to computing what Etch-A-Sketch is to art!"

Larry

Larry wrote:
>
> Apple didn't invent any of this. They bought it.

So, what's your point?

--
lsmft

John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in news:hmk3lg$poo$2
@news.eternal-september.org:

> Larry wrote:
>>
>> Apple didn't invent any of this. They bought it.
>
> So, what's your point?
>

No particular point. The impression one gets from the incessant fanboiz is
Apple invented everything from the first LED watch. I was simply pointing
out who invented multitouch....


--
"iPad is to computing what Etch-A-Sketch is to art!"

Larry

On 2010-03-02, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> Dennis Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote in
> news:slrnhor3e7.56.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com:
>
>> That's pretty funny, here's what he used to think:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
>>
>> I guess it depends on who's doing the stealing.
>>
>
> He's talking about the old Apple, before the greed set in.

I think he's actually talking about a time when no one thought
it possible that you could ever patent a user interface (or
DEC would have sued Digital Research over PIP). Apple at least
had the good taste to steal a nice one from Xerox.

Given that it is now possible to patent absolutely anything,
however, the lawyers get wealthy.

Dennis Ferguson

In article <slrnhora71.78.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>, Dennis
Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote:

> I think he's actually talking about a time when no one thought
> it possible that you could ever patent a user interface (or
> DEC would have sued Digital Research over PIP). Apple at least
> had the good taste to steal a nice one from Xerox.

apple didn't steal anything from xerox.

> Given that it is now possible to patent absolutely anything,
> however, the lawyers get wealthy.

as do the inventors.

On 2010-03-03, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnhora71.78.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>, Dennis
> Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> I think he's actually talking about a time when no one thought
>> it possible that you could ever patent a user interface (or
>> DEC would have sued Digital Research over PIP). Apple at least
>> had the good taste to steal a nice one from Xerox.
>
> apple didn't steal anything from xerox.

Of course. I forgot.

>> Given that it is now possible to patent absolutely anything,
>> however, the lawyers get wealthy.
>
> as do the inventors.

You can also get rich trading credit default swaps, but that
doesn't make it a socially productive activity. Inventors should
get rich by building better products than their competitors rather
than by suing those they fear to keep from having to compete
(or, worse, never building anything at all, instead living
like a parasite on the efforts of others who actually do
build stuff).

Dennis Ferguson

In article <slrnhorgcf.7s.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>, Dennis
Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote:

> Inventors should
> get rich by building better products than their competitors rather
> than by suing those they fear to keep from having to compete
> (or, worse, never building anything at all, instead living
> like a parasite on the efforts of others who actually do
> build stuff).

most don't sue, but sometimes suing is justified. unfortunately, there
are those who abuse the system and do nothing but sue, probably because
their patents are lame and it's the only way they'll make any money.

Dennis Ferguson wrote:

> I think he's actually talking about a time when no one thought
> it possible that you could ever patent a user interface (or
> DEC would have sued Digital Research over PIP). Apple at least
> had the good taste to steal a nice one from Xerox.

Should be a good lawsuit. No doubt Google is going to help HTC with it.
It'll be interesting to see how many of those patents hold up, as well
as how many are actually used by Android phones.

At least no where does Apple claim that they invented multi-touch!

Larry wrote:

> Apple didn't invent any of this. They bought it.

Doesn't matter, they still own it. Interesting that they would want to
expose themselves to having the patents overturned though. There's a lot
of prior art on those technologies. Should be an interesting battle
between Google and Apple.

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:020320102142485687%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <slrnhorgcf.7s.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>, Dennis
> Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > Inventors should
> > get rich by building better products than their competitors rather
> > than by suing those they fear to keep from having to compete
> > (or, worse, never building anything at all, instead living
> > like a parasite on the efforts of others who actually do
> > build stuff).
>
> most don't sue, but sometimes suing is justified. unfortunately, there
> are those who abuse the system and do nothing but sue, probably because
> their patents are lame and it's the only way they'll make any money.

Corrected to:
... because their patents *and/or products* are lame and it's the
only way they'll make any money.

:-)

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:020320102142485687%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <slrnhorgcf.7s.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>, Dennis
> Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > Inventors should
> > get rich by building better products than their competitors rather
> > than by suing those they fear to keep from having to compete
> > (or, worse, never building anything at all, instead living
> > like a parasite on the efforts of others who actually do
> > build stuff).
>
> most don't sue, but sometimes suing is justified. unfortunately, there
> are those who abuse the system and do nothing but sue, probably because
> their patents are lame and it's the only way they'll make any money.

Corrected to:
... because their patents *and/or products* are lame and it's the
only way they'll make any money.

:-)

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:020320101915184675%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

>> Given that it is now possible to patent absolutely anything,
>> however, the lawyers get wealthy.
>
> as do the inventors.
>

Try to spread that **** on the millions of screwed GENERAL MOTORS
investors whos company is still producing and selling products from the
same PROPERTY and MACHINERY those investors paid blood, sweat and tears
to build.....

.....simply stolen away from them by the damned lawyers at the stroke of
a pen.

No stock is safe....including Apple's....any more. Declare bankruptcy,
give the company fatcats a big bonus and go on as if nothing has
changed....no investors to worry about and please any more....

It's ********....The end of the American Dream.


--
"iPad is to computing what Etch-A-Sketch is to art!"

Larry

On Mar 2, 10:54*am, Apple sues competitors over Multitouch
<vic.hea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 2, 10:38*am, iPhone is still twice as popular
>
>
>
> <vic.hea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > BREAKING NEWS MARCH 2, 2010 from BG Reports
>
> > "After talking to HTC when they were giving us a preview of the HTC
> > Hero a while back, we asked about multitouch and why they finally
> > decided to include it. More or less, the response we received was that
> > HTC and their legal team felt confident about including it, and with
> > other competitors like Palm including multitouch, everything would be
> > alright. Fast forward to literally a couple minutes ago, and we now
> > find Apple filing suit against HTC regarding everything from hardware
> > to the iPhone’s user interface. Let’s see if you can figure out who
> > gave this quote:
>
> > * * “We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented
> > inventions, or we can do something about it. We’ve decided to do
> > something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors
> > should create their own original technology, not steal ours.”
> > "
>
> > more at
>
> >http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/...c-for-patent-i...
>
> > It looks a lot like the Android phones are not going to have
> > multitouch after all or else Google will have to pay a significant
> > 'Apple tax' on each one for patent infringement.
>
> > All Google has to do is push an Android update to remove the
> > multitouch GUI from all those Android *phones and tablets. :>)
>
> Apple sues HTC for alleged infringement of 20 iPhone patents
> from AppleInsider
>
> Apple on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against rival handset maker HTC over
> the alleged infringement of 20 patents related to the iPhone's user
> interface, underlying architecture and hardware.
>
> Send in the lawyers...
>
> Motorola next?

This cartoon says it all as to why Apple needs to sue these iPhone
wanabees...

http://darkgate.net/comic/images/wor...1267604046.gif

On 3/3/10 12:02 AM, in article Xns9D30A9074A2Enoonehomecom@74.209.131.13,
"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote:

> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:020320101915184675%
> nospam@nospam.invalid:
>
>>> Given that it is now possible to patent absolutely anything,
>>> however, the lawyers get wealthy.
>>
>> as do the inventors.
>>
>
> Try to spread that **** on the millions of screwed GENERAL MOTORS
> investors whos company is still producing and selling products from the
> same PROPERTY and MACHINERY those investors paid blood, sweat and tears
> to build.....
>
> ....simply stolen away from them by the damned lawyers at the stroke of
>
> a pen.
>
> No stock is safe....including Apple's....any more. Declare bankruptcy,
> give the company fatcats a big bonus and go on as if nothing has
> changed....no investors to worry about and please any more....
>
> It's ********....The end of the American Dream.
>
Arm your tinfoil deflectors, Larry! Here comes 2012...

"Your Name" <your.name@isp.com> wrote in message
news:hmjqla$mli$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4b8d3aa5$0$1594$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> Apple sues competitors over Multitouch wrote:
>>
>> > Motorola next?
>>
>> Probably Microsoft is next. Microsoft has been selling products with
>> multi-touch even before the iPhone was announced.
>
> Microsloth has been ripping off Apple (and many other companies) for
> decades, and getting away with it. :-(
>
>
>

That seems fair, as Apple ripped off PARC to develop the original MAC.

In article <hmo1ko$a27$1@news.eternal-september.org>, carlkeehn
<crkeehn@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Microsloth has been ripping off Apple (and many other companies) for
> > decades, and getting away with it. :-(
>
> That seems fair, as Apple ripped off PARC to develop the original MAC.

they did no such thing. xerox and apple entered into an agreement.
xerox basically said we're not going to do anything with this, go for
it.

On 3/4/10 6:51 AM, in article 040320100751445833%nospam@nospam.invalid,
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <hmo1ko$a27$1@news.eternal-september.org>, carlkeehn
> <crkeehn@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Microsloth has been ripping off Apple (and many other companies) for
>>> decades, and getting away with it. :-(
>>
>> That seems fair, as Apple ripped off PARC to develop the original MAC.
>
> they did no such thing. xerox and apple entered into an agreement.
> xerox basically said we're not going to do anything with this, go for
> it.
It's amazing how the hatebois distort truth, much like 'Progressives'...

nospam wrote:

> they did no such thing. xerox and apple entered into an agreement.
> xerox basically said we're not going to do anything with this, go for
> it.

Nope.

"http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/15/business/company-news-xerox-sues-apple-computer-over-macintosh-copyright.html?pagewanted=1"