Back in April, Samsung slapped back at Apple’s claims of patent infringement with a healthy helping of ten claims of its own. Now Bloomberg is reporting that Samsung quietly dropped its countersuit against the Cupertino-based company on June 30th, in an attempt “to streamline the legal proceedings.” Of course that doesn’t mean the saga is over: Apple’s smartphone infringement accusations stand, as do legal battles in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and the UK. Samsung says it will also continue to fight Apple’s accusations in the US in the form of a counter-claim. One down, one to go?
Update: To clarify, this does not mean that Samsung has abandoned its own infringement claims against Apple. Those claims have been rolled into counter-claims in the original suit.
The boys at MacRumors have uncovered a new Apple patent application. This one covers a physical keyboard with motion sensing cameras built into the frame. The idea is to merge the keyboard and mouse into one device. There would be both a “typing” and a “mouse” mode, toggled through a key or key combo.
So you’d type in your URL, tap the Mouse Mode button, and finger scroll up and down the page. I’m not really sure how much more comfortable hovering your hands above the keyboard will be, but I can certainly see this being a faster option. What’s most interesting in the patent app is Apple’s seeming admission of the failure of non-traditional keyboards.
Over the last forty years there have been numerous attempts made to introduce an alternative to the standard keyboard. The changes include, but are not limited to, non-QWERTY layouts, concave and convex surfaces, capacitive keys, split designs, membrane keys, etc. However, although such alternative keyboards may provide improved usability or ergonomics, they have failed to replace or duplicate the commercial success of the conventional mechanical keyboard.
Whether or not this proposed product ever sees the light of day, it’s clear that Apple still sees the traditional keyboard / display set-up as dominating for the foreseeable future. The iPad’s keyboard is more comfortable than any other touchscreen keyboard I’ve used. But it still can’t compare to the feeling of striking real keys.
I’m sure someone else said something similar about typewriters once.
So it’s been a fun day of armchair code forensics and legal analysis on the web after Florian Mueller published a piece this morning alleging Google directly copied somewhere between 37 and 44 Java source files in Android. That’s of course a major accusation, seeing as Oracle is currently suing Google for patent and copyright infringement related to Java, and it prompted some extremely harsh technical rebuttals, like this one from ZDNet and this one from Ars Technica. The objections in short: the files in question are test files, aren’t important, probably don’t ship with Android, and everyone is making a hullabaloo over nothing.
We’ll just say this straight out: from a technical perspective, these objections are completely valid. The files in question do appear to be test files, some of them were removed, and there’s simply no way of knowing if any of them ended up in a shipping Android handset. But — and this is a big but — that’s just the technical story. From a legal perspective, it seems very likely that these files create increased copyright liability for Google, because the state of our current copyright law doesn’t make exceptions for how source code trees work, or whether or not a script pasted in a different license, or whether these files made it into handsets. The single most relevant legal question is whether or not copying and distributing these files was authorized by Oracle, and the answer clearly appears to be “nope” — even if Oracle licensed the code under the GPL. Why? Because somewhere along the line, Google took Oracle’s code, replaced the GPL language with the incompatible Apache Open Source License, and distributed the code under that license publicly. That’s all it takes — if Google violated the GPL by changing the license, it also infringed Oracle’s underlying copyright. It doesn’t matter if a Google employee, a script, a robot, or Eric Schmidt’s cat made the change — once you’ve created or distributed an unauthorized copy, you’re liable for infringement.*
Why does this matter? Because we’re hearing that Oracle is dead-set on winning this case and eventually extracting a per-handset royalty on every Android handset shipped. In that context, “those files aren’t important!” isn’t a winning or persuasive argument — and the more these little infringements add up, the worse things look for Google. Whether or not these files are a “smoking gun” isn’t the issue — it’s whether Android infringes Oracle’s patents and copyrights, since the consequences either way will be monumental and far-reaching. Ultimately, though, the only person who can resolve all of this for certain is a judge — and it’s going to take a lot more time and research to get there.
–
*They’re not directly comparable, but think about the Psystar case for a second. Even though Psystar desperately wanted to argue that Apple’s OS X license agreement was invalid, the judge never got there — he simply ruled Psystar wasn’t authorized to copy and distribute OS X, and swung the hammer. It really is that simple sometimes.
Florian Mueller has been killing it these past few months with his analysis of various tech patent suits on his FOSSpatents blog, and today he’s unearthed a pretty major bombshell: at least 43 Android source files that appear to have been directly copied from Java. That’s a big deal, seeing as Oracle is currently suing Google for patent and copyright infringement in Android — which isn’t a hard case to prove when you’ve got 37 Android source files marked “PROPRIETARY / CONFIDENTIAL” and “DO NOT DISTRIBUTE” by Oracle / Sun and at least six more files in Froyo and Gingerbread that appear to have been decompiled from Java 2 Standard Edition and redistributed under the Apache open source license without permission. In simple terms? Google copied Oracle’s Java code, pasted in a new license, and shipped it.
Now, we’ve long thought Google’s odd response to Oracle’s lawsuit seemingly acknowledged some infringement, so we doubt this is a surprise in Mountain View, but we’re guessing handset vendors aren’t going to be so thrilled — especially since using Android has already caused companies like HTC and Motorola to be hit with major patent lawsuits of their own. We’ll see what happens, but in the meantime you should definitely hit up Florian’s site for the full dirt — it’s some 47 pages worth of material, and it’s dense, but if you’re into this sort of thing it’s incredibly interesting.
Update: It appears things aren’t this simple, but they’re still not great. Check here for the latest.
While Apple may have already tried to revolutionize the current mouse we all know and love/hate, that doesn’t mean the company has stopped trying to figure out new, and better ways to make the mouse even more ridiculous. What better way to go above and beyond the call of duty, then to include a multitouch display on the top of it? According to some new apple patent applications recently awarded, the Cupertino-based company may be doing just that.
The new patents suggest that Apple is toying around with the idea of putting a multitouch display on the top of a mouse peripheral. The display would be able to show off different pieces of information. As one image shows, a calculator could easily be displayed there, and touch-sensitive keys would allow for the numbers to be activated when necessary. Apple wouldn’t get rid of the left- and right-click buttons, though. It would just be the middle of the peripheral that would see the majority of alterations.
Part of the patent, is Apple’s idea of a virtual keyboard. Having the ability to change the keys to whatever a user needed at any given moment, and then being able to switch back when needed. Apple would also include a dedicated haptic feedback motor, so that when a digital key is pressed the user would feel it. Considering how popular multitouch is in today’s gadgets, and how a programmable virtual keyboard would be a benefit to those who use their keyboards often and for varied reasons, it seems that Apple would more than likely have a hit on their hands, if these were to come to market.
Solar power is becoming a common addition to some gadgets. Yet, it’s mostly tied to accessories that charge our more important devices, rather than being an integral part of them. That looks to be changing for at least one company, as Apple has recently been awarded a patent for solar-powered devices. Generally speaking, the patent describes solutions for charging devices that range from smartphones, to laptops and tablet devices, courtesy of solar power.
The general description of the patent goes into detail about the devices that would be included, which describes about as generally as possible any of the devices aforementioned. It goes on to say that these things could be charged from several different sources, and that solar power would be part of that method. This particular patent was originally filed by Apple way back in the first quarter of 2009. Rumors about a solar-powered Apple-branded device haven’t been as rampant as others, but they are out there, and this awarded patent would suggest that the company is certainly looking into the possibility.
The most legal problems between Apple and Nokia have taken a step forward today, with Apple winning a limited motion in the proceedings. The companies are both moving forward with assertions that each company has infringed on pertinent patens to technologies in use today. The motion, which was rewarded recently, means that the proceedings will be transferred from the Western District of Wisconsin, to the District of Delaware.
The switch means that this court will now see the proceedings between three lawsuits between Apple and Nokia. It wasn’t easy for Apple to win the motion, though, as Nokia’s lawyers challenged the motion to transfer it to the District of Delaware, citing that it could delay the rulings from Wisconsin by up to a year and a half. However, it’s been mentioned that Apple was successful in the process because the other filings in the District of Delaware, and the filing that was originally in the Western District of Wisconsin were similar.
The process is still on going, and there’s no telling how long they will go on.
An Apple patent covering the touchscreen interface for the iPod nano has surfaced, suggesting that the company is considering alternative ways to control the compact PMP even when the display is out of sight in your pocket or bag. According to patent 20100328224, “Playback Control using a Touch Interface”, the nano touchscreen could be used to recognize taps and gestures even if the display itself is switched off.
“An electronic device, however, may not have dedicated playback control buttons or interfaces. In addition, a user may wish to control media playback operations without needing to first look at a display to select a specific displayed option. To allow a user to control media playback using a touch sensing device without requiring the selection of displayed options, the electronic device can include a mode or configuration for which the touch sensing device can sense touch events, but not display any content on a display. For example, an electronic device with a touch screen can have a mode in which no content is displayed on the touch screen (e.g., the touch screen remains dark), but the touch screen is operative to detect touch events of the user.” Apple patent 20100328224
Rather than demanding users aim for where the onscreen controls would normally be found, the iPod nano – or, indeed, another touchscreen device – would instead respond to more generic inputs. For instance, a single tap could toggle between play/pause while double- or triple-taps could skip forward or backward. Tracing circles on the touchscreen could adjust the volume up or down.
Apple is seemingly considering a Ping-style social networking system for shopping, which would allow users to canvas opinions on potential purchases, rate businesses and product lines, and get gift ideas. A patent application titled “Social Networking in Shopping Environments” describes an in-store kiosk which would offer a stock list to a user’s iPhone; from that list, the shopper could then ask questions from their contacts or other friends lists about individual items or ranges.
The questions could be closed, requesting a simple yes or no response to whether contacts believe a certain item should be bought, or more open-ended. Apple suggests a husband might canvas suggestions on a gift for his wife using the system. Meanwhile, businesses could use the unnamed social networking tool to request ratings on products or general service.
Apple wouldn’t be alone in using smartphones to allow shoppers to share opinions; Google’s Hotpot app for Android allows for mobile ratings of stores and restaurants, though lacks the more specific item-by-item approach that Apple seem to be considering. Of course, there’s no telling whether a patent will ever actually spawn a product launch, but given Apple’s apparent interest in NFC and the potential to use an iPhone as a mobile wallet, apps that encourage you to whip your phone out during shopping trips would seem a sensible approach.
New details on Sony’s patent lawsuit against LG have emerged, with the Korean company saying it “will take action and actively respond” to claims that over ten LG handsets infringe on Sony technology. Sony is seeking an injunction on LG imports into the US, alleging the devices use audio and microphone technology, caller ID systems and radio transmission tech that Sony and the Sony Ericsson joint venture have patented.
Sony has also claimed that LG infringes on the patents of some of its licensees, including Samsung and Nokia, though neither company has made an official statement at this time. The handsets potentially affected by the import ban would include the Encore, LG Accolade, Neon, Quantum and Rumor Touch.
