LosOjos Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 'Transparent' iPhones: A text and walk plan for those trying to do two things at once - News - Gadgets & Tech - The Independent How have they managed to patent this? There have been Android apps for this very purpose for years: https://play.google.com/store/search?q=transparent+screen&c=apps So, how many small indie devs do we think Apple will bully, intimidate and ultimately ruin when they get this patent pushed through? Is anyone else sick of Apple 'inventing' things then suing the rear end of anyone who has anything even remotely like their 'invention'? It's got to be crippling progress in the smartphone market as only the big guys like Samsung can afford to risk doing anything new for fear of Apple having some bloody patent tucked away for a court case.
seawolf Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) Are you serious? Really, I'm asking if you are serious. Because you must be joking. To single out Apple as the big behemoth bully that steals from everyone else. The truth is - they all "steal" from one another. Some of it is rather innocuous and the end product looks quite a bit different from the original as the original idea was only used as a seed for innovation. Whereas other times it is a blatant copying to the letter (Samsung, you know who you are). I submit my evidence to the court. Apple vs Microsoft Top 10 features Microsoft stole from Mac OS X | Mac - InfoWorld Top 10 features that Apple stole from Windows | Windows - InfoWorld http://www.zangogroup.com/d/clips/IES_0588_news_2.pdf IBM vs Microsoft Business & Technology | Microsoft pays IBM to settle suit | Seattle Times Newspaper Apple vs Samsung Apple Wins Big Against Samsung In Court | TechCrunch Samsung says Apple stole some of its technology for the Apple iPhone Apple Vs Google Apple wins appeal reinstating ITC case against Google's Motorola Yes, Google "Stole" From Apple, And That's A Good Thing - Forbes Did Google Just Prove That Android is Google vs Blackberry Google Android Prototype In the Wild Google vs Oracle Google's Android In Trouble As Judges Mull Oracle's Java API Copyright - Forbes And the reality of it all is - to quote Isaac Newton "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." - that all innovation in technology is "stealing" from what came before. Do not think that mankind in 2014 is somehow smarter or more innovative than mankind in 1941. We only have the technology we have today because we are "standing on the shoulders of giants" who came before us. Much of what we know today only came about because of the work that originated at DARPA and PARC and has been built upon by others, including IBM, Microsoft, Apple, Google, Sun, and scores of other companies and inventors big and small. Xerox PARC turns 40: Marking four decades of tech innovations - Computerworld 10 brilliant DARPA inventions | Analysis | Features | PC Pro If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica Edited March 31, 2014 by seawolf
plexer Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 But seawolf as the op points out there are allready a ton of apps that can do this therefore plenty of prior art and the op was referring to small developers not the big companies ala samsung et al. You're obviously heavily invested in the Apple eco system but that doesn't make the op's points any less valid nor does it make your response so but lets have a good clean fight. Ben
synaesthesia Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 I hasten to point out, as much as I hate Apple and Apple fanboys (to clear one thing up, definition of fanboy at least in this context is an irrational fandom or love of a company regardless of their status, products etc) Apple have one thing going for them. They blatantly steal things and openly admit they don't give two hoots about it. Steve Jobs was one of the biggest pilferers, pirates and trolls on the planet, why on earth would or should Apple fall further from the tree! (see what I did there?) The problem is the patent trollage and Apple are one of the worst culprits here, if not THE worst.
LosOjos Posted March 31, 2014 Author Posted March 31, 2014 Are you serious? Yes. I don't believe I made any claim that Apple are the only company who steal ideas, why do you jump to that conclusion? "It's OK for me to do it because everyone else did" is no defense. The thing is, as @synaesthesia says, Apple are patent trolling. They have applied for a patent on a technology that already exists and has done for some years and they are, yet again, claiming to have invented it; why do this unless the aim is to file law suits? I think there needs to be a serious review in to how patents are filed, it's absolutely ridiculous that something so generic can be patented and it does nothing but hinder progress.
sparkeh Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) why do you jump to that conclusion? Because you criticised Apple. Shame on you! Edited March 31, 2014 by sparkeh
abillybob Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Haha nice invention Apple, I have been using this on my android phone as an app for 2 years..... bit slow to the market aren't you Apple! It will really annoy me if they get the patent as I find the apps useful and ultimately Apple will challenge the people that have made the app if they get the patent!
localzuk Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Before we all get in a flap about evil Apple, can we confirm that Apple applied for the patent after the other apps appeared? Reason I ask is, that article says the patent was filed in 2012, and others have said such apps appeared in 2012 also. So I'd want to know which came first for sure before choosing a side. Also, why so many transparent phone apps?! Are they the new fart apps? 1
abillybob Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 @localzuk, I'm not 100% sure when Apple started asking for the patent though I do know transparent apps have been on the android market for around 3-4 years now! I find the app I use useful because its a SMS app that uses your camera so as I'm typing and walking I can see where I'm going Bit sad I know but everyone seems to think it's cool and it has come in handy stopping me from treading in dog poo the once!
SYNACK Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) Before we all get in a flap about evil Apple, can we confirm that Apple applied for the patent after the other apps appeared? Reason I ask is, that article says the patent was filed in 2012, and others have said such apps appeared in 2012 also. So I'd want to know which came first for sure before choosing a side. Also, why so many transparent phone apps?! Are they the new fart apps? Well piling on with app availability and timing this was available on my HTC Windows phone around WP7.5 I think even WP7.0-7.1 which was well before 2012. This http://www.windowsphone.com/en-nz/store/app/text-n-walk/c0c0bc7c-9c28-43ec-93b5-26b0f12d4b39 had an update in febuary 2012 and that was 1.1 Edited March 31, 2014 by SYNACK
featured_spectre Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Whilst @seawolf makes a valid point that it isn't just apple that do this carp, they are the ones most likely to get away with it because they spend millions on lawyers to bully the little person into giving up and making it unjustifiably difficult and expensive for the "indie" or "low key" developer to continue. No company is clean in this department, what I would like to see though, is Apple buying the patent from the developer rather than trying to force through as their own, that way the original creator gets something out of it.
LosOjos Posted March 31, 2014 Author Posted March 31, 2014 what I would like to see though, is Apple buying the patent from the developer rather than trying to force through as their own, that way the original creator gets something out of it. Another problem this raises though (and this is a problem with the patent system itself) is that I bet a lot of people wouldn't even think to patent this - If I had come up with this idea, I'd never have believed it to be patent-able as it's no more an 'invention' than any other piece of high level software...
LosOjos Posted March 31, 2014 Author Posted March 31, 2014 Before we all get in a flap about evil Apple, can we confirm that Apple applied for the patent after the other apps appeared? Reason I ask is, that article says the patent was filed in 2012, and others have said such apps appeared in 2012 also. So I'd want to know which came first for sure before choosing a side. Also, why so many transparent phone apps?! Are they the new fart apps? According to the article, Apple filed patent in September 2012. The second app I clicked on in Play store (so semi-random choice) was published in February 2012: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ellipselab.android.transparentscreen.free
seawolf Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 I hasten to point out, as much as I hate Apple and Apple fanboys (to clear one thing up, definition of fanboy at least in this context is an irrational fandom or love of a company regardless of their status, products etc) Apple have one thing going for them. They blatantly steal things and openly admit they don't give two hoots about it. Steve Jobs was one of the biggest pilferers, pirates and trolls on the planet, why on earth would or should Apple fall further from the tree! (see what I did there?) The problem is the patent trollage and Apple are one of the worst culprits here, if not THE worst. I don't think you really understand the meaning of Patent Troll. Patent Troll - a person or company who enforces patent rights against accused infringers in an attempt to collect licensing fees, but does not manufacture products or supply services based upon the patents in question, thus engaging in economic rent-seeking.
seawolf Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) Firstly, here is the actual patent . This patent may also be related to or used in conjunction with United States Patent: 8665236 for a "transparent iPhone". Yes, there have been apps that have (seemingly) similar functionality previously. An app which allows people to text while their rear camera is activated has been available as a download for iPhones since 2009. There are similar apps for Android devices, too. However, what we don't know is: 1. Whether or not the developers of these apps has ever patented any of these features. 2. Whether or not their patent extends nearly as far as the Apple patent does (i.e. this feature would be embedded in iOS itself likely as an API that app developers would be able to hook into) 3. Whether or not Apple paid any of these developers (or the "original" developer) for the rights to this. 4. Whether Apple will be challenged and ultimately lose the rights to the patent if someone else shows prior use (and cares). So, my bone with the OPs original post is that it was irrational and lacking evidence as we don't have all of the facts, do we? EDIT: Of course, you may be against the ability for people or companies to patent software, or anything for that matter, but if that is an entirely different kettle of fish and an entirely different discussion. Edited March 31, 2014 by seawolf
HarryMonkey Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Putting all this patent thing to one side, what I find unbelievable is the fact that a person is rendered totally incapable of either stopping for the few seconds it takes to send a text or to ignore their phone for a few minutes until they get to their destination. I would consider myself a pretty sad individual if my phone ruled my life in such a way that I had to have an app that enabled me to walk and text at the same time.
synaesthesia Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 I understand the term more than you know - however definition may differ slightly. I refer to Apple as patent trolls as they are little more than trolls when it comes to this very subject. The richness of someone doesn't make them any less of a troll and Apple are dangerous.
SYNACK Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) Firstly, here is the actual patent . This patent may also be related to or used in conjunction with United States Patent: 8665236 for a "transparent iPhone". . 2009 http://bikeglam.com/transparent-mobile-phone-future-concept-nokia-transparent-mobile-phone-for-new-generation/ transparent nokia phone concept, they were just not dickish enough to patent it before having a viable product. And the reality of it all is - to quote Isaac Newton "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." - that all innovation in technology is "stealing" from what came before. Do not think that mankind in 2014 is somehow smarter or more innovative than mankind in 1941. We only have the technology we have today because we are "standing on the shoulders of giants" who came before us. Much of what we know today only came about because of the work that originated at DARPA and PARC and has been built upon by others, including IBM, Microsoft, Apple, Google, Sun, and scores of other companies and inventors big and small. We are less innovative now thanks to patents which brings us back to the other conversation you were discussing, if the patent system is not stopped we are all screwed in the long run, just look at the patents on seeds in the US, how are we not driving ourselves to extinction one greedy company at a time. Edited March 31, 2014 by SYNACK
localzuk Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Firstly, here is the actual patent . This patent may also be related to or used in conjunction with United States Patent: 8665236 for a "transparent iPhone". Yes, there have been apps that have (seemingly) similar functionality previously. An app which allows people to text while their rear camera is activated has been available as a download for iPhones since 2009. There are similar apps for Android devices, too. However, what we don't know is: 1. Whether or not the developers of these apps has ever patented any of these features. 2. Whether or not their patent extends nearly as far as the Apple patent does (i.e. this feature would be embedded in iOS itself likely as an API that app developers would be able to hook into) 3. Whether or not Apple paid any of these developers (or the "original" developer) for the rights to this. 4. Whether Apple will be challenged and ultimately lose the rights to the patent if someone else shows prior use (and cares). So, my bone with the OPs original post is that it was irrational and lacking evidence as we don't have all of the facts, do we? EDIT: Of course, you may be against the ability for people or companies to patent software, or anything for that matter, but if that is an entirely different kettle of fish and an entirely different discussion. Point 1 is somewhat irrelevant - if there is prior art, then the patent should not be awarded. It is the responsibility of the submitter to do a search for prior art. Point 4 is what is at stake. Who can afford to go up against Apple? Some countries would struggle with their legal prowess. Why should a little development company have to put basically their entire life on the line to fight claims in court?
seawolf Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Point 1 is somewhat irrelevant - if there is prior art, then the patent should not be awarded. It is the responsibility of the submitter to do a search for prior art. Point 1 is only irrelevant if Point 2 meant the patented feature was too close in functionality to another patent or prior art. Point 4 is what is at stake. Who can afford to go up against Apple? Some countries would struggle with their legal prowess. Why should a little development company have to put basically their entire life on the line to fight claims in court? Only if Point 3 did not occur, and it very well may have. Otherwise, the true inventor may hold out for 5-10 years and then ask the patent office to reexamine the patent providing ample proof of prior art (and having apps sold since 2009 would more than suffice. The threat of an invalidated patent that would open Apple up to a dead certain loss in court would likely convince them into paying up handsomely. That's how these things often work out because its cheaper than going to court.
localzuk Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 That's not generally how patents get overturned in the USA. Court cases are usually the way it happens, and even then often they don't actually overturn the patent - the bigger player just ends up buying the complainant off. Aka. "Settled out of court". So, the end result remains - a patent that shouldn't exist continues to exist.
LosOjos Posted March 31, 2014 Author Posted March 31, 2014 So, my bone with the OPs original post is that it was irrational and lacking evidence as we don't have all of the facts, do we? Irrational? Hardly! I posted a link to an article I had read and my opinion on it and asked others for their opinions. At what point did I become irrational? We have all the evidence we need - as they have done many times before Apple are patenting an idea that they did not come up with and that has already been well implemented for years before they filed for the patent. They may or may not get the patent; they shouldn't, but somehow seem to succeed quite often; and they may or may not use the patent to sue others who have already implemented this technology. Obviously we cannot see in to the future, but we can reflect on the past and I don't think even you could argue that Apple has a track record of doing exactly what I've described. I have already acknowledged that Apple are not the only ones to have acted like this, but this thread is about Apple's latest 'offence'
CHR1S Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 I just like to think Seawolf had that list of patent trolling companies pre-saved in a document ready to whip out as and when needed
seawolf Posted March 31, 2014 Posted March 31, 2014 Irrational? Hardly! I posted a link to an article I had read and my opinion on it and asked others for their opinions. At what point did I become irrational? We have all the evidence we need - as they have done many times before Apple are patenting an idea that they did not come up with and that has already been well implemented for years before they filed for the patent. So, MP3 players with usable scroll wheel interfaces and music stores that were usable as well as and capacitive touch full-touchscreen, actually usable phones and tablets were well implemented prior to the iPod, iPhone and iPad? OK. I'm sure you were referring to other things. Most of the time, Apple doesn't bring out something entirely new. They just bring out something that works better than what came before it. Sometimes much better, sometimes only a little. There were plenty of music players before the iPhone and there were even touchscreen phones and PDAs years before the iPhone. It's just that no one had hit upon just the right implementation and interface before Apple brought their products to market. Remember mobile web browsing before the iPhone - wow, it was horrible. Now, very good. They may or may not get the patent; they shouldn't, but somehow seem to succeed quite often; and they may or may not use the patent to sue others who have already implemented this technology. Obviously we cannot see in to the future, but we can reflect on the past and I don't think even you could argue that Apple has a track record of doing exactly what I've described. I have already acknowledged that Apple are not the only ones to have acted like this, but this thread is about Apple's latest 'offence' But, based on your line of thinking then Microsoft, Google, Blackberry, Sony, and Ericsson are also patent trolls. Has Microsoft's court victory exposed Google as a patent troll? | Computerworld Blogs Rockstar Consortium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia As Apple and these other companies have also been the victims of real patent trolls (those who make nothing, and exist only to sue others) they are merely using the current patent system to protect themselves and to gain advantage over competitors. Why was the Rockstar consortium formed by these companies? Because they were being attacked by patent trolls and didn't want these patents to be used against them (and because Google had already swallowed up thousands of patents with the Motorola purchase - it was a defensive move). That being the case, is the real problem that Apple (and other companies) are "stealing" ideas; or, is it a messed up patent system? I think it's a messed up patent system and that tech companies have been forced to play this game.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now