slide to unlock
Latest
Apple, April 2013: 'Consumers want what we don't have'
The ongoing Apple-Samsung trial is unearthing some interesting behind-closed-door secrets on both sides. Something we hadn't seen in the preceding legal tussles however, and presented by Recode, was a handful of slides from an Apple internal meeting in April 2013 regarding its plans for 2014. Alongside the slowing growth of iPhone sales, the research noted that overall smartphone growth was from cheap and large (well, larger than the current iPhone) devices -- both of which Apple had nothing to compete with. As the slide put it: "Consumers want what we don't have." The slide also includes some other reasons for concern, including the carriers' "strong interest in capping iPhone" sales because of its already-high market share, a tough subsidy premium and some (not mentioned) "unfriendly" policies -- consider that lack of carrier-sanctioned bloatware on your iPhone. Apple also admitted that the mobile competition had also "drastically improved their hardware and in some cases their ecosystems," while at the same time, some Android phone-makers were spending "obscene" sums on advertising or carriers to gain traction. Now, which company could Apple possibly mean?
Samsung looks to Google for help in its latest legal battle with Apple
No matter how much we hope and pray, the legal wrangling between Apple and Samsung never seems to end. The latest court battle has Apple seeking up to $2 billion in damages from the Korean manufacturer for infringing on five patents, including tap to search and slide to unlock. This time around though, Samsung is looking to drag Google engineers into the courtroom to testify about the creation of Android -- including, potentially, Andy Rubin. The hope is that their testimony and the evidence they provide would prove once and for all that the mobile operating system was developed independently of iOS and put to bed the back and forth over patent battles. While Mountain View has successfully stayed above the fray for the most part, it makes sense for Seoul to drag the company into this particular battle. Apple is seeking up to $40 per device sold in royalties -- far more than it ever has before. As part of its counter offensive Samsung is countersuing, claiming that Cupertino stole two of its technologies for use in the iPhone and iPad. Like other cases in the war, this will probably take some time to settle. And jury selection starts this week.
German Court finds Apple's 'slide to unlock' patent invalid
Germany's Federal Patent Court on Thursday invalidated all of Apple's claims for its slide to unlock patent. The news comes courtesy of Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents who was in the courtroom observing the proceedings in question. Samsung and Google's Motorola Mobility have just scored a win over a famous Apple user interface patent. The Bundespatentgericht, Germany's Federal Patent Court, ruled that all claims of EP1964022 on "unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image" are invalid as granted, and additionally held that none of the 14 amendments proposed by Apple could salvage the patent. Apple, of course, plans to appeal. A question worth posing, however, is to what extent does this matter anymore? As Mueller points out, Apple's slide to unlock function is today much more famous than it is a strategic feature. Note that Apple's slide to unlock patent doesn't embody every multitouch unlocking gesture and that many companies have developed alternatives that skirt around Apple's patent. Mueller also points out a fundamental difference between patent law in the US and patent law in Europe. Put simply, the patent requirements in Europe are more stringent to the extent that they are granted for technical solutions to technical problems. "In this case," Mueller writes, "the mere fact that a sliding gesture has a visual representation was not deemed to constitute a technical innovation worthy of patent protection." The death blow for Apple's slide to unlock patent was likely a Swedish phone called the Neonode N1m that launched well before the iPhone and featured its own slide to unlock implementation. The N1m was released in 2005 while Apple's own patent for slide to unlock wasn't filed until December of 2005. Skip ahead to about 3:58 into the video and you'll see something very familiar. Incidentally, a Dutch Court also found Apple's slide to unlock patent invalid because of the Neonode N1m. When Steve Jobs first introduced the iPhone, he confidently went over some of its unique features and boldly exclaimed, "and boy have we patented it!" Yet here Apple is, still battling over iPhone patents.
UK judge rules HTC doesn't violate Apple's patents, invalidates Cupertino's claims
Well, Apple had a few legal victories over the last couple of weeks, but it's just been handed a significant defeat by Judge Christopher Floyd. The UK court handed down a ruling that HTC does not violate four Apple patents, including the infamous slide-to-unlock claim. What's more, the judge ruled that three of the four patents in question were not valid, among them the aforementioned unlocking design. The only one of the four patents that stood at the end of the day was related to scrolling through images in the photo management app, but HTC did not infringe upon the claim. This follows the ITC refusing an emergency ban on HTC products in the US. Don't think you've heard the last of slide-to-unlock, however. As HTC, Apple and Samsung have repeatedly shown, they're just as interested in competing in the court room as they are on store shelves (if not more so).
Apple's second slide-to-unlock case against Samsung stayed in Germany
Nothing like a little drama in the ongoing never-ending saga between Samsung and Apple to spice up your Friday morning, eh? As legions of consumers are cashing in a vacation day in order to pick up one of Apple's newest iPads, a court in Mannheim, Germany has stayed Apple's second slide-to-unlock case. According to FOSS Patents, the decision was made for the "duration of a parallel proceeding before the German Patent and Trademark Office that could lead to the revocation, in whole or in part, of Apple's slide-to-unlock utility model." Purportedly, the judge said that the court was not convinced of the "validity of that intellectual property right in all respects, with particular concern about the broadest group of claims." Lawyers who'd love to do nothing more than read about things related to their profession can tap that source link; everyone else can resume their best efforts of trying to be Woz when they grow up.
German court guns down third Samsung patent lawsuit, plus one from Apple
Mannheim judge Andreas Voss is nothing if not decisive. FOSSPatents reports he's just thrown out a third Samsung v. Apple patent lawsuit relating to use of the 3G/UMTS standard. Not to be one-sided, he's also rejected the first of two Apple v. Samsung cases involving slide-to-unlock patents. Weirdly, this latter decision appears to contradict a recent ruling by a Munich court that upheld a similar slide-to-unlock claim by Apple against Motorola, but Judge Voss and his trigger-finger aren't bothered. Keep it up old boy, and maybe we can have this whole thing nailed by the summer. Oh wait, no, both sides are expected to appeal.
Apple wins injunction against several of Motorola's slide-to-unlock implementations in Germany
A German Court handed Apple a significant victory over Motorola this week. The Munich I Regional Court ruled that Motorola's handsets infringe on Apple's slide-to-unlock image patent. The patent describes a method of "unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image." A previous ruling in a Dutch court declared this patent to be invalid because it was not inventive, but the German court apparently disagrees. Speaking to the BBC, Motorola says it plans an appeal. The company already designed a workaround and expects this ruling will have "no impact on current supply or future sales." Motorola seems unfazed by this decision, but Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents said the ruling was "significant bad news for Android at large, and Google." Apple already cites this patent in another lawsuit against Samsung in Germany and could use it against other manufacturers as well. Wins in multiple cases could force Google and its hardware partners to rethink Android's slide-to-unlock system. Other implementations, like the circle one used by Samsung, are awkward at best. Instead of sliding from left to right, Samsung makes you slide your finger from a smaller, inner circle to a larger outer circle. If all Android handset makers had to develop a similar, non-infringing design, the result could be a mix of confusing unlock motions that could detract from Android's overall user experience. The unlock motion is the first thing you do when you get a handset and first impressions are important when someone is shopping for a phone.
Google files patent app for unlocking devices, says we don't need no stinking slide-to-unlock
Apple's legal assault on Android has ratcheted up another notch with Cupertino's newest complaint against Samsung, in which it alleges a bevy of devices infringe upon its slide-to-unlock patent. Help may be on the way, however, as a recent Google patent application shows Mountain View aims to acquire some device-unlocking IP of its own. Titled "Input to Locked Computing Device," the application claims a method for a device unlocking process using one or more user inputs while simultaneously executing a command -- like calling a specific contact or opening an application. Those user inputs can take the form of passcodes, touch and drag, or audio commands. While the application's drawings depict such a system on a phone, it claims an unlocking system for desktops and laptops as well, so it could easily find its way onto a Chromebook or two. Of course, it's just an application, so there's no telling when, or if, it'll actually become an addition to Android's courtroom arsenal, but feel free to check out the app itself by surfing on over to the source link below.
Apple granted injunction in German patent suit, Motorola phones with slide-to-unlock at risk
Apple scored a huge victory today in Munich's Regional Court where Judge Dr. Peter Guntz found Motorola's implementation of slide-to-unlock on smartphones to be in breach of Cupertino's patent holdings. The ruling has resulted in a permanent injunction that Apple could execute at will, forcing Moto to alter the UX it employs across its device portfolio in Deutschland. The case originally focused on three separate applications of this gesture tech -- two for phones, alone -- but for now, the one used on the Xoom has been deemed outside of Apple's purview. Naturally, both parties are expected to appeal this decision, with Apple gunning for a total victory on every derivation of patent EP1964022 and Motorola seeking to overturn the win. Nonetheless, this particular legal triumph could help to set a precedent for the company as it continues to rage an IP war against fellow mobile industry rivals.
Apple awarded patents for Slide to Unlock, keyboard letter pop
In the fast-changing world of smartphone design, often the most valuable thing that a company can own is a patent for a specific feature they've invented. No matter how seemingly trivial the design feature is, a company like Apple will seek patent protection in order to maintain the uniqueness of their product. Three years ago, Apple filed for patents on two features that iPhone, iPod touch and iPad users see every day -- the Slide to Unlock feature of the Lock screen and the pop-up letters that appear when you're typing on the iPhone keyboard. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has today awarded Apple a series of two patents titled "Animated graphical user interface for a display screen or portion thereof " that provide Apple with patent protection for the animated unlock screen and keyboard. Even though most other smartphone manufacturers have avoided having the same design elements on their own phones, the patent protection awarded by the USPTO means that Apple can now require license fees from any company that seeks to use the same or significantly similar elements. You can view the two patents here: D621849 D621848
