There have been rumors of Nokia entering the tablet market, and after their partnership with Microsoft for Windows Phone 8 it wouldn't be a surprise if it was a Windows 8 Tablet. Now, a recent article reports that they have filed a patent for an "Apparatus Cover with Keyboard", which in my opinion looks remarkably similar to the Microsoft Surface.
Article and pictures:
http://www.themobileindian.com/news/11667_Nokia-Patent-reveals-a-tablet-with-attached-keyboard-cover
It does seem pretty cool though. With patents like these, I ask myself, what new innovations does this bring to the market? In this case, it seems that Nokia's killer selling point is the fact that the screen and keyboard can slide, fold, and twist into multiple different formations. Additionally, it seems that they can separate from each other, and be used individually as just an ordinary screen / keyboard.
This is all very cool, but I must say, it just seems way too similar to Microsoft's Surface tablet, but less refined. The folded screen stand isn't as sleek as the Surface's kickstand, and the keyboard doesn't seem as thin or agile as the Surface's touch-cover. Nokia has been declining, and this looks like it'll be just another one of their too-little-too-late products.
Monday, April 22, 2013
Post 23 - Anonymous Mobile Payment by Amazon
On April 16, Amazon filed a patent for an anonymous payment system for mobile devices. The goal of the design is to minimize the amount of data that must be sent over the air for each payment transaction. The patent can be viewed here:
http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,423,457.PN.&OS=PN/8,423,457&RS=PN/8,423,457
This is interesting because if it takes off, a fast and efficient payment system like this could compete with PayPal (owned by eBay) and other anonymous payment systems. It works through text messaging - a user sends a text to Amazon's payment service, which holds your money and replies with a secret code. Then you pay the vendor by giving them the code; the vendor can then use that code to withdraw the money you had previously paid. Thus, Amazon's service sort of acts like a temporary bank or safety vault.
Here is the article:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/17/amazon-patent-describes-a-mobile-payment-system-that-keeps-transactions-anonymous/
The mobile payments market is already becoming saturated, with competitors like Square, Intuit, and PayPal. It is hard to say just from one patent, but it definitely seems that Amazon may be interested in entering that market space. And with a trusted name like theirs, they may be able to make a dent.
http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,423,457.PN.&OS=PN/8,423,457&RS=PN/8,423,457
This is interesting because if it takes off, a fast and efficient payment system like this could compete with PayPal (owned by eBay) and other anonymous payment systems. It works through text messaging - a user sends a text to Amazon's payment service, which holds your money and replies with a secret code. Then you pay the vendor by giving them the code; the vendor can then use that code to withdraw the money you had previously paid. Thus, Amazon's service sort of acts like a temporary bank or safety vault.
Here is the article:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/17/amazon-patent-describes-a-mobile-payment-system-that-keeps-transactions-anonymous/
The mobile payments market is already becoming saturated, with competitors like Square, Intuit, and PayPal. It is hard to say just from one patent, but it definitely seems that Amazon may be interested in entering that market space. And with a trusted name like theirs, they may be able to make a dent.
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Post 22 - Apple Defends Mobile Developers from Patent Trolls
Back in 2011, notorious patent troll Lodsys demanded .575% of revenue
from small app iOS app developers, if they used in-app purchases.
In-app purchases are a great source of revenue for many mobile app
developers, and Lodsys claims that they own the patent for it and must
be paid.
This is a textbook definition of a patent troll: Lodsys does not practice in the mobile development market; their entire business is to attempt to get a cut of revenue from other developers. And rather for ask for big numbers, they only ask for a small percent, which encourages developers to simply agree rather than go to court. This strategy has been successful; Lodsys has reported to having more than 150 companies that have agreed to their terms.
Interestingly though, the big dog Apple has stepped in to protect its developers. Usually I am highly critical of Apple but I think this is a bold move; obviously Apple is mostly concerned with their own profit and wants to retain its developer base, but regardless their actions are noble. Apple's claim is that since they have previously licensed Lodsys' patents, iOS developers are protected against those licenses. Google has intervened as well, with similar claims in an attempt to protect their Android developer base.
This is an interesting scenario that we have not covered in class, and raises the question if these defense claims by Apple and Google are valid. Although it slowed down Lodsys, they certainly don't seem to think so, because now they are back with more lawsuits then ever before:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/patent-troll-lodsys-sues-10-mobile-game-makers-despite-apples-intervention/
Only time will tell if the great legal forces of Apple and Google will hold up against Lodsys in court when it comes to protecting their small and independent app developers. But at the very least, it's nice to know that at least someone is offering some protection from these patent trolls.
This is a textbook definition of a patent troll: Lodsys does not practice in the mobile development market; their entire business is to attempt to get a cut of revenue from other developers. And rather for ask for big numbers, they only ask for a small percent, which encourages developers to simply agree rather than go to court. This strategy has been successful; Lodsys has reported to having more than 150 companies that have agreed to their terms.
Interestingly though, the big dog Apple has stepped in to protect its developers. Usually I am highly critical of Apple but I think this is a bold move; obviously Apple is mostly concerned with their own profit and wants to retain its developer base, but regardless their actions are noble. Apple's claim is that since they have previously licensed Lodsys' patents, iOS developers are protected against those licenses. Google has intervened as well, with similar claims in an attempt to protect their Android developer base.
This is an interesting scenario that we have not covered in class, and raises the question if these defense claims by Apple and Google are valid. Although it slowed down Lodsys, they certainly don't seem to think so, because now they are back with more lawsuits then ever before:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/patent-troll-lodsys-sues-10-mobile-game-makers-despite-apples-intervention/
Only time will tell if the great legal forces of Apple and Google will hold up against Lodsys in court when it comes to protecting their small and independent app developers. But at the very least, it's nice to know that at least someone is offering some protection from these patent trolls.
Post 21 - Samsung 3G Patent Invalidated in Germany
The German Federal Patent court has ruled against Samsung and in favor of Apple in another chapter of their legendary patent wars.
Article:
http://allthingsd.com/20130412/apple-wins-invalidation-of-samsung-3g-patent-in-germany/?mod=googlenews
This particular battle concerned a technology known as "turbo encoding/decoding device and method for processing frame data according to QoS." Samsung was seeking injunction against Apple for violating this patent, which they claim is a vital part of implementing the 3G wireless standard that we learned about in class.
However, the court ruled in favor of Apple and in fact invalidated the entire patent (!). This result echoes a similar consensus reached last month by the UK's High Court of Justice, which determined that an intervening prior art invalidated the patent as well.
With yet another win, it seems that so far Apple is slowly gaining the upper hand in this patent war. Perhaps their expansive squadrons of lawyers are finally paying off.
Article:
http://allthingsd.com/20130412/apple-wins-invalidation-of-samsung-3g-patent-in-germany/?mod=googlenews
This particular battle concerned a technology known as "turbo encoding/decoding device and method for processing frame data according to QoS." Samsung was seeking injunction against Apple for violating this patent, which they claim is a vital part of implementing the 3G wireless standard that we learned about in class.
However, the court ruled in favor of Apple and in fact invalidated the entire patent (!). This result echoes a similar consensus reached last month by the UK's High Court of Justice, which determined that an intervening prior art invalidated the patent as well.
With yet another win, it seems that so far Apple is slowly gaining the upper hand in this patent war. Perhaps their expansive squadrons of lawyers are finally paying off.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Post 20 - Slide to Unlock
While Apple's iconic Slide to Unlock mechanism for unlocking their touch-screen mobile devices was protected by United States courts, but it seems they are not so lucky in Germany.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/apples-slide-to-unlock-patent.html
Apple hasn't had much luck in Europe in general lately. Many of their design patents that are upheld in the US do not count as much in Europe where the law deems that the patent needs to solve a technical problem, and this is one of those examples.
The decision is appeal-able and Apple will undoubtedly take advantage of that, but this is still a huge win for Samsung, Google, and other recent opponents of Apple in patent litigation cases. It's interesting how the same cases in different countries can have such different results.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/apples-slide-to-unlock-patent.html
Apple hasn't had much luck in Europe in general lately. Many of their design patents that are upheld in the US do not count as much in Europe where the law deems that the patent needs to solve a technical problem, and this is one of those examples.
The decision is appeal-able and Apple will undoubtedly take advantage of that, but this is still a huge win for Samsung, Google, and other recent opponents of Apple in patent litigation cases. It's interesting how the same cases in different countries can have such different results.
Post 19 - Samsung ban only affects older Apple devices
Samsung has been trying very hard to get mobile Apple devices such as iPhones and iPads banned in the United States. However, even if they do succeed, it now seems that the extent of the ban wouldn't go far.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/samsung-affirmatively-says-us-import.html
It seems that the only Apple products affected by this, if Samsung does succeed, are those not using the new Qualcomm chips: The AT&T versions of the iPhone 3, 3GS, and 4, (but no later), and iPad 3g and iPad 2 3G.
Since Apple fans tend to adopt their new products very quickly, even if this comes to pass it would have a very limited effect. Many Apple customers already own iPhones with model 4S or 5 and later-generation iPads, and as time passes the number of adopters will increase. Additionally, many customers are not on AT&T and won't be affected either. It seems that Samsung has dug themselves into a hole with this one.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/samsung-affirmatively-says-us-import.html
It seems that the only Apple products affected by this, if Samsung does succeed, are those not using the new Qualcomm chips: The AT&T versions of the iPhone 3, 3GS, and 4, (but no later), and iPad 3g and iPad 2 3G.
Since Apple fans tend to adopt their new products very quickly, even if this comes to pass it would have a very limited effect. Many Apple customers already own iPhones with model 4S or 5 and later-generation iPads, and as time passes the number of adopters will increase. Additionally, many customers are not on AT&T and won't be affected either. It seems that Samsung has dug themselves into a hole with this one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)