And So It's Come To This: Samsung/Google Forced To Degrade Features In Patent Dispute
from the this-benefits-the-public-how? dept
The latest in the ridiculous saga of the patent dispute between Apple and Samsung, which has resulted in Samsung phones and tablets being banned from sale in the US, is that Samsung, with the help of Google, has been pushing out an over-the-air software update to make its phones worse. Yes, the OTA update is designed to take away a feature, in an effort to convince the judge that the phones no longer violate Apple's patents. The feature in question? The ability to do a single search that covers both the local device and the internet. Because, you know, if Apple had never figured that out, I'm sure no one would have ever thought to search two databases with a single query. Either way, the end result is that the public loses a useful feature, because Apple doesn't want to compete, and a federal judge seems to think that's okay.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: android, ota update, search
Companies: apple, google, samsung
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why the hell would such a painfully obvious feature ever even make it past the postman to the patent office anyway?
Apparently to get a new patent for a really old and obvious software function, one simply needs to introduce a new form factor for computing, a la smartphones and tablets.
My day is coming though. The patent office is breathless with my 'trapperkeeperPad' application.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or maybe non-exclusive ideas can never be property. When ideas, such as search behavior, can be independently recreated by others who are inevitably faced with the same problem, even thousands of times over, who can claim it as exclusive "property"? And what about all of the others who also have the same idea, even though they create their ideas without any involvement from the self-proclaimed "owner", the "owner" still gets to claim the ideas of others as their own? Just how can anyone suddenly come into possession of someone else's "property", even if they have never touched or seen it before?
The pursuit of spinning ideas into property is a fool's errand, a madness that never ultimately turns a profit. All the profits from these suits eventually end up being paid out to someone else in another suit. And who has to make up for the all the losses? We, the customers, get stuck with the tab! Billions are wasted every year on these suits, billions that you and I have to pay for in the higher cost. And what do we get for it? Better products or new features? Nope, many of those have to be stripped down or removed to appease someone else.
And no, nowhere does this protect the small inventor. What good is having a patent or two, or even a real working product, when mammoth corporations with war chest of billions of dollars and thousands of patents can merely claim infringement and grind them through years of litigation? In the end, they always have to sellout or be ground into a penniless pulp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:Ripped?
Apple has had the local database search feature since 1991 with Mac System 7
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:Ripped?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:Ripped?
The patent should've expired, then, no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:Ripped?
The ability to do a single search that covers both the local device and the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Usefullness
http://www.bgr.com/2012/07/02/android-market-share-us-smartphone-iphone/
If only they made restricted closed platforms they could do better than most popular.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
Low level hacks through Jailbreaking can be used on all iOS devices, whereas Android users have to have specific rooting methods for specific hardware calls which are unique to each make of devices. iOS users call it Jailbreaking, Android users call it rooting. You can also use one other program to sync your phone to upload things onto your iOS device while not using iTunes. BitTorrent can do it without a Jailbreak. The only restriction you have on a non Jailbroken iOS device is you can't edit your icons. You can perform low level hardware hacks if you really feel like being bold.
They are both very hackable, it's just that people on both sides use different terms. That leads the Robot fanbots of Android to think that you cant havk an iOS device. Honestly, there is nothing wrong with that at all, it's just annoying so many Android ushered are missinformed about Apple's product lines and why they have very few choices to consumers.
Apple allows you to have custom specs and hardware configurations, but restricts what models are put when to make a uniform, unfragmented niche in their marketing. The way they see it, it keeps things simpler for the consumer. They've been like that since the iMac G3, and it has clearly been working out for them well before their patent trolling.
Before anyone remotely accuses me of being an Apple fanboy, let me tell you one thing now. My iOS device has retina display (326dpi 32GB 4th Gen iPod Touch). This allows me to use a magnifying glass so I can see the text better. I use my Droid for phone calls. I have both, and both of them fulfill my needs to communicate with others. In my opinion, I have the best of both worlds according to my needs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
"Low level hacks through Jailbreaking can be used on all iOS devices, whereas Android users have to have specific rooting methods for specific hardware calls which are unique to each make of devices. iOS users call it Jailbreaking, Android users call it rooting. You can also use one other program to sync your phone to upload things onto your iOS device while not using iTunes. BitTorrent can do it without a Jailbreak. The only restriction you have on a non Jailbroken iOS device is you can't edit your icons. You can perform low level hardware hacks if you really feel like being bold."
Low level hacks can be used on all iOS devices. However, you neglect the fact that the majority of those hacks are routinely patched by Apple and the fact that as the operating system and hardware progress, such hacks become useless and new ones must be discovered and ONLY THEN can they be used to hack a new device.
In comparison, there is hardly an Android device that isn't rooted on day one (and as of late, a great many are rooted before they're even officially released). Also, there are several tools that are useful on the majority of Android devices that are one-click and thus negate the need for "specific rooting methods for specific hardware". If you haven't heard of Super-One-Click, well... that wouldn't surprise me. But it covers most devices. In fact, up until recently it was the go to for most users. There's also unRevoked (for some of the more popular devices). But without going off, suffice it to say, you are attempting to greatly over exaggerate just how easy it is to root Android devices, and trying to make it seem like people have to learn a variety of methods. Truth be told, as a regular Android device user and person who roots phones for people, you know one method you know them all. Again, I'm simplifying but that's the gist of it.
"They are both very hackable, it's just that people on both sides use different terms. That leads the Robot fanbots of Android to think that you cant havk an iOS device. Honestly, there is nothing wrong with that at all, it's just annoying so many Android ushered are missinformed about Apple's product lines and why they have very few choices to consumers. "
On that first sentence, we're agreed. People use different terms and sometimes confuse them. But DO NOT say that it's Android fanboys alone. The general public has no clue about rooting or jailbreaking and most interchange the terms. Also, I've never met any Android user who didn't know that an iOS device couldn't be hacked (I should say, Android hacker, not just user). However, what you fail to point out is that just like with Android devices, there are limitations on iOS. Namely basebands. You don't have the appropriate baseband and you can't hack your device. End of story. Til someone comes up with a method of either downgrading the baseband or changing it to another (which sometimes results in loss of functionality, GPS being one I've seen recently), or just waiting to see if a hack is produced, or doing without completely.
Regarding misinformed (NOTE: the correct spelling of the word), that's bullshit. You see, you went from almost sounding reasonable (emphasis on ALMOST), to showing true bias. You can't even have a discussion without hurling insults, calling Android users Robots and whatnot. If you want to be taken seriously, state the facts as they are without the need to insult others. Also, become more informed, because I'm seeing nothing but bias and naivety in your post. Also, most Android users aren't misinformed about why there are so few choices in Apple's product lines. It's simple, Apple wants to control the entire experience. Not in a dictator-like way (although that's debatable). But as in, they want to keep things as simple and smooth as possible. From the operating system to the hardware configuration, as long as they control it from end to end they can ensure that it meets their standards and they can avoid having to work to fix any problems that come up (as in say graphics drivers and cards not working in this configuration or with that, like Windows PCs).
"Before anyone remotely accuses me of being an Apple fanboy, let me tell you one thing now. My iOS device has retina display (326dpi 32GB 4th Gen iPod Touch). This allows me to use a magnifying glass so I can see the text better. I use my Droid for phone calls. I have both, and both of them fulfill my needs to communicate with others. In my opinion, I have the best of both worlds according to my needs."
I wouldn't accuse you of being an Apple fanboy. I know you are. You see, you can't call people Robots (Android users) and then say, "But I'm not an Apple fanboy." It defeats itself. You very much are an Apple fanboy. Having a Droid phone DOES NOT automatically make you unbiased/a non-fanboy. I have a Macbook, guess who I'm no fan of? Apple. I received it as a gift and it's useful for tinkering with to some degree and then taking said experience and knowledge with me to help fix problems on my friend's Apple computers. In that sense, I'm more of a Windows/Linux fan. As for mobile devices, I prefer Android. But that doesn't make me an Android fanboy or a Robot. It just means I like choice and freedom. Being essentially forced to use iTunes (and yes, there are other options but at the end of the day the average user does not know about them and thus they are forced to stick with iTunes) to get the most out of a device is ridiculous. But that's just my opinion. As you said, you have a device from each OS and it works for you. Right on. But please, may I make a suggestion, get a bit more informed on Android before making such post. You can't say Android users are misinformed when you appear to be so yourself. You also can't claim to not be a fanboy when using the traditional fanboy insults. You can't claim to be unbiased when in fact all you've done is defend Apple and insult the Android OS, Android devices, and Android users. That's not unbiased, not even remotely.
Or to put it simply, if you aren't going to be able to say anything nice and without resorting to insults and misinformation, perhaps it would be best to just avoid articles such as this. I'm not an Apple fan for a variety of reasons, so you know what I do? I don't read Apple related articles. Not a fan of Android? Avoid the articles and thus avoid sounding like an Apple fanboy when you go off in said articles. Problem solved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
that is what shills do
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
http://gigaom.com/apple/2011-smartphones-by-the-numbers-samsung-v-apple/
So Apple is loosing the battle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Usefullness
(And if it was a race, one contestant wouldn't be allowed to sabotage the others all the time)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
As I've said before, you don't appear to have ever used an Android device. Heck, there are G2 phones running Ice Cream Sandwich. Do you know how old the G2 is? The Nexus One, considered the grandfather of Android phones is capable of running Ice Cream Sandwich, and well.
If the new updates were truly meant for newer hardware, there would not be old phones running the newest versions. And truth be told, if they didn't run well people wouldn't port them or produce new ROMs from the source code. It's a fact. People want stability and performance. If it won't work, people won't run it. Which shoots down the belief "newer hardware" bit you wrote.
Wally, no offense, but maybe you should just stick to praising Apple and stop trying to knock Android. You're misinformation campaign is laughable and you never even seem to come close to stating anything that is actually based on fact. And I'm saying that as a Macbook/iPod owner, and overall tech fanatic. I also own a Dell desktop, Toshiba and Compaq laptops, a Nook Color (which runs a modified by B&N version of Android, but I also run Cyanogenmod 7.2 off a micro sdcard when I feel like it), and, my again now discontinued, Nexus S 4G (which is 2 years old and running the latest widely available version of the OS, 4.0.4, as smoothly as is possible, and in a manner that puts some newer and more powerful phones to shame). Just listing all that to show how unbiased I am. I own and use it all.
Oh, one more question, how's iOS 5 run on the original iPhone? That's what I thought. That too shoots down your "your phone slows down a bit because the new updates are meant for newer hardware" jab at Android. Until I can see an original iPhone running iOS 5 (and note, it is called iOS 5, the 5.1.1 is an incremental update to the OS, but it is still called iOS 5... for an Apple fan, notice I didn't say fanboy, you can't even get the simple stuff right) I would hold off on making such petty remarks about newer slow down and newer updates only being for newer hardware.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
Until now.
Go go xda devs to work around this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Usefullness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent = No Competition
That's not to say the patent itself was valid (or should be valid) or that Samsung was infringing. But I wouldn't chalk up the injunction itself as a crazy-activist-judge-ruling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patent = No Competition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patent = No Competition
If the principal purpose of a patent search is not finding things that would be good to use, but rather finding things that would be good to avoid, the system is doing just the opposite of what it was supposed to do and should be shut down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Will Still Win (for better or worse)
More advanced users could reflash their device to include the code that was removed.
All an open source model needs is one patent to completely remove functionality from a closed source, walled garden, model permanently. A closed source, walled garden, model needs complete control over all communication to and from the open source device to remove the functionality. Apple cannot win this fight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
!1 mounths later.....
FAP FAP FAP
/loves me some android
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shameful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
k.
Why is this happening now? Apple has a ton of money, and are afraid they'll start losing it like they're losing market share, so rather than compete, they try and take away our choice, to turn us into sheep, like the iFanBoys. The difference between iFanBoys and Google fanboys? Choice. Google fans CHOOSE to be fans of Google, because that doesn't LIMIT their choices, it increases them, which is the opposite of Apple fanboys. Think about it.
Btw, didn't Google have a desktop search product, which would search your large device for files, as well as the internet? Way before Apple even announced a mobile communications product?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: k.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: k.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: k.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: k.
Just because Apple had a search function on their OS doesn't mean they own the right to all search functions until the end of time. I doubt you can find a single engineer who worked for Apple back then who would think otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: k.
The search you mean may be the Unix 'Find' tool, which was not even remotely invented by apple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Umm...they do
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tired now...
Apple is really not doing much new in the phone arena, yes now they are updating with a few features android has been using for a while but there is nothing groundbreaking, i was in a phone shop today and had a look at the iphone, it looks boxy and not very comfortable to hold compared to many others , yes it was popular and still is , but if anyone using an iphone had to just try holding and using some of the great phones in the market they would drop apple like a hot coal.
Microsoft is the one to watch over the next few years, they know what people want and they do there best to give them it, an open system where almost anyone can develop an app. Yes you have problems with poor apps but over time the better apps stand out from the poor, and if Microsoft can give just enough control to devs they can prevent one app from crashing the full phone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: tired now...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: tired now...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: tired now...
You're acting as if Apple is a saint who has never violated our absurd patent law and the sheer number of patent cases brought against it would clue you in that it isn't possible to make a useful product anymore without violating some ridiculous patent. You can keep shoving your head in the sand because Apple is clearly your god, but don't act high and mighty when people call you the moron that you are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
google desktop
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2048770/Google-Desktop-Search-Launched
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or Google wants the patented feature for free. Why don't they license it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Patenting ideas and concepts is a bad thing. Nobody should get a patent just because they were the first to apply for one. As it happens, there are 7 billion of us. I guarantee you that there are people around the world coming to the same conclusion.
I would grant a patent for unique non-obvious work, but for "slide to unlock".... I would have laughed them out of the patent office if they came to me with that crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because it's an obvious software application that have been used since the 90's that every modern OS has.
There are legions of patent lawyers at Apple just pouring through Android's source code looking for minor infractions to go ballistic over. It's hard to say the standard "THEY ARE JUST STUPID FREELOADING FREETARDS WHO NEED TO PONY UP THE CASH AND NOT KEEP HITLERING OUR FREEDUMBZ" or whatever worthless drivel you maximalists continue to spew when we're seeing patents on applications that exist in the majority of Computer Science textbooks dating back to the 80's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/Uses the nexus
//screw you apple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
//Uses 4th gen iPod touch for fun and games and buys Nexus as a phone
Screw you fanboy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Run along and play now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patient War
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patient War
That and it's yet another sign of Apple floundering in the smartphone market. With all their suits and attempts to ban products as of late. Basically, if you can compete you will. If you can't you'll try anything and everything to stop the competition. Which is what this appears to be. They took a shot at Motorola and lost. They took a shot at HTC and lost. Now it's Samsung/Google's turn.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also, now we see Apple has been granted a patent on AR glasses. Again, this is stupid since Google are actually one of the first to market with an actual real thing, and even if they weren't I can point Apple to several films I worked on during the 90s and early 200s in which we not only done this, we basically had the concepts and ideas all over cinema screens around the world!
It's ridiculous that Apple might try to use this patent to stifle others from launching their AR glasses, but prior art should basically kick Apple in the teeth once and for all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Then when they want to hold the market hostage, they can prove that their version is exactly the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For the love of all that's holy, please stop making baby panda's cry :(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIM-BB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Missing the point...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Missing the point...
The problem is that the United States sees everyone else as not understanding the problem and tries to "persuade" them to their side with things like TPP and ACTA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quick Patent Clarification
The patent doesn't cover local device and web search on a mobile device, that's been a feature of Android since Day 0 and the Apple patent was applied for in 2009 and granted in 2010.
The patent is for conducting local and web search at the same time on a mobile device...
...wait for it...
...with VOICE!
That's right, combining two extremely trivial concepts on an extremely common platform resulted in patent protection. The "Google Now" interface is what triggered this particular action, and is why the Nexus specifically was targeted. Another top-notch ruling from Judge Koh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]