EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.22.12

Patents Let Giants Attack the Rest, Apple Attack FOSS

Posted in Apple, Free/Libre Software, Patents at 12:12 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

jupiter

Summary: A roundup of patent news with focus on Apple’s attack on FOSS projects, notably in the courtroom

PATENTS are still being used to push small players out of the market, as shown recently courtesy of Honeywell.

As we also showed some days ago, there is impact [1, 2, 3] on dentists. This was mentioned here some days ago when we stressed the human toll of patents. There are too many reports of software patents out there and they have a negative effect on the inclination to develop (this factor is rarely being taken into account in cost analyses). GCC and other examples of widely used Free software are always at the mercy of patent holders. This works well for those who can wield an axe while exploiting Free software – companies such as Apple, which hoarded KHTML and many other FOSS projects (before starting to attack FOSS with patent lawsuits).

It was only a matter of time really, especially given Apple’s arrogance. Watch what Apple is doing to CUPS right now. It’s not just technical sabotage but also legal sabotage. It helps nobody except Apple, the selfish company that promotes selfishness. “Software patents do create jobs for litigation lawyers and patent attorneys in Europe,” writes the FFII, which keeps emphasising that patents are not about innovation but about profit for very few people. Given Apple’s legal attacks on FOSS, lawyers’ blogs are providing tips for fellow patent lawyers. Paul Cole is not interested in innovation but only in ways of exploiting the EPO to extract money. To quote:

According to BBC News last Friday, Apple has succeeded in the German courts in enforcing a patent for a user interface feature for its mobile devices. The ruling demonstrates the value of European patents for “software” inventions where a “technical” effect can be demonstrated. The claims in the granted patents and the problems that they solve provide insight about what features of a user interface might be regarded as “technical” by the EPO. The advantages to a software developer of being able to patent innovative interface features that are important to the “look and feel” of the device and the software running on it are self-evident.

[...]

One take-away message for US applicants is the need to draft applications bearing in mind the exclusions under the EPC: stating as one of the main objects of the inventions “to provide more aesthetically pleasing operations” plays straight into the hands of an Examining Division or Appeal Board within the EPO and even if such objects can and should be stated, functional objects are best set out first. Another message is not to overlook the role of the human user in the invention: in the refused application the needs of the computer and the attractiveness of the micro-movie as a matter of shape were explained but what was necessary for the user to see the “micro-movie” and how long it should last were left unstated.

Meanwhile, over in China, Apple is shown for the hypocrite it is:

INTERNATIONAL LITIGATOR Apple could be faced with the prospect of a ban on its Ipads in China, after a lower court ruled in favour of Shenzhen Proview Technology.
Proview claims that it owns the rights to the Ipad name in China and wants a ban on sales of its rival’s device in the country. So far it has had some success in China, and now, according to a report at the Associated Press, it can claim another victory.

This is far from the first time Apple is accused of taking other companies’ names. But Apple and its followers just ignore the reality of inspiration and simultaneous discoveries/advancements. Apple created this illusion that it is a great innovator and that everything resembling an Apple product is just a ripoff, never mind prior art and Steve Jobs’ admission of copying others massively.

One thing that Android backers definitely did not copy from Apple is defective antennas, which even Apple with its hype machine can no longer cover up.

A few days ago we wrote about Apple's use of a "slide to lock" patent to try to ban Android devices. Apple has no shame and some of the press mocks Apple for it [1, 2, 3] although not sufficiently. One analysis shows why Apple’s patent should be considered invalid:

When I initially searched the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office database and Google Patents, I missed something very interesting in the war [1][2] between Apple, Inc. (AAPL) and Android’s “Big Three” — Google Inc.’s (GOOG) new acquisition Motorola, HTC Corp. (TPE:2498), and Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KS:005930) — regarding swipe-to-unlock intellectual property.

Neonode Inc. (NEON) appears to be the first to patent this technology, holding a claim I missed.

Currently, Apple is trying to embargo certain Android devices:

Apple raised the stakes in an intensifying global patent battle with Samsung Electronics by targeting the latest model using Google’s fast growing Android software, a move which may affect other Android phone makers.

Please boycott Apple and also explain to other people why Apple is an enemy of fair competition. There is nothing “magical” there. This sort of behaviour oughtn’t be tolerated, and not only because Android is based on Linux. This harms everyone in the market and outside of it (customers).

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

A Single Comment

  1. Michael said,

    February 22, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    Gravatar

    Apple has no attack against FOSS. You made that up. In face, Apple has gotten OSS into the hands of more desktop users than all desktop Linux distros *combined*. The idea that they are somehow an enemy to OSS is complete fantasy.

    It was only a matter of time really, especially given Apple’s arrogance. Watch what Apple is doing to CUPS right now. It’s not just technical sabotage but also legal sabotage.

    Complete fabrication on your part – but worse than that, it shows a complete lack of understanding of the entire concept of what it means for OSS to be *free*. When you work on open source software you are welcome to change it to suite your needs. Add to it. Take from it. Alter it. Do *anything* you want but prevent others from doing the same. This is the core value of OSS. This is what being open is all about. This is what Apple is doing.
    And you do not get it. You whine and complain that Apple, who owes you nothing, is not working to serve your needs. Boo hoo, Roy. What a sad state your mind-set is in to think the world owes you everything.

    It helps nobody except Apple, the selfish company that promotes selfishness.

    Selfish! You simple do not get it. Let’s look at someone who might just understand Linux (and OSS) a wee bit better than you (which is really anyone, but let’s pick a specific expert):
    Linus Torvalds: http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7439/

    I agree that it’s driven by selfish reasons, but that’s how all open source code gets written! We all “scratch our own itches”. It’s why I started Linux, it’s why I started git, and it’s why I am still involved. It’s the reason for everybody to end up in open source, to some degree. So complaining about the fact that Microsoft picked a selfish area to work on is just silly. Of course they picked an area that helps them. That’s the point of open source – the ability to make the code better for your particular needs, whoever the ‘your’ in question happens to be. Does anybody complain when hardware companies write drivers for the hardware they produce? No. That would be crazy. Does anybody complain when IBM funds all the POWER development, and works on enterprise features because they sell into the enterprise? No. That would be insane.

    You are doing what Linus Torvalds considers to be insane. Yes: insane. You are not being even slightly rational in your reaction to Apple. You rarely are. You are driven by emotion and, as you have said yourself, "envy".
    And then you on about your BS attacks against Apple’s work against plagiarism.
    Here: challenge for you – make a statement about your view on plagiarism. Is it fine in your book? Is it something that those who are plagiarized should work to correct? Just what is your view?
    You will not, of course, answer this – because then you would have to be completely open about your pro-plagiarism stance.
    Oh, as far as your call to boycott Apple. LOL! You do realize the only ones who will listen are your cult-buddies who are willing to blindly accept your BS without thinking. As shown above, you know nothing of OSS and are simply not willing to talk about your views on plagiarism.

What Else is New


  1. Links 24/5/2013: Fedora ‘Pidora’, CIvil Rights Debated in the US

    Links for the day



  2. Bill Gates Still Getting Richer Through For-Profit Investments, Now Wants to Brainwash Children in Schools in Favour of His Investments

    Some of the latest strategies used by the world's richest man to protect his investments and amass yet more money, adding to an ever-growing wealth while pretending it's a charity



  3. Microsoft Entryism and Its Effects on Corporate and Public Policy

    An aspect of Microsoft culture that ought not be overlooked because of its profound effect on society (private and public)



  4. Red Hat Should Follow Google's and Twitter's Footsteps on Patents to Avoid Becoming the Next Novell

    Red Hat continues to ignore my plea to defang the software patents it is applying for, potentially making them weaponised like Novell's and Sun's patents (e.g. Java at Oracle) upon buyout or another major event



  5. CAFC Decision Still Overridden by Overzealous Patent Lawyers in the Press, The Guardian and Other Corporate Press (CBS and AFP Included) Still Guard the Establishment

    Analysis of a sceptical kind of corporate press coverage regarding software patents in the US; great examples of how Microsoft- and Gates-funded press outlets tend to get it all wrong on the facts, smearing digital freedom fighters



  6. Software Patents Debate Still Open in New Zealand and the US

    In spite of distraction attempts, the debate over software patents continues to stress that there is a real danger



  7. WebM is No Ogg, It is Not Freedom-Respecting Anymore, Even in Countries That Have No Software Patents

    Why Google needs to fix the licence of VP9, or simply stop pretending that it should be the only de facto standard for multimedia



  8. Microsoft Violates Google Licences

    The champion of 'IP' and licensing (extortion) is not much of a champion after all, based on new reports, not just a lot of old ones



  9. Skype Teaches Us That All Microsoft Software Should be Assumed Spyware Unless Proven Otherwise

    The broader implications of Microsoft adding spying 'features' to Skype



  10. Links 23/5/2013: Threat to Civil Rights in UK, KDE 4.11 LTS

    Links for the day



  11. Links 22/5/2013: Debian GNU/Hurd, New Go Language Release

    Links for the day



  12. The FRAND Apple-Microsoft Conspiracy Attempts to Destroy Android/Linux, Ban Imports

    How Microsoft and Apple are using patents in bulk (sometimes acquired in unison, e.g. from Novell and Nortel) to artificially lower market saturation of the Android operating system or drive costs up



  13. Gates Foundation: Buying Influence for Bill's Ego and Bill's Profit

    New examples of power being acquired and investments (i.e. for profit) being funnelled into the beneficiaries



  14. Bill Gates Enters Financial Centres With His Goons Becoming US Budget Chief, Top Bankers

    How Bill Gates' staff is entering positions of financial power, indirectly giving Gates power over US (national and international) finance



  15. IBM Ignores Small Companies' Interests, Denies Patent Scope is a Problem, Focusing on Its Own Problems (Trolls) Instead

    How David Kappos and IBM (his longtime employer) continue to ignore the obvious problem which kills small businesses and everyone is complaining about



  16. The New York Times Publishes Factually-Flawed Patent Propaganda Benefiting Microsoft and Apple

    Eamonn Fingleton is rewriting history in the US' top newspaper, insinuating that patents contributed to the rise of software duopolists



  17. Software Patents Eligibility Likely to be Decided by SCOTUS

    Analyses suggest that an escalation by appeal to SCOTUS is likely to be the next stage in 'Bilski 2.0'



  18. Does Bill Gates Try to Flush GNU/Linux Down the Toilet in Kerala?

    Renting Microsoft software rather than using Free (as in freedom, or libre) software?



  19. Links 21/5/2013: Handbrake Turns 0.9.9, NetBSD 6.1

    Links for the day



  20. Links 20/5/2013: First Salifish Smartphone, Mageia 3 Released

    Links for the day



  21. Microsoft Corruption (Illegal Tenders) Stopped by European Court

    Microsoft cannot bypass public tenders, based on a ruling from a court of law in Europe



  22. Not Satire: Microsoft Wants to Show the World How Security is Done

    Software security 'standard' to be led by the company which made insecurity an acceptable engineering practice?



  23. Microsoft is Struggling to Maintain Industry 'Standards'

    With Microsoft's common carrier and browser share down considerably Microsoft finds itself increasingly irrelevant and it tries subversive means of making another comeback



  24. Microsoft Entryism and Bribery Get the Microsoft Way Implemented

    A recollection of very dirty tactics from Microsoft, which uses money to oppress, overthrow, and even hijack its opposition



  25. Patent Policy Laundering in the European Union and New Zealand

    How the so-called 'free' trade agreements help spread patent policy which favours software patents



  26. Ongoing Focus on Patent Litigation and Patent Trolls Reduces Focus on Software Patents

    The problem with increased focus on the players that use software patents litigiously and the litigation itself



  27. Andrew Y. Schroeder Shows That Patent Lawyers Are Sociopaths

    Bully and law misuser is trying to get his way with foul language, intimidation, and sheer lack of professionalism



  28. IBM-backed Book on 'Open Innovation'

    OpenForum Europe (OFE), which helps IBM's turf wars in Europe, releases a new book filled with its talking point



  29. Joseph E. Stiglitz Criticises the Patent System

    More critical words about the patent system and the way it is harming lives



  30. Senator Schumer Should Focus on Software Patents, Leaving Patent Trolls (Side Effect) Aside

    Reform in the USPTO and the US courts should focus on patent scope and not patent holders


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts