Details Of Apple's Lawsuit Against Samsung Revealed; And It's Even More Ridiculous

from the steve-jobs-would-sue-his-sister dept

Tue, Apr 19th 2011 3:46pm — Mike Masnick

When we wrote about Apple's new lawsuit against Samsung over its new phones and tablets looking too much like Apple's iPhone and iPad, the full legal complaint from Apple wasn't yet public. However, it's now coming out, and the detailed list of patents and trademarks at issue make this seem ridiculous. While the initial report we saw yesterday showed only design patents, the lawsuit actually covers utility patents, design patents, trademarks and trade dress claims. Here they are in all their glory, as compiled and described by Florian Mueller:

7 utility (i.e., hardware and software) patents

U.S. Patent No. 7,812,828 on an "ellipse fitting for multi-touch surfaces" (previously asserted against Motorola in an ITC complaint and a federal lawsuit)

U.S. Patent No. 7,669,134 on a "method and apparatus for displaying information during an instant messaging session" (a software patent, presumably infringed by the Google Talk chat client, which I also use on my Galaxy phone and on which this patent may very well read)

U.S. Patent No. 6,493,002 on a "method and apparatus for displaying and accessing control and status information in a computer system" (previously asserted against Motorola in a federal lawsuit)

U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381 on "list scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display" (previously asserted against HTC in a federal lawsuit)

U.S. Patent No. 7,844,915 on "application programming interfaces for scrolling operations"

U.S. Patent No. 7,853,891 on a "method and apparatus for displaying a window for a user interface"

U.S. Patent No. 7,863,533 on a "cantilevered push button having multiple contacts and fulcrums" (a hardware patent)
3 design patents
U.S. Design Patent No. D627,790 on a "graphical user interface for a display screen or portion thereof"
U.S. Design Patent No. D602,016 on an "electronic device"
U.S. Design Patent No. D618,677 on an "electronic device"
AllThingsD displays various graphics from the complaint that relate to those design patents.
Trade dress rights
Apple claims to hold "trade dress protection in the design and appearance of the iPhone, the iPod touch, and the iPad, together with their distinctive user interfaces and product packaging." (yes, in Apple's view even Samsung's packaging infringes its rights)
Apple asserts its registered trade dresses no. 3,470,983, no. 3,457,218 and no. 3,475,327.
Trademarks (i.e., 6 trademarked icons)
U.S. Trademark No. 3,886,196 on a dial icon
U. S. Trademark No. 3,889,642 on a chat icon
U.S. Trademark No. 3,886,200 on a sunflower icon (for a collection of photos)
U.S. Trademark No. 3,889,685 on a settings icon
U.S. Trademark No. 3,886,169 on a notepad icon
U.S. Trademark No. 3,886,197 on a contact list icon

As the article suggests, Steve Jobs would sue his own family if they made a reasonable Android device. This is a kitchen sink lawsuit, where Apple is throwing everything at Samsung, and once again, the sheer pettiness of the whole thing after looking over the really quite minor patents and trademarks being asserted here seems to scream only one thing: Samsung has apparently designed an awesome phone and tablet device that has Steve Jobs scared of competition.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: mobile phones, patents, tablets, trademarks
Companies: apple, samsung

52 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Pickle Monger (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 2:53pm

Solution for Samsung
In terms of appearance of the smartphone, just make it look like the mythical white iPhone 4...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
athe (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 3:56pm

Talk about throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks...

Can't wait to see what Samsung comes back at them with - I can't believe that they wouldn't have something.

I'm guessing that the iPhone 5 wont be very innovative if this is the tact that Apple are taking now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2011 @ 7:49am
  
  Re:
  We might have a patent nuclear war on our hands.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff, 19 Apr 2011 @ 4:10pm

Apple hates competition. It's a fact.
They will do anything to keep competition away, because they like to think they are the absolute best...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vincent Clement (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 6:12pm
  
  Re: Apple hates competition. It's a fact.
  Wait untill the file the injunction requests with the ITC.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lesath (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 4:21pm

Yet one more reason I will never have an Apple Product.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:34pm
  
  Re:
  What products do you have that are free of patent sin?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Any Mouse (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 6:11pm
    
    Re: Re:
    It isn't about avoiding 'patent sin,' it's about avoiding overly litigious corporations.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 12:15pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      OK, who isn't 'overly litigious' these days?
      
      Serious question.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris Rhodes (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 4:26pm

Yep
If they are getting both barrels of Apple's BS, Apple must be worried they're losing the innovation race. Time to check out Samsung, I guess; Apple seems to think they've got a really good product.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2011 @ 7:50am
  
  Re: Yep
  I'm sure Samsung likely has patents of their own that they can counter-sue Apple for just as well.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
umccullough (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 4:49pm

Trademarks on individual icons?
I must admit, I was surprised to see that they've trademarked individual icons...

I can understand if your icon contains a logo... but beyond copyright protection so nobody blatantly rips off your artwork, seriously?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2011 @ 6:57pm
  
  Re: Trademarks on individual icons?
  Those icons look really generic to me. There's nothing distinctive about them. Doesn't something you make have to be kinda unique before you can trademark it?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DannyB (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 8:17am
    
    Re: Re: Trademarks on individual icons?
    Two issues for icons: Trade Mark and Copyright.
    (Let's not get into whether icons should be patentable.)
    
    For trade mark, being unique and distinctive makes a mark more protectable.
    
    For copyright, there must be some minimum amount of creativity in order to be protected.
    
    If an icon is of a third party design, say Amazon or NetFlix, then Apple may not have any Trade Mark or Copyright rights in it. Especially if Apple didn't create the app that presents the icon.
    
    Even if Apple created the app for a third party, say Amazon or Netflix, and another party creates similar apps for Android apps for Amazon or Netflix, then Apple wouldn't ahve trademark rights in the trademarks of the respective companies', but Apple might have copyright rights in the "creativity" expressed in the icon designs. I suspect very little creativity is expressed, such as background color the icon is displayed against. Even that may not be protectable under copyright or trademark.
    
    If a third party designs (work for hire) Android apps for example for Amazon and Netflix, and even if they use the identical icon used on the iPhone, the entire icon may be the property of Amazon / Netflix (example) and Apple may have no rights in the icon design whatsoever.
    
    IANAL and this is not legal advice.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mrtraver (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:08pm

Lawsuits gone wild aren't nearly as fun as girls gone wild.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:57pm
  
  Re:
  U.S. Patent No. 7,762,818 on "girls in various states of undress shouting "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 7,644,114 on a "method and apparatus for displaying said girls in various states of undress shouting "WOOOOOOOOOO!"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 6,803,072 on "girls in various states of undress raising alcoholic beverages and shouting "WOOOOOOO!"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 8,969,311 on "guys in various states of Abercrombie & Fitch raising alcoholic beverages and shouting "WOOOOOOOOOO!" at said girls in various states of undress shouting "WOOOOOOOO!"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 6,174,915 on "exposed female breasts"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 6,174,916 on a "method and apparatus utilizing a separate girl in a varied state of undress to expose breasts of another girl in a varied state of undress via a lifting apparatus [hands/arms]"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 5,003,123 on a "bulletproof release/resignation of publicity rights form"
  
  U.S. Patent No. 5,603,4543 on a "Rohypnol"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Andrew (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 10:33am
    
    Re: Re:
    Ooh! I saw one of those a little while ago.
    
    U.S. Patent No. 6,803,072 on "girls in various states of undress raising alcoholic beverages and shouting "WOOOOOOO!"
    
    Abstract
    
    Apparatus and methods are disclosed for the disrobing and subsequent public display and video recording of inebriated girls. Significant quantities of cocktails, vodka or other alcoholic beverages are provided to ensure effective intoxication of party participants. An atmosphere conducive disrobing is provided through party participants shouting, �WOOOOOOOOO!� (U.S. Patent No. 7,762,818), a self-perpetuating state also believed to be a novel form of perpetual motion (U.S. Pat. Pend.). Girls remove some or all of their clothing, exposing areas of their bodies including (but not limited to) breasts, back, some or all of the buttocks, breasts, thighs. And breasts. Still images and moving video footage of participants is recorded and subsequently widely distributed for profit.
    
    Anyone have the full patent?
    
    On a more serious note, here's another writeup of this patent dispute, with pretty pictures and everything.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:22pm

I feel I must....
... call here upon my patent; 8,999,666 "A method of showing contempt for silly IP law by exposing intimate anatomy parts in a lewdly insulting but not quite illegal manner." :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why get a patent then?, 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:34pm

Apple is correct in pursuing patent infringements. They are required to vigoriously defend them. Patents are meant to protect property and intellectual rights developed and executed. This is blatant copying like in grade school. Why get a patent then ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dave, 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:38pm
  
  Re:
  "Why get a patent then ?"
  
  Exactly. The only winning move is not to play.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- umccullough (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 6:18pm
  
  Re:
  I think you're mixing up patents and trademarks there, the latter requires the owner to defend them if they wish to keep them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- senshikaze (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 4:43am
  
  Re:
  I'm going to just assume you are a troll.
  I would bet you would defend the patent lawsuits keeping life saving drugs out of dieing people's hand as well.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Steve, 20 Apr 2011 @ 6:45am
  
  Re:
  It that "developed" part that's really at issue. And it really isn't Apple we're all frustrated with, it's the state of IP law in this country. We take it out on Apple because they love to abuse it.
  
  Do you really think Apple "developed" anything when they decided to use a picture of a phone's handset to represent a phone? Do you think that anybody picking up a Samsung phone from the Android section of Best Buy will see that icon and think to themselves, "Well this phone says Samsung and it's not by the iPhones on that pedestal over there, but the phone icon looks similar so it must be an iPhone."
  
  Trademarks were originally designed to protect consumers, not to prevent competition.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prashanth (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:35pm

I will say that Samsung could possibly have designed different-looking icons to avoid the trademark lawsuits, though I'm not sure how broadly the trademarks cover the icons (whether it covers the particular icon designs or just having icons representing these functions, period). Also, it isn't clear exactly how broad/specific the patents are on "electronic device". Otherwise, wow. Just, wow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 8:22am
  
  Re:
  The elements of icon designs may not even be too generic to protect.
  
  You should definitely draw your own original artwork and create your own from scratch icon files. But the idea of using an old fashioned telephone handset from the 20th century as an icon to place a call should not be protectable. It is functional. It's also arguably not even original or novel (eg, lacks creativity for copyright, is not distinct enough for trademark).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
iamtheky (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 5:36pm

"awesome phone and tablet"
-or this is a default response regardless of the awesomeness

not so much a kitchen sink lawsuit as it is the new boilerplate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 6:25pm

A good write up.
I know, I know. Everyone loves to beat on Apple but this is a good write up. Although we all might agree things in the patent/design area need to be fixed you can't hate a company for doing what the system has basically forced them to do. They are a company not a person for farks sake already. It is really getting tiresome to see everyone cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Now to the link. http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 8:23am
  
  Re: A good write up.
  Please explain how "the system" has forced Apple to file suit against Samsung?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rand Johnson, 12 Jul 2011 @ 2:48pm
  
  Re: A good write up.
  Wrong, bub... Corporations are recognized as individuals. They've fought to be recognized as people, so you are blatantly wrong.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
James, 19 Apr 2011 @ 9:18pm

It seems..
Apple is using chips from Samsung for memory and possibly CPUs for the iPhone/Pad, I guess Samsung could just tell them to f**k off, and cut them off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheOnly92, 19 Apr 2011 @ 9:35pm

Well, maybe they're thinking: since we're suing anyway, might as well just sue every possible aspect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You've never read a lawsuit before, 19 Apr 2011 @ 9:40pm

Hi,
Have you ever read a civil complaint before? It pretty common to include every possible issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 19 Apr 2011 @ 10:15pm
  
  Re:
  Hi,
  Have you ever read a civil complaint before? It pretty common to include every possible issue.
  
  Hi,
  Have you ever read Techdirt before? We cover civil lawsuits in detail all the time. Doesn't make this any less ridiculous.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
You've never read a lawsuit before, 19 Apr 2011 @ 9:40pm

Hi,
Have you ever read a civil complaint before? It pretty common to include every possible issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Frost, 19 Apr 2011 @ 10:46pm

Good thing we're rich
Good thing mankind is incredibly efficient and rich in reality today, otherwise shenanigans like these (extrapolated out across all of society... this is not exactly the only resource wastage insanity going on) would have more than merely 1 billion of us starving and kids would be dying needlessly even quicker than merely one every five seconds. Aren't we lucky?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alex, 19 Apr 2011 @ 11:58pm

Steve jobs is a bafoon
And look what happens when apple feels threatened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 20 Apr 2011 @ 2:44am

Comparing The Pictures ...
... the Samsung is so obviously inferior in design to the Apple, only someone with no taste would confuse the two.

Look how closely they copied Apple�s innovative design ideas, it almost looks exactly like an Iphone. How dare they!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rowan (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 3:48am
  
  Re: Comparing The Pictures ...
  hey apple fanboi like to compare, well compare this
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Rowan (profile), 29 Apr 2011 @ 3:51am
    
    Re: Re: Comparing The Pictures ...
    (hint) click on my name
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 20 Apr 2011 @ 5:00am

Apple is done innovating and has begun litigating...
I have a friend who drank the Apple juice and has all things Apple. He says that Apple's days of innovation are over and they aren't really doing anything new now. Google is the innovator now and Apple realizes that they are going to have to relax their vice like grip on the iPhone & iPad to compete. And we all know that Apple is not going to give up control without a fight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2011 @ 6:40am
  
  Re: Apple is done innovating and has begun litigating...
  If they release their vice like grip on the iphone, it might not even drop calls!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2011 @ 7:17am

I have a solution. Patent this: "Method of filing a patent to the patent office by paper or electronic means" that way every asswipe who tries to patent is infringing and i'm not licensing to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joey, 20 Apr 2011 @ 7:50am

Apple product will be as great as their supplier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2011 @ 7:58am

Yeeees, this is a sign Samsung Tablets are good!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Apr 2011 @ 10:54am

This has somewhat of a ring to it as was the case when Apple took on Microsoft after its introduction of Win95, but with numerous (and substantial) differences. Then hardware was not an issue, nor were industrial designs, nor were trademarks.

The Apple v. Microsoft case had as its gravamen claimed similarities between the Apple OS GUI and the Win95 GUI, and that the similarities were such that Apple proceeded on the basis of copyright infringement.

In contrast, here we seem to be talking about hardware manufacturers, and not a harware manufacturer versus a software vendor. In other words, this case revolves around direct competitiors involved in the production and vending of hardware. In my view this is an important distinction.

Love them or hate them, Apple is clearly an innovator in the field of industrial design. It does not seem at all unreasonable for Apple to seek leveling the playing field by having others acquire their own design expertise, and then present products to consumers that distinguish themselves over those of Apple.

As for the comment suggesting that Apple is asserting a host of relatively minor rights, I can only wonder on what basis this assertion is made (besides, of course, "IP is silly" generalizations).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DannyB (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 11:27am

Who copied whom?
Please take a look at this:

http://phandroid.com/2011/04/20/did-apple-really-steal-their-iphone-design-from-samsung-pot -meet-kettle/

Did Apple's iPhone copy the design of a Samsung phone released prior to the iPhone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 11:29am
  
  Re: Who copied whom?
  Bad taste to reply to my own hastily posted message.
  
  The link shows that Apple should sue Samsung for releasing a phone that looks like the iPhone prior to Apple's release of the iPhone.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 20 Apr 2011 @ 2:01pm
  
  Re: Who copied whom?
  Here is an important followup link:
  
  http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/04/19/android_fans_accuse_apple_of_copying_samsung_ first.html
  
  Two important points here:
  
  1. Samsung's phone came out just after the iPhone.
  2. It was LG who should complain about having a phone that the iPhone copied.
  
  Or in the alternative...
  
  It is Apple who should complain that LG copied the iPhone and then to make matters worse copied it before the iPhone was released. Apple's lawyers should be pounding on the table! Design innovations must be protected! Etc., etc.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom, 24 May 2011 @ 6:43am

The HTC Wallaby aka XDA was released in 2002 the iPhone come out in 2007. This is the first sign Apple is now past peak, they are litigating vs. innovating. Look at the SCO v. Linux lawsuit to get an idea of how this waste of time and money will work out. I was leaning towards Apple more over the past year, but I am now afraid to put my eggs in one (closed eco system) basket that fears competition.Nail your competition with a killer product not lawsuits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sang, 9 Aug 2011 @ 5:59pm

apple being petty
next it will be "awh nuh uh samsung we used a 10.1" SCREEN, you can't cause we did... apple please....silly patent infringment are silly there shouldn't be the ability to patent such stupid things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pugazendhi Asaimuthu, 10 Aug 2011 @ 11:50am

Alternative to Apple's patent number 7844915 exists!
I hold a patent application that provides a cool alternative to Apple's patent number 7844915! No scrolling necessary. Hang in there till the solution comes out!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
shivaji, 18 Feb 2014 @ 12:35am

mentally disturbe about samsung core mobile
This is Shivaji Lohar, I have bought new mobile phone (Mobile model - Galaxy Samsung Core, bill number: (UAP):2045526 TIN/CST no:-28026280297 IMEI Number: 359710050247197) Hyderabad(Gachibowli) showroom ( 2nd Avenue ) on 12/JAN/2014 around 1 PM.
Issue:-
The very next day from the date of purchase I noticed that there is a NETWORK ISSUE with mobile. I tried using different SIM cards, but every time I was disappointed as none of the SIM was working in the Phone. The same SIM is working properly in other Cell Phones.
The Error message is like:- �MOBILE NETWORK NOT REGISTERED�. Due to which I cannot use any of the SIM services provided such as Making & Receiving Calls, SMS Facilities etc.
If this is the case then what is the Purpose of Purchasing the New Phone�? By spending amount Rs 13350/- if the Phone is not serving the purpose for what it is meant for, then for what purpose it should serve�?
Contact number--9581775514 8125660054
[ link to this | view in chronology ]