Google can't use finger-fumble patent to poke Apple - Trade panel

The US International Trade Commission (ITC) has declared that a Motorola "finger slip" patent that stopped users dialling wrong numbers is invalid. That means it cannot be asserted against Apple or used to ban or block Apple products by the patent's new owner, Google. The ITC ruling by Judge Thomas Pender, reported by Reuters …

[Bronek Kozicki]

Nobody can get any traction against Apple

that is worrying. The assumption is always that the regulator is not siding with ... well, sides. If this is not true, that raises the question about validity of the regulator itself, in this case International Trade Commission.

Of course it might be that all the cases brought against Apple in ITC were trivial and non-patentable, but nevertheless the unusual statistics raises a question, quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Nobody can get any traction against Apple

unless of course that Bloomberg report was just sourgrapes

[Crisp]

Re: quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Are you sassing me in eskimo talk?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Nobody can get any traction against Apple

Why is it worrying? surely it is more worrying that the company who dominate the search and smartphone markets would be allowed to eliminate competition with patents.

[Steven Roper]

Re: Nobody can get any traction against Apple

This is exactly why judges, magistrates, and those selected for jury service, should not be allowed to own shares in private or public companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly Apple is bulletproof in the ITC's eyes.

As reading this patent, it DOES to me look like innovation that is patentable and doesn't have prior art, unlike much of the stuff Apple has (slide to unlock, something doors have had for hundreds of years..., rounded corners, give me a break...)

America yet again showing just how screwed up it really is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Clearly Apple is bulletproof in the ITC's eyes.

Of course had Apple been asserting the patent against Google, you'd be happy wouldn't you?

[Mike Moyle]

Re: Clearly Apple is bulletproof in the ITC's eyes.

@ Barry Shitpeas

Oh, come on... You know that if the "recover from a mistake" patent had been an Apple one you would have claimed it was invalid due to prior art because people have had 'recover from a stumble' for millions of years, so it was obvious.

[Richard Jones 1]

Please correct the name Do you mean the ATC?

Clearly the Domestic Trade Commission of the USA is wrongly named it should either be the DTCUSA (Only) or perhaps more accurately the Apple Trade Promotion Commission either ATC or ATPC?

[Destroy All Monsters]

Someone cares about Apple outside of California?

"it's going to have to be in a foreign forum where it doesn't have the clout or the cachet it has at the ITC or the northern district of California"

The Asian Landmass (funnily described by Andrew as gearing up on IP enforcement) DOES NOT CARE.

[Valeyard]

Invalid patents

What's the point of owning a patent if it's not a guarantee of protection? can they now sue whoever approved it?

[Steve Todd]

Re: Invalid patents

The grant of a patent doesn't guarantee that people can't challenge it's validity. The Fandroids around here get excited every time one of Apple's patents is challenged, it cuts both ways.

[Steve Todd]

Hmm, typical Leach article

Court/trade body finds against Apple = law good. Court/trade body finds for Apple = biased, bribed etc.

The details of WHY the judge found as he did are due at a later date. Perhapse we should wait until we know the answer to that question.

[frank ly]

Re: Hmm, typical Leach article

Oh dear; when did she stop being 'Anna'?

[Bronek Kozicki]

Re: Hmm, typical Leach article

I think you missed the point - Court/trade body finds for Apple every time = biased etc.

[Steve Todd]

Re: Hmm, typical Leach article

What, Apple wins at the ITC every time, like this one? http://www.tuaw.com/2012/03/17/apple-loses-itc-ruling-against-motorola-mobility-in-patent-infri/

Since that disproves the theory can we expect that we'll hear no more of it from Ms Leach?

[Anal Leakage]

Re: Hmm, typical Leach article

Downvotes FOR JUSTICE

[ratfox]

Good

The only good patent is a dead patent.

[FunkyEric]

Re: Good

The only good patent lawyer is a dead patent lawyer.

There I've corrected that for you.

[Anonymous Cowerd]

America's trade commission

is biased towards American companies?

No shit, Sherlock.

[Tom 38]

Re: America's trade commission

Is Illinois no longer in America? Has Canada invaded the Great Lakes and I missed the article?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: America's trade commission

There's no such thing as US company, Japanese company etc unless they are privately owned. Publicly traded companies can be owned by foreign countries but be based in the US.

Samsung for instance is 55% owned by foreign companies.

[Kevin Johnston]

Self-evident wisdom

The title itself gives away the plot....The US International Trade Commission.....

Rather like the Baseball World Series which, last time I looked had one non-US team and none from outside the North American continent

[Omgwtfbbqtime]

Re: Self-evident wisdom

That would be because most of the rest of the world stopped playing rounders at age 10.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nowt wrong with rounders

especially when played with handgrenades....

[Dave 126]

Re: Self-evident wisdom

>Baseball World Series

It seems there were two competing leagues which both allowed their winners to be called "American Champions", so a more grandiose name was required.

http://roadsidephotos.sabr.org/baseball/name.htm

It reminds me of the Miss World, Miss Universe and Miss Earth competitions in competition.

[Destroy All Monsters]

Re: Self-evident wisdom

Well, there is some lass that can still be elected Miss Multiverse.

[Toothpick]

A story about Google....

.. that is very quiet in the comments department. I wonder why?

[Dave 126]

Re: A story about Google....

Happy Holidays!

[James 100]

Karma?

I'm not too convinced of the merits of this patent either - but when a big company plonks down billions to buy and gut a whole company, sacking a load of staff just so they can asset-strip the patents to use as ammunition in a patent-war, there is a certain karmic balance when one of those patents falls apart afterwards.

Compete with products, not lawyers! (Which of course goes for most if not all of the current phone outfits, I know...)