Apple wins patent victory over HTC

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Kevin8or

There's nothing new about the idea, is there? Apple may have been the first to add it to smart phones, but a similar kind of data recongnition must have a prior history in various computer applications.

Since the patent dates from 1996, you can be sure that Apple originally had it for computer applications too, not just phone apps. (iPhone arrived over a decade later, in 2007.)

Of course, if you can find someone who did it before 1996, then you have prior art, and parts or all of the patent will be invalid.

[Kevin8or]

It strikes me, at the gut level, as wrong for anyone to hold a patent on a simple idea like this one. My thinking on the matter is muddled, however. I may need to target this topic for future reading.

[Lalilulelo]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You may not think so, but the fact is that no Smartphone did this until Apple came up with the idea. Sometimes the best ideas are obvious in hindsight, but it still takes someone to come up with them in the first place...

I don't think this is a case of one of the best ideas. It's far from being a significant invention if an invention at all, which is why HTC were intent on removing the functionality in question entirely from their devices before they reportedly found a workaround.

Also, it is not Apple's idea because they were the first to port it to a new category of phones, but because they patented it in 1996 a long time before smart phones.

Anyway, whether no one ever thought of combining parsing to hypertext before 1996 or they did but Apple was the clever party to patent it, my point was that the ability to patent such a non-invention is ridiculous.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Lalilulelo

Anyway, whether no one ever thought of combining parsing to hypertext before 1996 or they did but Apple was the clever party to patent it, my point was that the ability to patent such a non-invention is ridiculous.

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what you and I think about it. The simple fact is that Apple do have the patent, and that HTC were quite plainly in breach of it.

[afa]

I don't know when other phones implemented this, but my 3-year old Nokia E71 had the ability to recognize phone numbers in text messages and allow you to call/sms etc. directly from there by clicking it.

I'm surprised that Apple has the patent for this. Were they really the first to implement this? And why sue HTC but not Nokia?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by afa

I don't know when other phones implemented this, but my 3-year old Nokia E71 had the ability to recognize phone numbers in text messages and allow you to call/sms etc. directly from there by clicking it.

I'm surprised that Apple has the patent for this. Were they really the first to implement this? And why sue HTC but not Nokia?

Perhaps - and this is pure speculation - Nokia paid Apple a licence fee. That's the way that these patents are intended to work; not to suppress technology, but to licence it.

[JoeD]

Edit: nm, decided against rehashing same old arguments

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

It's a garbage patent, but then again all patents are garbage.

This.

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's the thing, though, about these "obvious" ideas: they are obvious only in hindsight. Yes, it may seem obvious to convert anything that looks like a phone number into something that you can tap on to dial the number, but the fact is that it's Apple who first thought of the idea, and that gives them rights to it.

Which is pure idiocy with no basis in any tenable philosophic theory of rights. In other words, it is purely legal.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by luqmaninbmore

This.

So you're going to throw out the patent system and replace it with... what, exactly? Would you rather return to the "good old days" when everything was kept secret, and peoples' inventions died with them, or would you advocate that nobody had any rights to their inventions?

Where would be the incentive for drugs companies to spend billions on developing new drugs, if there was no patent protection, and their rivals could just copy and manufacture the drugs for pennies?

Please do explain your ideas!

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what you and I think about it. The simple fact is that Apple do have the patent, and that HTC were quite plainly in breach of it.

It matters what we think because in a representative republic _we_ do have the power to change the laws either by electing people who will pass the requisite legislation or by ignoring them in large enough numbers to make enforcement impossible. Since the the former strategy is not likely to work in the short term given the plutocratic lobbying system that has been erected, I say we go for the latter. I think we're already making headway on that front when it comes to copyright (and wait to the current generation of children grows up!). We just need some bold and powerful corporations to stand up to the madness.

[Lalilulelo]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what you and I think about it. The simple fact is that Apple do have the patent, and that HTC were quite plainly in breach of it.

lol, fortunately enough however, it does not prevent me from expressing my commoner opinion of the patent system being ridiculous in this instance.

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by HarryT

So you're going to throw out the patent system and replace it with... what, exactly? Would you rather return to the "good old days" when everything was kept secret, and peoples' inventions died with them, or would you advocate that nobody had any rights to their inventions?

Where would be the incentive for drugs companies to spend billions on developing new drugs, if their was no patent protection, and their rivals could just copy and manufacture the drugs for pennies?

Please do explain your ideas!

The incentive comes from being first in the market. It takes more than just 'pennies' to retool a factory. And, of course, there is our old friend advertising which dupes the gullible into thinking that 'authentic' 'genuine' aspirin is better than the 'generic' brands. Pharmaceutical companies will not simply stop producing because patent protections are stripped and even if they did they would be replaced by other organizations looking to exploit new openings in the market. As for R and D, leave it to the publicly funded universities. We might actually even get a more rational distribution of research funds that way.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by luqmaninbmore

Pharmaceutical companies will not simply stop producing because patent protections are stripped

This is just plain wrong. R&D costs for drugs are astronomical, and the only reason that the drugs companies can afford to spend those sums is because patent law gives them the right to exclusivity for a limited period, thus allowing them a reasonable return on investment. If you think that that R&D could continue in the absence of patent protection, you're living in a fantasy world.

[Kevin8or]

Perhaps patents need not apply to every corner of human endeavour. Maybe we can exclude software, or your DNA.