News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by vacri on Sunday September 02, 2012 @10:00PM (#4468843)
Her point was that the patent shouldn't have been granted in the first place. It shouldn't take the expense of big enterprise teams of corporate lawyers taking it to a jury trial to say that the patent wasn't infringed (I take it that's all it was, and that the patent hasn't actually been invalidated, either).

Copy-and-pasting from a comment I just made in another thread about how merely having an obvious patent does cause problems: You don't have to contest the patent for it to be suppressing others' design. I once worked for a company that made a humidifying air pump. We had to have the water tank held in with a removable flap rather than a door because our main competitor had patented 'holding the tank in with a hinged flap/door'. Sure, you could fight it in court, down the track, after hardware design (which is much more expensive than people realise). Or you could move onto the next problem and have a slightly inferior product.

Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by othermaciej on Sunday September 02, 2012 @10:19PM (#4468877)
Her apparent point was that there is no way to design around it, which is false. The claim was not about obviousness or validity of the design patent, but rather that it's really dangerous because there is no way to design around it. Which is clearly false. You may well have a valid point, but it's not what the Groklaw post said.
Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by 001sky on Monday September 03, 2012 @12:34AM (#4469120)
How do you code around it? A tablet in the shape of a parallelogram?

- She got you | Rhetorical questions != Not False Statements.

[Edit: Agree she could have been more informative.]

Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by fpgeek on Monday September 03, 2012 @01:32AM (#4469219)
It's worth noting that Apple won on "rounded rectangles" as they applied to the iPhone (instead of the iPad). That certainly complicates any attempted workarounds.
Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by 001sky on Monday September 03, 2012 @02:07AM (#4469282)
Did Samsung not cite the Domino in the Prior Art? WTF "a hand-held computing device with a rectangular shape, rounded corners, and devoid of buttons" etc. "it has a touch-enabled surface communication technology called "Braille..."and"infite power supply"[1] <pls excuse: sarcasm>

[but if anyone knows?]

[1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Dom...

Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by conroe64 on Monday September 03, 2012 @03:06AM (#4469414)
The Domino can be disregarded. Only prior art that can run software compatible with Apple hardware can be considered. The Jury foreman explained it better than I could as follows:

The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That changed everything right there.

Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by wazoox on Monday September 03, 2012 @03:54AM (#4469509)
This is widely recognized as blatant misunderstanding of what constitutes prior art by the jurors. "software compatibility" has absolutely zero relation to the notion of "prior art". This is one of the sorest points in this judgement, which has absolutely no credibility overall.
Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by Dylan16807 on Monday September 03, 2012 @03:21AM (#4469445)
How can that restriction be applied to prior art but not the Samsung device?
Re:The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android by fpgeek on Monday September 03, 2012 @03:32AM (#4469466)
In the world where he's looking for a reason his patent wasn't completely anticipated by TiVo (or ReplayTV or ...): http://www.google.com/patents/US7352953