Active Topics
-
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (14)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by t-b - 2 hrs, 30 mins ago -
Maemo 20th Anniversary (4)
to Brainstorm by teroyk - 22 hrs, 41 mins ago -
Nokia Booklet 3G (RX-75) Drivers (64)
to Alternatives by teroyk - 22 hrs, 57 mins ago -
Porting apps to Leste (46)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 3 days, 2 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (8)
to Community by Maemish - 6 days, 20 hrs ago - more...
ericsson |
2011-06-14
, 18:14
|
|
Banned |
Posts: 974 |
Thanked: 622 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#41
|
Originally Posted by Texrat
So this thread is now officially a yo-yo
 |
|
2011-06-14
, 18:18
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#42
|
Originally Posted by ericsson
I hope not.
So this thread is now officially a yo-yo
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
|
|
2011-06-14
, 20:10
|
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#43
|
Originally Posted by ericsson
Well, how do you prove the patent is broken? You may use official documentation, original source code, maybe disassemble?
Caller ID is an idea. Nokia obviously owns one (of many other owned by others) patents for how to make a working Caller ID in a cell phone. Apple has shamelessly and unlawfully used Nokias patent. Now they must pay
Depending on how the patent applications were filled, it may be very difficult not to brake any patent while designing any type of device today.
Big corporations have a long history of filling applications that are almost equal to the general idea (or trivially different). You may check the IBM patent used to pin down Sun Microsystems over RISC?
In this particular case I can bet that is the case. It would be very interesting to see how they have proved their claims.
EDIT: I don't like Apple because of it's business model, but I dislike patents even more.
__________________
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
|
|
2011-06-14
, 22:33
|
|
Banned |
Posts: 974 |
Thanked: 622 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#44
|
Originally Posted by momcilo
It depends on the patent. The Caller ID may be tied directly to the GSM standard that Nokia developed (with others I must add). But I have never read a Nokia Caller ID patent, so I have no idea of the specifics.
Well, how do you prove the patent is broken? You may use official documentation, original source code, maybe disassemble?
Depending on how the patent applications were filled, it may be very difficult not to brake any patent while designing any type of device today.
Big corporations have a long history of filling applications that are almost equal to the general idea (or trivially different). You may check the IBM patent used to pin down Sun Microsystems over RISC?
In this particular case I can bet that is the case. It would be very interesting to see how they have proved their claims.
EDIT: I don't like Apple because of it's business model, but I dislike patents even more.
You have to remember that Nokia (and Samsung and (Sony) Ericsson) have developed a large amount of what we today consider prior art regarding mobile technology. They have patents in every aspects of this technology from chips to radio transmission standards to production processes to encryption algorithms and so on.
I think you are thinking of software patents more than patents in general. Pure software patents are hard to get because in programming there is generally no inventive steps involved other than obvious steps (non-inventive steps), and you cannot get a patent on abstract matters and ideas. Software patents are very often tied to hardware and physical processes of some kind, for instance data transmission, encryption, storage and so on. Software is protected by copyright, programming is (usually) a creative process rather than an inventive process.
|
|
2011-06-15
, 07:12
|
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#45
|
Originally Posted by ericsson
Well, that is correct as long as the EU is the battleground. In this case I believe the trial has started in the US, which means software patents are at their best.
It depends on the patent. The Caller ID may be tied directly to the GSM standard that Nokia developed (with others I must add). But I have never read a Nokia Caller ID patent, so I have no idea of the specifics.
You have to remember that Nokia (and Samsung and (Sony) Ericsson) have developed a large amount of what we today consider prior art regarding mobile technology. They have patents in every aspects of this technology from chips to radio transmission standards to production processes to encryption algorithms and so on.
I think you are thinking of software patents more than patents in general. Pure software patents are hard to get because in programming there is generally no inventive steps involved other than obvious steps (non-inventive steps), and you cannot get a patent on abstract matters and ideas. Software patents are very often tied to hardware and physical processes of some kind, for instance data transmission, encryption, storage and so on. Software is protected by copyright, programming is (usually) a creative process rather than an inventive process.
__________________
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
|
|
2011-06-15
, 08:21
|
|
Posts: 1,425 |
Thanked: 983 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Hong Kong
|
#46
|
I think Theodore owns the caller id patent.
Before we look into the details of the lawsuit and settle we can never be sure what exactly in Nokia was infringed.
Before we look into the details of the lawsuit and settle we can never be sure what exactly in Nokia was infringed.
 |
|
2011-06-15
, 08:27
|
|
Posts: 434 |
Thanked: 990 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Australia
|
#47
|
Slashgear have offered an interesting take on the original endgadget article. They had a whole bunch of additional text HERE Nokia's "forward looking" plan and ensuing caveats include, what in my mind reads as very much leaving open the option to dump MS if their own in-house stuff proves better. It also makes mention of a few other things relating to their technology arms and patent revenue.
__________________
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.
|
|
2011-06-15
, 13:02
|
|
Posts: 248 |
Thanked: 191 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ New Zealand
|
#48
|
Originally Posted by stickymick
Don't people read the first post in a thread?
Depends on who paid what:
"Nokia said its agreement with Apple consisted of a one-off payment, the value of which was not disclosed, and ongoing royalties."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13759612
But I'd hazard a guess that it's Apple paying Nokia.
"Apple payments to Nokia settle all litigation and have positive financial impact" and so on -
a one-off payment by Apple, plus royalties on every device sold, is Apple paying Nokia - no guesswork necessary. Duh!
__________________
Maemo 5, Windows 7 (for MCE, MS.Word+Endnote), Debian, Ubuntu, trying to get LibreOffice Writer+Bibus working properly with EndNote bibliography, given up trying to get MythTV working with AverMedia Galaxy DVB-S USB tuner. Linux & astronomy: http://mishastro.wikispaces.com/
Maemo 5, Windows 7 (for MCE, MS.Word+Endnote), Debian, Ubuntu, trying to get LibreOffice Writer+Bibus working properly with EndNote bibliography, given up trying to get MythTV working with AverMedia Galaxy DVB-S USB tuner. Linux & astronomy: http://mishastro.wikispaces.com/
|
|
2011-06-16
, 03:48
|
|
Posts: 992 |
Thanked: 738 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Low Earth Orbit
|
#49
|
Originally Posted by govprog
They probably could, but then it would most likely only work between iphones.
Unbelievable! Apple is such an idiot that could not create the caller ID itself!?