

A US judge rules Samsung 'infringed' Apple's auto-complete text patent - SifJar
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25842637

======
bushido
This is disgusting. I have had auto-complete on my mobile devices for years.
Easily as far back as 2003.

Its baffling that this patent was awarded. Even more so that technology
innovators are being so anti-competitive and stifling innovation.

~~~
Pxtl
I'm confused how Samsung's lawyers failed to show prior art or the fact that
it was an obvious development. Autocomplete is on every IDE worth a bean,
every T9-based phone... even if iOS was the first to bring it to the touch-
screen, that's not exactly a huge leap.

------
josteink
This is just anti-competitive warfare and plain patent-trolling.

Apple scored 1 billion playing the trolling game last time, for a list over-
scroll effect and rounded corners no less.

How much will it get this? Two billion? Who knows, but last time around they
clearly got enough to buy another judge.

Utterly disgusting.

~~~
rayiner
It's not patent trolling because Apple is suing to defend its design as
implemented in an actual product.[1] Moreover, I'm going to guess there is
more to the patent than just "autocomplete for touch devices" considering
Apple is just seeking bans on old Samsung Galaxy devices. Samsung did some
very shady ripping off the iPhone in those models, so it wouldn't be
surprising if they managed to infringe on Apples' patent even taken very
narrowly and specifically.

The usual arguments against patent trolling don't apply to Apple v. Samsung,
in my opinion. There is nothing "innovative" about Samsung's early Android
devices: they were copy-cat designs that ripped-off Apple in order to get
quickly to market and take advantage of the mindshare around Apple's product.
That's not a business tactic that should be encouraged.

[1] "Trolling" means to lie in wait for an unsuspecting passer-by, like a
bridge troll. There was nothing "unsuspecting" about what Samsung did. This
document was damning in the original suit: [http://bgr.com/2012/08/08/apple-
samsung-patent-lawsuit-inter...](http://bgr.com/2012/08/08/apple-samsung-
patent-lawsuit-internal-report-copy-iphone).

~~~
harryh
> That's not a business tactic that should be encouraged.

Why not?

~~~
rayiner
1) People broadly tend to perceive it as "unfair."

2) It tends to hurt American companies, who have a competitive advantage in
design, which is easily copied, and help Korean/Taiwanese/Chinese companies,
who have a competitive advantage in manufacturing, which is not easily copied.
Apple versus Samsung is of course the paradigmatic example of this.

3) It tends to lead to commoditization of markets which I don't think is
particularly good for innovation. When you can't compete on design, because
someone else can easily copy it, the industry just becomes a race to become
the biggest/most outsourced/most vertically integrated. And once that
vertically integrated leviathan emerges, it is unassailable. It can destroy
everyone on price and also copy any competitive design that gets traction with
consumers. Samsung in the Android space is the paradigmatic example of that.

I probably have an atypical, at least among HN-ers, view of the cell phone
industry. I view Apple as the underdog, fighting to keep the industry from
turning into something like the PC industry, where innovation is more or less
dead because everyone is too busy fighting for the thin scraps of profit that
are available.

------
coob
Yes yes, software patents are ridiculous. But they are a part of the current
legal and business system and until that changes (and it should), Apple or
anyone else would be idiotic not to play the game as it exists.

For those complaining that autocomplete is obvious and this patent is
'disgusting', they quite clearly have not read it [1].

The patent describes exactly how Apple's autocomplete implementation works,
specifically on a touch screen device with a soft keyboard, right down to when
things should appear depending on what punctuation is typed in and how new
words not in the dictionary should be added. This is not a 'hurr-durr we
invented autocomplete' patent, this is 'this is exactly how our autocomplete
works' patent.

[1] [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=H...](http://patft.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=8,074,172.PN.&OS=PN/8,074,172&RS=PN/8,074,172)

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
> specifically on a touch screen device with a soft keyboard

But also rather ambitiously includes the use of autocomplete using a physical
keyboard.

> _7\. The method of claim 2, wherein the keyboard is a physical keyboard that
> is not a part of the touch screen display._

Which appears to describe a nearly identical system to the one used on
www.google.com and in many other places; also for which examples of prior
usage almost certainly exist. At first glance, I don't see anything that would
prevent this patent from being asserted against a laptop manufacturer.

~~~
podperson
The physical keyboard refers to claim 2, basically implying that the system
for responding to suggestions (with gestures) applies whether the initial
typing was done on the glass or virtual keyboard. So it's not making such a
sweeping claim.

In any event, specific claims can be thrown out as appropriate.

------
gopher1
Meanwhile auto-completes have been around for far longer. Yet another
ridiculous patent gets approved.

I'm sorry but I don't see any meaningful technical innovation by bringing it
to a mobile touch screen.

~~~
ryanhuff
Having auto-complete is not the issue. You have to look at the patent claims,
which would describe a specific approach. In this case, it seems to involve
Apple's specific approach to auto-complete when paired with a touch screen
interface.

~~~
bushido
That is true. AND even more infuriating.

I wonder if I could apply for a patent for sidebar designs and widgets (for
increasing interactivity, customization, conversions etc.). Oh wait those have
already been applied for and approved, for example:

[https://www.google.com/patents/US8209622](https://www.google.com/patents/US8209622)

------
ohwp
I'm reading the patent and can't believe it was approved.

Maybe I don't understand the patent but it seems Apple patented that the auto-
complete suggestions are shown under the input field.

So this is all about interaction design.

~~~
Pxtl
Samsung has good lawyers and deep pockets so there _must_ be a lot more to it.
Autocomplete is _not_ a novel invention from 2007.

~~~
marcosdumay
The deep pockets and good lawyers couldn't make the judge even look into
Samsung's evidence the last time.

I doubt there is anything more to it, but that's just a preconceived notion
after reading a couple (literaly, 2) of other Apple patents.

------
SifJar
Within the article, it shows this image [1] stating that this image "of
Samsung's user interface" was included in the ruling. This image does NOT show
Samsung's (TouchWiz) UI, but rather stock Android, including the AOSP
messaging app and keyboard.

[1]
[http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72438000/png/_72438181...](http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72438000/png/_72438181_samsungauto.png)

EDIT: On further reading, this is a screenshot from a Galaxy Nexus, which is
indeed produced by Samsung, but which runs completely Google Android, not
Samsung's TouchWiz interface. Seeing as this is a software complaint, it
should be directed at Google, NOT Samsung, who have little/nothing to do with
the software on a Nexus device.

~~~
josephlord
"... Seeing as this is a software complaint, it should be directed at Google,
NOT Samsung, who have little/nothing to do with the software on a Nexus
device."

It is imported (attached to hardware) by Samsung so why should it not be their
legal problem? Now you would hope that the software's provider would indemnify
you and/or fight the legal battle on your behalf but that is for
Samsung/Google to sort out not the company allegedly being infringed.

Note that I currently have not looked at the patent or this case in detail and
I don't yet have a position on validty, infringement or even know if this is
Samsung's own software or Google's.

[Edit - Fixed: "so why should be their legal problem."

~~~
bgaluszka
> It is imported (attached to hardware) by Samsung so why should it not be
> their legal problem?

Following that path, do you think hardware manufacturer is responsible for
pre-installed software e.g. Asus for Windows, and that companies should sue
Asus instead of Microsoft?

~~~
josephlord
Yes. But Microsoft will indemnify their customers (and license or take on the
complainant in court) I believe (I'm not party to those contracts so that may
be wrong) unlike Google with it's Android customers.

------
Fuxy
Lol, old Nokia 'brick' phones had auto-complete this is completely ridiculous.

Does that mean that now that every phone uses a touch screen no other phone
can have auto-complete functionality?

------
hardwaresofton
Is it me or is it impossible for Samsung to win judiciary battles against
Apple in the US.

------
josephlord
Note that from my understanding the infringement aspect has been decided but
the validity of the patent still needs determination by the court. Apple needs
to prevail on both to get an injuction or damages.

Also note that it isn't for all auto-complete systems but a particular
approach for touchscreens. See the patent [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=H...](http://patft.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=8,074,172.PN.&OS=PN/8,074,172&RS=PN/8,074,172)
or other comments on this thread.

Finally as others point out it is not trolling even if you still think it is
abusive use of patents. Patent trolls are companies that have patents that
they don't practice themselves that they wait and hide until a juicy target
adopts it then they wait under their bridge a little more until it is hard for
the target to stop using it then they jump out.

Edit: The BBC op seem to have mangled this article in an attempt to make it
accessible (or because the journalist didn't fully read it):
[http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/01/us-court-finds-samsung-
to...](http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/01/us-court-finds-samsung-to-infringe-
one.html)

------
veganarchocap
More mindless industry stifling courtesy of Apple. They're going around suing
everyone because they know they're in decline, because they're running out of
their own good ideas.

Like a dying star, they're violently trying to implode everything around it.

------
smackfu
Yet another part of the mess of software patents is that it took four years
from this patent being filed in 2007 to it being granted in 2011. How are
companies supposed to operate in that kind of environment?

~~~
belgianguy
They aren't, that's the whole point of it. Increase Android's (or any other
competition that isn't Apple or Windows Phone) Total Cost of Ownership, by
adding layer after layer of frivolous patent licensing.

Now Microsoft and Apple even own their own patent troll (Rockstar Bidco) and
they plan (or already have) made plans to split the patents over many shell
companies, which can pass the patents along to each other like a merry-go-
round, giving each plenty opportunities to sue a company time after time.

Android has a low cost of ownership at the moment which makes it interesting
for OEMs. If Apple, Microsoft, Rockstar Bidco or any other trolls keep on
attacking Android, the balance will tip over back to Microsoft for the
'accessible' OS that OEMs will want to license (or risk patent attacks of the
likes of giant trolls like Rockstar Bidco), opening the door for them to claim
all the ground that Android had to cede, and give or take a few years you'd
get the same thing as on the Desktop: Apple small marketshare but high
profitability, Microsoft high marketshare which compensates less profit
margins. But the open mobile development spirit will be dead, as worst case
it'll be a minefield with more trolls than innovators, as the former will
deplete the market they're in until it's no longer profitable.

Oracle went after the development (break the programming language -> break the
platform), Apple went after Samsung (break their biggest manufacturer -> break
the platform) Microsoft went after the other OEMs, a bit more stealthy, but
they too have attacked Motorola, HTC directly or through subsidiaries. (Patent
tax the OEMs -> force them off Android to their own OS)

Anyway, that's how I see it, and it's not getting any prettier anytime soon.
Alas, this is all perfectly 'legal'. So I foresee much more lawsuits that'll
strangle innovation and limit mobile software development to the 'happy few',
unless the USPTO changes (unlikely) or SCOTUS comes up with a solution to this
unholy mess.

------
sentenza
I recently listened to a podcast in which they discussed that some Lightning-
to-HDMI adapters sold by Apple had an ARM board inside which could actually
run operating systems.

If it is possible to patent something trivial just because it is now on mobile
or in the browser, then I CALL DIBS on patenting every trivial algorithm that
exists out there, but "run on a cable adapter".

~~~
loceng
You've got to pay into the system in order to solidify the dibs - which is
what big companies do because they can afford to.

------
zerop
Has apple patented auto-complete feature on touch screen devices. What if my
app auto completes text. Is that infringement.. please help

~~~
SifJar
Seeing as they appear to have gone after Samsung, and not Google, whose
keyboard also has this functionality (and in fact, an image of the Google
keyboard appears to have been used in the ruling, referred to as an image of
Samsung's), it seems more like a specific attack on Samsung with anything they
can find, rather than them tracking down anyone infringing on that specific
patent. There are literally hundreds of keyboards in the Play Store that have
this functionality, as well as it being a staple feature of every modern
mobile OS platform. I doubt they'll care much about your app TBH. You should
be safe enough.

~~~
wilecoyote
I believe part of the reason is that by suing Samsung, with direct (and
substantial) revenue and profits from these devices it is more straightforward
for Apple to demonstrate both infringement and damages. The case probably also
becomes more straightforward for a jury. In addition, (though this may not be
as much of factor here as Apple is simultaneously suing most of the Android
device manufacturers) IP lawsuits often begin by targeting weaker parties with
a greater chance of victory to establish early precedents before taking on
larger or more difficult cases.

------
SifJar
The article also mentions blocking the sale of the Galaxy Nexus and the early
Galaxy Note models; the GN has certainly not been available for purchase (new)
for quite a while now, and I'm sure early Notes probably aren't too abundantly
available either.

------
shaneofalltrad
Another reason to support open source projects, with goals of taking away
power and money from the companies who monopolize the market. I was "thinking"
about going MAC/iOS recently for development and this just helped me change my
mind.

------
asadotzler
Giant US corporation vs giant Korean corporation in a U.S. court. Yeah,
that'll be totally fair.

