The Next Step in Apple's Thermonuclear War Against Android

I'd love to see control of the "mobile space" be in the hands of individuals instead of large, for-profit and often evil companies. Clearly mobile computing is here to stay. If it wasn't then companies like apple and google wouldn't be fighting so hard for control.<p>Imagine a decentralized app store where people can make a living without having to deal with apple's ridiculous review process or ideas of what's appropriate. I suppose the major challenge is getting all the non-geeks into this ecosystem and away from iTunes and other privately owned app stores.<p>This is obviously wishful thinking. However given the importance of mobile computing going forward I think it's worth imagining the best mobile ecosystem possible.

&#62; These Four Horsemen of the Android Apocalypse are patents for what Apple claims are “key” product features -- “Slide to Unlock,” “Text Correction,” “Unified Search,” and “Special Text Detection.<p>Wasn't "Slide to Unlock" invalidated in the process against HTC?

Does anyone see groklaw as a credible source any more? They used to have good reporting, but all I've seen since the Apple v Samsung verdict is spittle-flecked ranting.

somehow Apple reminded me of monsanto. Maintain your dominant position on the market by agressively suing everybody.

Groklaw links to a BBC interview with the jury foreman.<p>&#62; we as jurors were sworn to abide by the rules and the stipulations in law as they exist today, at the time we made the decision.<p>Can't jurors just ignore laws that they feel are unjust?

Why would you need bounce back at all? It's one of those things that gives iOS it's personallity, you could definately make a touch based user interface without bounce back.

They ask themselves why Apple went for Samsung's head. It's pretty obvious... they don't want an Apple vs. Google. It's much easier to win vs Samsung (a foreign company, by the way) and thus establish some valuable jurisprudence. Google was recently said to be getting ready to sue Apple, it's only natural because Apple's target was always Google and it's now only a matter of time before we get to that. It's a bit like WW2 when Germany started invading eastern countries. It was in no small part a preemptive move, because eastern Europe being occupied by Germany or the USSR was only a matter of time. It would have been Russia if it hadn't been Germany. We might still see some preemptive moves by Google before Apple finally sues Google directly.

I'm very much against software patents, at least regarding the UI. But the proposed Bouncebackandforth workaround is how the iOS Photos app works.

One can't help but suspect these players are acting in concert, to manufacture the most ridiculous exercises of technology patent abuse, so as to motivate the public and Congress to advocate for a reconsideration of the whole mess...

<i>For those who would like to read them, here are all the Apple patents in play in this case:<p><pre><code> 5,946,647 (the “’647 Patent”), System and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data 6,847,959 (the “’959 Patent”), Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system 8,046,721 (the “’721 Patent”), Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image 8,074,172 (the “’172 Patent”), Method, system, and graphical user interface for providing word recommendations 8,014,760 [Part 2] (the “’760 Patent”), Missed telephone call management for a portable multifunction device 5,666,502 (the “’502 Patent”), Graphical user interface using historical lists with field classes 7,761,414 (the “’414 Patent”), Asynchronous data synchronization amongst devices 8,086,604 (the “’604 Patent”), Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system* </code></pre> </i>- Short form summary of the IP. Useful for reference.

Some companies will have to pay a slightly higher per device royalty than they had wanted to and/or remove/modify some functionality. It's the Apocalypse! It's Thermonuclear War!