Post # 14:Google's new slide to unlock patent

In my other post I talked about the legal process surrounding Apples Slide to unlock patent and how the publication of Google's new patent may provide relief to their partners. In this post, I will talk specially about Google's patent itself.

Below are part of the actual blueprints for the patent that were submitted in 2010:



Interestingly, in many ways the patent seems a more useful tool for the end user.


How it works:


Phone locked

1) Press the icon you want to access e.g. email

2) Hold and drag it to the unlock bar (detailed above)

3) Phone is unlocked and the icon is automatically opened simultaneously e.g. your email instantly opens up for use

Phone unlocked


Arguably, more important than these features however, is the voice-recognition-to-unlock method that was also filed at the same time. This is something completely new and innovative to the mobile space, in terms of unlocking devices. Perhaps we will see a repeat performance of the apple slide-to-unlock legal fiasco, but with future legal suits ensuing over voice-recognition-to-unlock software.

Post # 13:Legal Relief from Apple?

The publication of Google's patent to 'unlock mobile devices' may now provide some protection from Apples legal onslaught. In August 2010 Google filed paperwork detailing a method for unlocking a computer or mobile device with the users touch.

As many of us are now aware, Apple has been especially notorious for pressing legal action against their competitors on the basis of patent infringement. Specifically  Apple has been rigorousness y protecting its slide to unlock function over the past 18 months, resulting in multiple lawsuits. Many of these have been successful  For example, in Germany on February 16th 2012, it was ruled that Motorola's Android phones were infringing on Apple's unlock patent.

However, Google filed blueprints of a very similar patent in August 6, 2010, 11 days before Apple was awarded their slide-to-unlock feature. Now that this patent has been published, it will no doubt change the shape of the legal debates between Apple and their competition.

Most importantly, for Google's mobile partners, (specifically Motorola, Samsung and HTC) the publication of this patent will most probably provide legal standing and relief from further lawsuits.

Post # 12: VP8 Patent Infringement

Nokia is suing Andriod 2.3 over the operating systems ability to decode VP8 videos. Although, Nokia holds a series of video codec patents that VP8 may infringe upon, Google has been brought into the case because they technically own the patent. What is interesting, is that Google appears to have a lack of control over their patent, the decoding of VP8 videos, that one of their recently acquired companies created. 

However, it appears that Nokia does not have any FRAND licensing obligations: namely, Nokia does not have any  "Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory" grounds to participate in a standard-setting process related to VP8. As VP8 was created by a company Google acquired, in my opinion I assume that Nokia will lose the case, which will reach a resolution on 3rd May. Indeed, the UK is close to voting against Nokia, however the cause is still very open in Germany. 

Either way, it will be interesting to see how the case plays out, in front of the Chancery Division of the High Court of England and Wales, considering Google is acting as a third-party intervener.

Post # 11:Page Limit Fiasco

After reading a series of  interesting articles on ITC rulings and trends on http://www.itc337update.com, I came across a rather nit-picky piece of legislature  that in my opinion, demonstrates the overactive bureaucratic patent hearing system.

According to the law, Apple improperly bypassed the page limit their pre-hearing brief in violating Ground Rule 9.2 in Inv. No. 337-TA-808. The pre-hearing brief is 'meant to be a complete stand-alone document” that “shall not exceed one-hundred seventy-five (175) pages and shall have no more than fifty (50) pages of relevant attachments. Allegedly, because Apple explained some issues in the attachment part of the briefing, there was a motion to cut it. This tiny idiosyncracy in patent law, in this case seems entirely ludicrous. 

Post # 10: Design vs Utility

I came across a series of interesting articles that illuminated the fact that there are specific differences in Patent Filings.

These can be categorized into two sections; the way an invention looks (Design Patents) or the way an invention operates (Utility Patents). When you file your patent, it is up to you which avenue you decide to pursue. Obviously, a way a product works can sometimes impact on the way it looks and vice versa, however below are the main differences that I gauged from a series of articles. 

Design Patents:

Aesthetic components safe from imitation
Protection for 14 years after the grant date
No maintenance fees required
Allows filing in US

Utility Patents:

Functionality of product safe from imitation
Protection for 20 years after application date
Maintenance fees are required
Allows filing of “international application
naming various countries”

Post # 9: How much protection does a Provisional Patent give?

Potentially, as students, we are looking to put through Provisional Patent (or Patent Pending) applications on ideas we may have. Therefore, an examination of how much protection this gives us, is important.

The USPTO defines a Provisional Patent as:

'It allows filing without a formal patent claim, oath or declaration, or any information disclosure (prior art) statement. It provides the means to establish an early effective filing date in a later filed non-provisional patent application filed under 35 U.S.C. §111(a). It also allows the term “Patent Pending” to be applied in connection with the description of the invention.'

http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/types/provapp.jsp

But how much protection can a provisional patent give us as innovators, entrepreneurs and inventors?

A provisional patent application only offers proof that your invention was made by the day you filled out the application  Thus, if another application is filed for the same invention after yours, yours will be the only valid one. In this way, a provisional patent offers a way to ensure that if others attempt to copy your idea, you will have a legal standing in court. Importantly,  the only instance where provisional patent applications have any legal importance is during later litigation to defeat a competitor’s later priority date.