Feeds

back to article Apple throws sueball at China's patent office over Siri clone

Apple has decided to take on the might of the Chinese government over an on-going Siri patent dispute by throwing a sueball at the State Intellectual Property Office and a Shanghai-based technology firm. Cupertino decided on the lawsuit after it failed to declare Zhizhen Network Technology’s patent for Siri-like voice assistant …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

The term Quixotic comes to mind

I wonder if they hope to have China telecoms get on their side... Without some Chinese help, I don't see how they can get rid of this one.

Then again, this might be just to earn time. The idea of having to stop selling iPhones must be driving them nuts. Or to pay the troll.

Now that I come to think of it, I wonder how much the troll is asking. What's the limit, when you are against Apple, and a rigged system on your side?

0
8

Re: The term Quixotic comes to mind

"Then again, this might be just to earn time. The idea of having to stop selling iPhones must be driving them nuts. Or to pay the troll."

You read the article right? Apple IS the troll here, the Chinese firm patented the software YEARS before apple created/patented siri.

This just shows Apples regard for patents - they are nothing but a revenue stream via lawsuit, if they have a patent they'll sue you, if they don't have a patent they'll sue you anyway and if you're the one with the patent, guess what? they'll sue you. God forbid you make anything with rounded corners....

Who's the troll again?

16
1
Silver badge

Re: The term Quixotic comes to mind

To which I reply: Bull. Not only do I severely doubt there is more than a cursory similarity between the two systems, but also this type of technology should not be patentable.

And I don't change my opinion depending on whether I like the company in question or not.

4
5

Re: The term Quixotic comes to mind

Riddle me this-

If the Chinese firms patent is so dissimilar to siri then why is apple trying to have it declared invalid? if they aren't similar then it shouldn't matter to apple, right? because even if apple were taken to court over siri based on this patent the case would fail as the differences should stand out on their own merit, correct?

Why then is apple apparantly so worried?

7
0
Silver badge

Re: The term Quixotic comes to mind

"the differences should stand out on their own merit"

That would assume that a Chinese court is going to rule fairly between a Chinese company and an American company. Why would they?

0
3

Re: The term Quixotic comes to mind

court sees that firm 1 was granted patent years prior to firm 2 complaining awards victory to firm 1 = seems fair to me.

unlike certain rulings dealt out by American courts concerning disputes between American and foreign firms.

10
0
Roo
Silver badge

Re: The term Quixotic comes to mind

"That would assume that a Chinese court is going to rule fairly between a Chinese company and an American company. Why would they?"

The same applies with respect to Apple in the US, except in the US the lawyers cost more and the settlements are an order of magnitude larger. Net win for Apple on that one. Besides which Apple can quite easily manage to ship phones sans Siri, but I doubt it will even come to that.

3
0

invalid patent

thats something Apple know a lot about...

Maybe they want the patent ruled invalid so they can file a patent for it themselves.

6
0
Silver badge

Re: invalid patent

If you pay any attention to patent fights, the party being sued always tries to get the patent(s) declared invalid, or if that fails narrow the claims to the point where the suit can no longer stand. Samsung did the same in the suits against Apple, Apple did the same when Samsung countersued, and so on.

This is similar to the defendant in a civil suit always asking for the suit to be dismissed. It is just part of the legal dance.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Im sure the problem here is apply really invented it and for some reason delayed putting in the patent application.. In which time someone had ripped off their idea and put an application through...

Its not like apple hasnt real ever just copied everyone else and then told the world that because it now has an apple badge they invented it first.

Its hilarious after seeing the spec announcements of the S5, with crapple owners calling the biometric addition to the phone a blatent rip off, although they forget phones with biometrics had already been sold long before apple put one in a phone.

1
0

Apple NEVER claimed to be the first to put a fingerprint ID button on a phone. What they did do was see how lame the implementations were of the manufacturers who did do it were. So they bought the company who was considered ahead of the game, sunk millions more into R&D and came out with a phone that has the feature working as it should. This tech is not flawless but Apple now has the best record for doing it right. They do the same with a lot of technology, that's what they're know for.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

"although they forget phones with biometrics had already been sold long before apple put one in"

Actually, how about laptops with biometrics. Just because you're putting existing technology into a phone, that doesn't make it a new invention. Or patentable.

Same goes with voice recognition.

0
0
Bronze badge

"Im sure the problem here is apply really invented it and for some reason delayed putting in the patent application"

So if the Chinese compnay got a patent approve in 2004, and Apple invented it before, then assuming that it took a couple of years to develop, Apple must have created Siri before they started developing the iPhone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone

1
0

Apple didn't invent siri they bought it outright from siri inc in 2010.

Your argument is still valid but lets not add to the confusion by intimating that apple actually "invents" stuff ;-)

8
0

Did anyone read the article??

Although they do the same thing, according to apple they do it in a different way7, which is where they have a problem. The chinese are saying that even though they do it a different way , its still infringing!

1
1

Re: Did anyone read the article??

Isn't that the essence of the Apple case against Samsung? Sammy do the same thing in a different way but that means they are violating Apple patents.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Did anyone read the article??

Indeed,

And that works every time when used as a defence when Apple claim one of their patents has been infringed in a US court.

What's good for the goose, and all that.....

2
0
Bronze badge

Re: Did anyone read the article??

It's only Apple's claim that they implement it a different way. That is what the court needs to determine (Chinese this time, so not Apples home ground advantage).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Has Apple Met Its Match?

It would be grand to think that the world's biggest patent troll and propaganda master has met its match. I'm going to keep an eye on this one.

1
0
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Apple doesn't comment on ongoing legal disputes.

Too long, and redundant.

Apple doesn't comment is quite sufficient.

1
0
Roo
Silver badge
Windows

Re: Apple doesn't comment on ongoing legal disputes. @ JaitcH

"Apple doesn't comment on ongoing legal disputes.

Too long, and redundant."

Actually not redundant at all, because Apple does comment on ongoing legal disputes, they couldn't keep their mouths shut vs. Samsung. I think the author may have been aiming for sarcasm.

1
0

"During that case Apple’s lawyers maintained that although the two products are designed to perform similar tasks they employ different underlying technology. "

Wait, Apple is using a defense that it is usually litigating AGAINST???

Score one for legal irony.

3
0
This topic is closed for new posts.