Details Of Apple's Lawsuit Against Samsung Revealed; And It's Even More Ridiculous
from the steve-jobs-would-sue-his-sister dept
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
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Solution for Samsung
[ link to this | view in thread ]
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 thread ]
Apple hates competition. It's a fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yep
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trademarks on 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 thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I feel I must....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"awesome phone and tablet"
not so much a kitchen sink lawsuit as it is the new boilerplate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Exactly. The only winning move is not to play.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
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 thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Apple hates competition. It's a fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A good write up.
Now to the link. http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Trademarks on individual icons?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It seems..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Have you ever read a civil complaint before? It pretty common to include every possible issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Have you ever read a civil complaint before? It pretty common to include every possible issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
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 thread ]
Good thing we're rich
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Steve jobs is a bafoon
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Comparing The Pictures ...
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 thread ]
Re:
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 thread ]
Apple is done innovating and has begun litigating...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Apple is done innovating and has begun litigating...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
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 thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Yep
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Trademarks on individual icons?
(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 thread ]
Re:
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 thread ]
Re: A good write up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
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 thread ]
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 thread ]
Who copied whom?
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 thread ]
Re: Who copied whom?
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 thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Serious question.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Who copied whom?
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 thread ]
Re: Comparing The Pictures ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Comparing The Pictures ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: A good write up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
apple being petty
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alternative to Apple's patent number 7844915 exists!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mentally disturbe about samsung core mobile
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 thread ]