Samsung galaxy nexus banned in the US!!!

So it really is no longer on sale.

Somebody just tell me how can apple have a patent on universal search?????? How is a smartphone supposed to be a smartphone without universal search?? Why dont apple ban windows 7 and vista who do the same exact thing??

I mean if it's going to be this way the courts may as well ban the rest of the world from making a smartphone. :roll:

Apple also has a patent for keyboard autocorrect. So I suppose other smartphones shouldnt have auto-correct?

Why do I feel the US courts and patent system is possibly corrupt? Am not the one for conspiracy theories but this is seriously just ridiculous.

The funny thing is the patent has nothing to do with iOS or iphone, it was granted to apple in 2000.

Never stopped Apple from ripping straight off of Android. Apple is feeling the pressure and cant compete with innovation anymore so they resort to this petty crap.

Btw a reminder before anyone calls android a stolen IP.

Google manged to "invalidate" many of oracle's patents during the legal proceedings between the 2. Reports suggest that google is going to try to invalidate the universal search patent of apple, I hope apple loses all their BS patents. It's funny how apple never went for MS after this, they probably know how much of a BS patent it is and that it can only be used as a one off strike before it gets challenged for validity.

What is universal search?Heirren

[QUOTE="Heirren"]What is universal search?Gambler_3

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Heirren"]What is universal search?Heirren

[QUOTE="Heirren"][QUOTE="Gambler_3"]To be able to search contacts, apps, the web everything from one place.

Gambler_3

Btw it's not samsung which did anything here, it's google vs apple.

In other news a UK court declared "slide to unlock" as an "invalid" patent. :lol:

It's not just people on the internet saying how ridiculous the patents can be. The UK court rejected 3 of the 4 apple patents as invalid. Now who the hell gave such a ridiculous patent in the first place? These people should be investigated is apple paying the patent office for such patents? Because no sane person could hand out such a patent.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/04/uk-judge-rules-htc-doesnt-violate-apples-patents-invalidates/

Now if only US judges could learn some common sense, the slide to unlock was accepted as a legitimate thing in the US case. :roll:

To my knowledge from various Stories, Google and Samsung are currently working on a rumored cross licensing solution(Apple will get eyed for certain if they are adamantly unwilling.) and HOPEFULLY Google get's IT'S lawyers, rather than Samsungs. Also I believe it was stated that Google is looking to get said patents, including the search one invalidated.

"universal search" is touching on Apple's "spotlight search" algorithms. Spotlight was developed on OSX a decade ago, and quite literally exposed how limited Windows "searching" was. So much, in fact, that years later, Windows introduced its own algorithm that was similar (yet not infringing on Apples own technique" in windows Vista, and smoothed out the edges in Windows 7.

The universal search (or Spotlight) in iOS is an extension of Apples own Algorithm, that Microsoft is still privy of not infringing on.

Yes. Apple developed TRUE universal search, for others to follow. If Google just took Microsofts approach and developed its own algorithm that could compete rather than simply imitating, then they wouldn't have these patent issues they're facing. Is Microsoft being sued? Nope.

I personally think it's a shame that the Nexus was blocked. Then again, if Samsung or Google took more time to think these things through and be mindful of intellectual property, then they'd be like Microsoft. Not having to worry.

Google already pays Microsoft for each Android device it sells. It would be quite literally telling if Google came to agree to pay cross-licensing fees to Apple. Google has to rely on licensing techniques from Microsoft and Apple to stay competitive. Doesn't sound much like an innovative company to me. Microsoft does a better job at innovating.

I think this article does a fine job of explaining the situation.

http://www.i-programmer.info/news/83-mobliephone/4441-the-four-patents-that-apple-used-against-galaxy-nexusa-programmer-reads-the-patents.html

Particularly the search function:

"The second patent should give its wackiness away simply from the inclusion of the word "universal" in its title. Its abstract is no less lofty and just as vague:

The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information.

What?

You have to read the full patent to get even a hint of what is being proposed. It seems to describe any sort of search aggregation mechanisms. If you take a query from a user and then attempt to satisfy the query from a range of different sources then you are probably infringing the patent. Of course this is what Siri does but then it is also what most secondary search engines do. Android might well infringe this patent along with a lot of web sites and apps."

Is Microsoft being sued? Nope.

Google already pays Microsoft for each Android device it sells.

Kid-Atari

-Microsoft is an incredibly dangerous target to sue, as is google itself. Notice how apple is always going after the manufacturers, the guys with the least amount of defense. Microsoft and, to a lesser extent, google have enormous collections of patents. If Apple sued microsoft, you can bet that microsoft would fire right back, and neither company wants that mess. So instead, target the smaller guys, the manufacturers. They can fight back, but not nearly to the same extent.

- to my knowledge, Google isn't paying microsoft jack diddly squat. Several manufacturers are.

"universal search" is touching on Apple's "spotlight search" algorithms. Spotlight was developed on OSX a decade ago, and quite literally exposed how limited Windows "searching" was. So much, in fact, that years later, Windows introduced its own algorithm that was similar (yet not infringing on Apples own technique" in windows Vista, and smoothed out the edges in Windows 7.

The universal search (or Spotlight) in iOS is an extension of Apples own Algorithm, that Microsoft is still privy of not infringing on.

Yes. Apple developed TRUE universal search, for others to follow. If Google just took Microsofts approach and developed its own algorithm that could compete rather than simply imitating, then they wouldn't have these patent issues they're facing. Is Microsoft being sued? Nope.

I personally think it's a shame that the Nexus was blocked. Then again, if Samsung or Google took more time to think these things through and be mindful of intellectual property, then they'd be like Microsoft. Not having to worry.

Google already pays Microsoft for each Android device it sells. It would be quite literally telling if Google came to agree to pay cross-licensing fees to Apple. Google has to rely on licensing techniques from Microsoft and Apple to stay competitive. Doesn't sound much like an innovative company to me. Microsoft does a better job at innovating.

Kid-Atari

"Samsung welcomes the decision of the court in The Hague, which again confirms that Apple makes free use of our technological innovations?In accordance with this statement, we will recover adequate damages that Apple and its products have caused."

Samsung

http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_win_patent_battle_against_apple_in_holland-news-4423.php

Seems like the judge is an Apple fanboy

"universal search" is touching on Apple's "spotlight search" algorithms. Spotlight was developed on OSX a decade ago, and quite literally exposed how limited Windows "searching" was. So much, in fact, that years later, Windows introduced its own algorithm that was similar (yet not infringing on Apples own technique" in windows Vista, and smoothed out the edges in Windows 7.

The universal search (or Spotlight) in iOS is an extension of Apples own Algorithm, that Microsoft is still privy of not infringing on.

Yes. Apple developed TRUE universal search, for others to follow. If Google just took Microsofts approach and developed its own algorithm that could compete rather than simply imitating, then they wouldn't have these patent issues they're facing. Is Microsoft being sued? Nope.

I personally think it's a shame that the Nexus was blocked. Then again, if Samsung or Google took more time to think these things through and be mindful of intellectual property, then they'd be like Microsoft. Not having to worry.

Google already pays Microsoft for each Android device it sells. It would be quite literally telling if Google came to agree to pay cross-licensing fees to Apple. Google has to rely on licensing techniques from Microsoft and Apple to stay competitive. Doesn't sound much like an innovative company to me. Microsoft does a better job at innovating.

Kid-Atari

If there were no substance to their argument, there would have been no ban on nexus product sales. musicalmac

The very fact that the UK high court declared 3 of 4 similar apple patents as invalid including the infamous slide to unlock goes to show how much of a judgemental matter it is.

"The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying."

-John Carmack

link

"The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying."

-John Carmack

link

Mozuckint

One can say Apple utilised google/yahoo search to create spotlight in OS X, anything is plausible.

Its a stupid patent from the get go. Tell me why does apple get away with things such as the notification system and widgets in the notification bar, which are clearly inspired by googles platform yet, something which is clearly a standard in mobile smartphones gets patented and the insane judge allows it. Phones are created post PC's all the tools in PC's have been invested to create the modern day smartphone. Things such as slide to unlock or universal search are standard features for touch screen/smart devices.

Apple could have had an app icon with all the notifications in there rather than the scroll down approach, they could have had the weather and stocks compiled in apps as thats what apple does, but no they utilised a great feature and implemented it into their OS.

I'm not raising these points to side with either company as im not pro Apple or pro Google. I like HTC and thats about it, i wouldn't even buy the galaxy series. But the issue with patents is ridiculous, these companies should be learning of each other to create the best possible product not kill the competition with petty law suits. -_-'

Google has filed a patent for the notification center but it hasnt been approved yet. Let apple taste it's own medicine once it gets approved!!!

Here's your Prior Art..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernic

Founded in 1996

Copernic Desktop Searchis a commercial utility for theMicrosoft Windowsfamilyoperating systems. It allows the user to instantly search files, e-mails, and e-mail attachments stored anywhere on a PC's hard drive. There are three versions of Copernic Desktop Search (CDS) available, each offering a variety of features. The Home version is a light and free version, with a little less features than the Professional and Corporate versions. The Professional version includes features such as the ability to search on network drives. The Corporate version offers the ability to searchIBM Lotus Notesand there is a deployment tool for major organizations.

Copernic Agentis a commercialmetasearchutility for theMicrosoft Windowsfamilyoperating systems. There are three versions of Copernic Agent available, each offering a variety of features. The Basic version is a light version, with fewer features than the Personal and Professional versions, and is free fornon-commercialuse. It includes non-intrusive advertisement in order to keep it free. It currently offers 90 sources separated into 10 categories, each covering a different type of information.[7]

Apple is less desperate in the tech world than Exon Mobile is in the oil industry. I can assist you all by putting that theory to bed right now. The sincerest form of flattery also happens to be the purest form of IP theft and that's why Apple is on the warpath. If there were no substance to their argument, there would have been no ban on nexus product sales. musicalmac

Blocking the sale of a product is meant to be a last resort measure to prevent the infringing competitor from irreperably damaging your sales.

You can draw your own conclusions, but I highly doubt any of this has been enough to damage iphone sales by any significant amount.

Judge in Apple patent case says patent system is a mess

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-apple-patent-case-says-patent-system-mess-223028893.html

Pretty significant thing to say for a judge. So we have one UK and one US judge saying that trivial things shouldnt be given legal IP protection. Obviously samsung has been unlucky with the judge they got in their case. The same judge banned the galaxy tab 10.1 because it looks "indistinguishable" to the ipad. Supposedly apple has a patent for rectangles as well. :roll:

Btw the trial for the case of the galaxy nexus is supposed to be heard in........2014. :|:|:|

Btw the trial for the case of the galaxy nexus is supposed to be heard in........2014. :|:|:|Gambler_3

The same judge banned the galaxy tab 10.1 because it looks "indistinguishable" to the ipad. Supposedly apple has a patent for rectangles as well.Gambler_3

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]The same judge banned the galaxy tab 10.1 because it looks "indistinguishable" to the ipad. Supposedly apple has a patent for rectangles as well.Heirren

They both are rectangular pieces of glass, nothing exclusive about how a company's tablet looks. The galaxy tab uses a 16:9 aspect ratio whereas ipad uses a 4:3, that alone is enough to make them distinguishable. A tablet is just like a TV, not much you can differentiate.

Gambler_3

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

They both are rectangular pieces of glass, nothing exclusive about how a company's tablet looks. The galaxy tab uses a 16:9 aspect ratio whereas ipad uses a 4:3, that alone is enough to make them distinguishable. A tablet is just like a TV, not much you can differentiate.

musicalmac

So pointless, will be back on sale next week. And it's already old handset. GalaxyIII launched and is projected to sell like 20 mln units in a quarter. All those patent wars are doing is fill lawyer's pockets

[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

They both are rectangular pieces of glass, nothing exclusive about how a company's tablet looks. The galaxy tab uses a 16:9 aspect ratio whereas ipad uses a 4:3, that alone is enough to make them distinguishable. A tablet is just like a TV, not much you can differentiate.

Gambler_3

If you Google "Samsung Lawyers can't tell difference" you'll get a bunch of hits. That being said, I don't much care for the Tab issue as even I felt it was too close for it's own good, and considering there are other tablets such as the Archos G9 or Motorola's Xyboard(XOOM 2) that manage to incorporate minor elements to differentiate themselves in design, I can't say much for Samsung. The Nexus issue though is a whole different story altogether,

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="musicalmac"] Samsung's lawyers couldn't pick out which was the iPad and which was the Galaxy tab at a distance of, I'm fairly certain it was, 10 feet. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and Apple is flattered regularly by it (even Best Buy is now taking queues from Apples retail strategy). Mozuckint

If you Google "Samsung Lawyers can't tell difference" you'll get a bunch of hits. That being said, I don't much care for the Tab issue as even I felt it was too close for it's own good, and considering there are other tablets such as the Archos G9 or Motorola's Xyboard(XOOM 2) that manage to incorporate minor elements to differentiate themselves in design, I can't say much for Samsung. The Nexus issue though is a whole different story altogether,

"Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.

"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.

"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer."

Dont see the big deal one of the lawyers was just playing too safe. The aspect ratio alone can easily distinguish between the 2, it's like saying you cant differentiate between a wide-screen LCD and old square LCD.

The ban has been over turned temporarily.

UK court dismisses apples complain that the galaxy tab looks like an ipad.

"...the High Court dismissed Apple?s arguments by referring to approximately 50 examples of prior art, or designs that were previously created or
patented, from before 2004 ... The court found numerous Apple design features to lack originality, and numerous identical design features to have been visible in a wide range of earlier tablet designs from before 2004."

Once again UK courts show what common sense is.

Apple is scared, if you ask me. They tried to demand retailers remove the gnex/tab 10.1 prior to the ban.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/13/3157505/apple-retailer-galaxy-nexus-tab-10-1-takedown-order

And remember how this thing is regarding universal search?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Desktop

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernic_Desktop_Search

Delicious prior art

I wonder how you can really defend apple on this one. They weren't the first to come up with the idea. They tried to demand that retailers pull products when they had no legal right to do so. Their attempted ban on the Gnex was lifted in a couple of days. It seems pretty clear to me.

The ban was lifted until Apple responds. I'm switching to Sprint and buying one this Friday.