Sprint Confirms Delay of HTC EVO LTE 4G
Top message: How to protest? by perdition
Replying to: How do we protest this absolute crime? by Haggard
Re: How do we protest this absolute crime?
Before you post a snarky response, you should make sure you're not ignorant of the facts.
HTC did not violate Apple's patents "again," it made the necessary changes after it was found to violate Apple's patents in December 2011. Even though the software no longer violates the patent, the phone is still being held up at customs while their compliance is verified. That, in itself, is pretty ridiculous since plenty of HTC phones have entered the US since being modified to comply with the patent in question. In short, this is not HTC's fault OR Apple's fault, it's custom's fault for doing an inadequate and inconsistent job.
That said, the patent in question is ridiculous in the first place. Recognizing an email address or phone number in text and turning it into an actionable link is not covered by the patent. A pop-up menu after clicking a link is not covered by the patent. Yet, putting those two things together is considered an invention? This patent fails the non-obviousness test of US patent law miserably, but our government and judicial system is so woefully uninformed about technological issues that it was upheld anyway.
HTC did not violate Apple's patents "again," it made the necessary changes after it was found to violate Apple's patents in December 2011. Even though the software no longer violates the patent, the phone is still being held up at customs while their compliance is verified. That, in itself, is pretty ridiculous since plenty of HTC phones have entered the US since being modified to comply with the patent in question. In short, this is not HTC's fault OR Apple's fault, it's custom's fault for doing an inadequate and inconsistent job.
That said, the patent in question is ridiculous in the first place. Recognizing an email address or phone number in text and turning it into an actionable link is not covered by the patent. A pop-up menu after clicking a link is not covered by the patent. Yet, putting those two things together is considered an invention? This patent fails the non-obviousness test of US patent law miserably, but our government and judicial system is so woefully uninformed about technological issues that it was upheld anyway.
Replies
No replies to this message
