My thoughts exactly.

I hate Apple, with a passion that has its reasons. None of which I am going to get into here because I am level headed and can unbiased so shouldn't have the need to explain myself.

This is NOT like Apple. To be short sighted? Very strange.

When it comes to US sales, Apple > Nokia. When it comes to world wide sales the reverse is true. Apple either knows what Nokia is after and this movie is to help prevent Nokia from reaching their goal, or they just went stupid for a day!!

In either eventuality, a win or loss does not hurt Nokia as much as it hurts Apple. A win for Apples case, to me, almost says Nokia would win theirs. Apple hasn't been in the mobile phone business long enough to really have patents that would cover technology that Nokia is utilizing in their devices.

When was the last time we saw a capacitive touchscreen with pinch to zoom on a Nokia device? Maybe patents are the reason Nokia has not released a capacitive screen to rival the iPhone yet? If that is the case, I am honestly OK with that reasoning. That means Nokia has been "forced" to push R&D into resistive screens, which in the long run are going to be a better technology to have as its limitations are not as pronounced as capacitive.

Just food for thought, since none of us here really can say one way or another!

Interesting times though, very interesting. I hope Nokia puts Apple in their place honestly. That company so badly needs it, lol. I also hope Nokia learns from Apple in how to polish a damn device before kicking it out the door, man do they need to learn that BAD!

Tracked down Apple's ITC complaint papers. Link

Stuff that hasn't being brought up so far in media:

-Unlike Nokia, Apple is using some the Delaware case patents in ITC complaint. 4 of 9 patents involved are from Apple Delaware countersuit. Three of the new patents involve User interface and basic computing. The one remaining is about power management in digital cameras.

-(IIRC) Delaware papers only mentioned S60 and Maemo as infringing platforms. Apple has now included both Qt and S40 as infringing products. Booklet 3G/Nokia's netbook & Windows products aren't mentioned.

-N900 is among the physical evidence and listed as example of products Apple want's ITC to ban.

-Interestingly N900 isn't mentioned as product that violates any of the computing/UI patents. It's the new digital camera patent that N900 infringes. Not sure why, but I guess this is due to Maemo's Linux roots and Apple not wanting to take risk of upsetting open source people. Although in Qt related part Apple does say that all of Nokia's Qt products violate Apple's patents, which I guess includes Maemo/N900.




Operating system implimetation:

Patent 5519867 Object-oriented multitasking system
Patent 5379431 Boot framework architecture for dynamic staged initial program load
Patent 5,915,131 Method and apparatus for handling I/O requests utilizing separate programming interfaces to access separate I/O services
Patent 5969705 Message protocol for controlling a user interface from an inactive application program
Patent 6343263 Real-time signal processing system for serially transmitted data
Patent 6424354 Object-oriented event notification system with listener registration of both interests and methods
Patent RE39,486 Extensible, replaceable network component system

Graphic system and corresponding management of graphic processing

Patent 5455599 Object-oriented graphic system (Qt)

Digital camera hardware interfaces and power management.

Patent 5920726 System and method for managing power conditions within a digital camera device (N900)

Reading through these patent descriptions makes me want to raze the entire USPO and accompanying IP law and start over with something less ridiculous.

PS I've filed for protection for my "Mechanism for cutting large quantities of lawyer retirement yacht from company budgets", so don't go and use my idea or i'll sue ya.

Bllomberg reporting that ITC has decided to take Nokia's complaint against Apple under investigation.

No comment comment from Apple. Nokia not even saying that yet.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=a6cBthXHTyh8

You need to read the claims to find out what the patent is actually for.

Well the USPO is woefully out of date (and there are investigations into it as to how to bring it up to date). Part of the problem is how the system is setup (it tends to favor acceptance over rejection).

But basically to get a patent past the USPO, write it in language only a lawyer or computer scientist will understand and you can patent almost anything.

The Patent Office has been way skewed to rejecting everything over the past few years, and is just now getting back to a reasonable middle ground.

Nonsense.

Well... there have certainly been enough cases to back Laughing Man up.

In general: software, business process and human DNA patents. Artfully argued by skilled attorneys to the point that all 3 ridiculous examples still stand despite their utter inappropriateness.

Err..

I say that based on

a) I know someone that works in the USPO doing this type of work
b) I know people working in DOC that do audits of the various offices and Bureaus.
c) Wasn't there a patent in the recent years that someone got by that was the basis of computing (something about lists in programming). I can't remember the conversation I had with my friend about which specific one it was though.