

How Palm Designed Around Apple's iPhone Patents for the Pre - dominik
http://palmaddict.typepad.com/palmaddicts/2009/01/palms-sneaky-use-of-holes-in-apples-patenti-love-it.html

======
rufo
Engadget had a really great analysis of both companies' patent portfolio...
their conclusion was Apple has a handful that may put a squeeze on Palm, but
with a bare minimum of research into Palm's portfolio they came up with four
that the iPhone is a near-direct rip-off of, with hundreds more they hadn't
even delved into.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=454118> (News.YC)
[http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/28/apple-vs-palm-the-in-
dept...](http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/28/apple-vs-palm-the-in-depth-
analysis/) (direct link)

------
AndrewWarner
Workarounds are much easier than people expect. I was once pushed by a patent
troll who wanted me to pay for some patent that I was violating. My lawyers
told me that I had to pay and advised me to negotiate. (Lawyers seem to always
look for the easy way out.)

But my brother, who developed our site, spent some time looking at the patent
and figured out a way to do what we needed without violating the patent.

You can't give up because someone has a patent. Cleverness always wins.

------
greatreorx
I'm pretty sure this is incorrect. That section he is referring to in Apple's
patent is just the part where Apple describes possible ways their invention
might be used. In fact, if you read the intro to that section in the patent,
it says "However, it will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that
the present invention may be practiced without these specific details." The
patent claims are what's important and most of them don't hinge on whether or
not the gesture area displays a visual output.

~~~
dominik
You're correct that the claims are what matter.

The article, unfortunately, sensationalizes a bit and looks to the
specifications to show how Palm designed around Apple's patents. But Palm
didn't need to design around the specification. Palm only needed to design
around the claims. They did this as well, it turns out, but the article
doesn't highlight that.

------
metatronscube
Am I missing something? Apple never actually said that Apple are looking sue
Palm for any infringement. I remember it being a general statement about
competitors blatantly ripping them off. It wasn't directed at Palm.

And I tell you one 'hell of an organization to beat' is the company that on
their first attempt at a phone, came up with a device that everyone else are
now following as the way forward. Apple have nothing to worry about.

~~~
padmanabhan01
//And I tell you one 'hell of an organization to beat' is the company that on
their first attempt at a phone, came up with a device that everyone else are
now following as the way forward. Apple have nothing to worry about.

I totally agree

------
maximilian
I was reading the other day about how companies use patents like countries use
nuclear weapons: As a deterrent.

Palm probably has a few patents on mobile internet-enabled devices or some
such, which it could then use as a bargaining chip against Apple if need be.
They all carry around these patent portfolios and agree to play nice. At least
thats the way I see it working out.

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
The real loser in this scenario is the small disruptive company which wants to
break into the big leagues. They don't have the nukes so they don't get to
play.

~~~
dominik
Unless they happen to get a patent on their small, disruptive idea...

Caveat: And don't infringe on any of the nuclear arsenal the big leagues have.
And don't get bogged down in litigation to defend against infringement.
Fortunately it's usually much cheaper for the big leagues to license a patent
or buy a start-up outright than it is to try to bury them through litigation.

------
10ren
If their engineers and patent attorneys are really that well integrated, it's
a sign that Palm, Inc will be one hell of an organization to beat.

