+ Reply
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 50 of 50

Your favorite Apple, iPhone, iPad, iOS, Jailbreak, and Cydia site.


Thread: Apple Gets Sued Yet Again: Infringing Four Digital Camera Patents

is a discussion within the

iPhone News

forums, a part of the

General iPhone

section;
This is terrible! Does this company make any products they own patents for? I think patent owners shouldn't be able to sue unless they can be competitive in the market.
...
  1. #41
    Green Apple
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Amarillo, TX
    Posts
    42
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 14 Times in 6 Posts

    This is terrible! Does this company make any products they own patents for? I think patent owners shouldn't be able to sue unless they can be competitive in the market. What if Ben Frank had patented electricity? We could either be sitting in the dark, or being sued everytime we turned flicked the switch. I'm not sure how the patent system works, but it seems like a great to patent things that are years from becoming a reality. Or maybe find something common that technically isn't patented. "Using series of buttons to make a purchase of a snack item". Oh wait I just became a millionaire from suing vending machine companies! Unbelievable what some people will do these days. I like the idea of patents when used correctly, but no one on Earth except this company and their legal team benefit from this. Can these suits be appealed to higher courts? I'm disgusted.

  2. #42
    Green Apple Teoyaomqui's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    42
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Quote Originally Posted by yahoowizard View Post
    I don't see what they did wrong. I mean, it seems they came up with a lot of the ideas of the digital camera and patented it, meaning that no one else could use it without their permission. Now that they did use it, they're suing the companies after they've made some money. Yes, it's true that every digital camera uses it, but it seems all of them are violating the patent which is wrong since they own them. We just don't see this as a crime to break the patent since it's so normal for a camera to do all these things, but it's only because that it's been a lot of years.
    Second that.

    And they are not Stupid as they are making pretty good millions out of it.

    Good for them.

    And what every time someone sued apple people have to be outraged?

    Come on. Now that is stupid.

  3. #43
    iPhone? More like MyPhone riku98523's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    192
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts

    The reason they make so much money is because of possible losses. Since other companies make **** loads of money off of cameras using their patents they are in a sense loosing money. Obviously the whole reason they created the patents was to sue companies when digital cameras became big in the market and you may think they are *** holes for doing it but trust me they can't hear you under the piles of money they are swimming in.



  4. #44
    Livin the iPhone Life sziklassy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Iowa (ISU for Vet School!)
    Posts
    3,920
    Thanks
    69
    Thanked 310 Times in 264 Posts

    Apple would do the same thing about multitouch or anything else that they have patented for that matter. Why the hell are all you fools protecting Apple?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I once prayed to God for an iPhone, but quickly found out He didn't work that way...so I stole an iPhone and prayed for His forgiveness.

    A dog is the only thing on earth that loves you more than you love yourself. - Josh Billings

  5. #45
    Santa Claus, Theme Creator santaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    3,712
    Thanks
    1,080
    Thanked 1,472 Times in 1,107 Posts

    hahahahahaha makes me laugh i'm gonna patent naming a person.that's how i can drop out of college and not do anything but make a crap load :P

  6. #46
    What's Jailbreak?
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    This thread is driving me crazy!

    Patents 101 for all of the St. Clair haters. You cannot patent an invention unless it is patentable subject matter, novel, and non-obvious at the time of filing for a patent.

    Patentable subject matter includes processes, machines, manufactures, and/or compositions of matter. You cannot patent an abstract idea--such as a mathematical formula--or a naturally occurring phenomena--such as electricity (e.g., lightning). However, you can patent an embodiment of a mathematical formula that performs a practical function or a process for generating electricity.

    The invention must also be novel. In other words, you cannot patent something that is already known. For example, you could not patent "using a series of buttons to purchase a snack item" because this process is probably already known.

    In addition, the invention must be non-obvious in light of known inventions. In other words, if a prior invention includes element A, and another prior invention includes element B, you cannot patent a new invention that includes only elements A and B unless it would not have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine elements A and B to form the new invention.

    Also, the St. Clair patents were acquired from a company, Personal Computer Cameras (PCC), that intended to develop this technology but, instead, ran out of money and, as a result, needed to liquidate its assets, including these patents. PCC did, however, contribute research and development to the industry of digital cameras.

    The author of this article also misled you into believing that some of these patents were as simple as pushing a button to take a picture. That is absolutely false! All of the patents listed under the '459 patent are continuations of the '459 patent, which claimed taking digital photographs and storing them in solid-state memory. Because they are continuations of the '459 patent, these continuation patents are limited to the the technology claimed in the '459 patent. In other words, these continuation patents do not apply to traditional film cameras but, rather, only to digital cameras that store digital images in solid-state memory.

    Remember, the application for the '459 patent was filed in 1990. In fact, all of these patents will be expiring very soon. This technology may seem old now, but in 1990, it was cutting-edge.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jonbillsee For This Useful Post:

    L00i3 (12-07-2009), santaf (12-06-2009)

  8. #47
    Santa Claus, Theme Creator santaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    3,712
    Thanks
    1,080
    Thanked 1,472 Times in 1,107 Posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonbillsee View Post
    This thread is driving me crazy!

    Patents 101 for all of the St. Clair haters. You cannot patent an invention unless it is patentable subject matter, novel, and non-obvious at the time of filing for a patent.

    Patentable subject matter includes processes, machines, manufactures, and/or compositions of matter. You cannot patent an abstract idea--such as a mathematical formula--or a naturally occurring phenomena--such as electricity (e.g., lightning). However, you can patent an embodiment of a mathematical formula that performs a practical function or a process for generating electricity.

    The invention must also be novel. In other words, you cannot patent something that is already known. For example, you could not patent "using a series of buttons to purchase a snack item" because this process is probably already known.

    In addition, the invention must be non-obvious in light of known inventions. In other words, if a prior invention includes element A, and another prior invention includes element B, you cannot patent a new invention that includes only elements A and B unless it would not have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine elements A and B to form the new invention.

    Also, the St. Clair patents were acquired from a company, Personal Computer Cameras (PCC), that intended to develop this technology but, instead, ran out of money and, as a result, needed to liquidate its assets, including these patents. PCC did, however, contribute research and development to the industry of digital cameras.

    The author of this article also misled you into believing that some of these patents were as simple as pushing a button to take a picture. That is absolutely false! All of the patents listed under the '459 patent are continuations of the '459 patent, which claimed taking digital photographs and storing them in solid-state memory. Because they are continuations of the '459 patent, these continuation patents are limited to the the technology claimed in the '459 patent. In other words, these continuation patents do not apply to traditional film cameras but, rather, only to digital cameras that store digital images in solid-state memory.

    Remember, the application for the '459 patent was filed in 1990. In fact, all of these patents will be expiring very soon. This technology may seem old now, but in 1990, it was cutting-edge.
    i dont know why but i loved this thank you so much for this hahaha. you are so angry i love it

  9. #48
    What's Jailbreak?
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Actually 010 isn't going anywhere, as you tap the screen to take the picture, not press a button.

  10. #49
    My iPhone is a Part of Me JAG2621's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    510
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 58 Times in 45 Posts

    To me thats like filing a patent saying " A device to transport people and things with a gasoline powered engine and four wheels" Then suing every automobile manufacturers. The patents are ridiculous. Or " a device that is portable to connect to the internet" then lets sue all cell phone and laptop producers. I cannot believe that they winning the lawsuits. Oh well just my opinion.
    If anything was usefull a thanks would be great!

  11. #50
    Santa Claus, Theme Creator santaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    3,712
    Thanks
    1,080
    Thanked 1,472 Times in 1,107 Posts

    Yeah it seems that way ti us so it's rediculous butjonbillsee had a great point at the time it was craziness that we could do that stuff seriously same with automobiles how crazy was itthat now we could do that? Now it seems like an obvious thing but at the time not at all and with portable Internet devices

+ Reply
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts