The reason so many are upset, including myself, about this particular case has nothing to do with the merits, or lack there in, of this case. The reason is that Samsung attempted to remove blindness accessibility from the only product which has full accessibility built-in (yes, Google is catching up).
As one of the reviewers quoted in the article stated, this is the public relations equivalent of Samsung punching itself in the face. In the blindness community, Freedom Scientific did something similar, albeit significantly less intense, when they sued Freedom Box over its name because Freedom is the first half of Freedom Scientific. Freedom Box, being such a smaller company at that time changed its name to Serotech to avoid all the expense involved in defending itself legally. It then successfully rebranded itself. After a while, Freedom Scientific recovered its positive perception in the community. Any company which owns a patent or copyright must actively pursue protecting its patent. If it does not do so, when the patented concept becomes ubiquitous, it becomes public domain. In this case, Samsung made a huge public relations blunder whilst actively protecting its patents. This blunder is being perceived as though Samsung would deliberately ruin accessibility for a significantly disadvantaged group of people. Considering that Samsung does not actively incorporate accessibility in their consumer electronics products, do they have any concern whatsoever for the blind? I personally hope that, as Samsung works to clear its name from this, the company starts adding accessibility into its products for the purpose of repairing its public reputation. After all, Samsung called for the removal of the ability to turn VoiceOver on and off in the iOS devices using an accessible method. Of course, had Samsung won the lawsuit, iOS devices, in order to comply, may well have become somewhat less accessible. As Apple is now known for iPhone accessibility, this may well have damaged Apple's reputation which might have given Samsung a boost in its reputation. David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA Email: dchitten...@gmail.com Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 Sent from my iPhone On 24/02/2013, at 9:15, Aman Singer <aman.sin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. > The patent does not simply apply to the home button, at least as > originally submitted. Despite that, I would say that any reaction at > the moment is a bit overblown, after all, the court did stay the > action on this patent for now with a plain hint that the ruling in the > federal court was likely to turn out badly for Samsung. In any case, > from reading the patent > (the US version of the patent, anyway, I don't read German, the patent > seems to have other issues, it is very wide and I know of two products > which did this even before the Korean patent which the American and > German patents are based on was issued back in 1999. Samsung has > already narrowed the patent significantly, but according to the judge, > eeven the narrowed patent is unlikely to succeed. I haven't seen the > narrowed patent description, and don't know where it can be found > online if it can be found at all. The US patent is at > http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6937700.PN.&OS=PN/6937700&RS=PN/6937700 > The german patent, for those of us who know that language, is at > http://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/pat/PatSchrifteneinsicht?docId=DE000010040386B4&page=1&dpi=150&lang=de > and a blogger's description of the stay and reasons for it is at > http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/02/german-court-stays-samsungs-voiceover.html > The blogger, Florian Mueller, has a bunch of interesting links with > his own views about the case and seems to link to source documents > when he can, which is great. I got the links I pasted in above from > his site. Personally, I suspect this is unimportant, I would be > surprised if Samsung's patent was upheld, if Apple were found to have > infringed it and, even if those two astonishing things come to pass, > if Samsung and Apple don't work something out as a licensing > arrangement. Remember that this is all part of a much larger situation > which is worldwide and which is about many other patents/issues. > Aman > > > > > On 2/23/13, Robert Fenton <robert.fen...@samobile.net> wrote: >> The article that was quoted here was originally published by the BBC. >> However, several of the financial and technology publications have also >> picked this up. There's no question that the thoughts behind the article are >> legitimate. >> >> Bob Fenton >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 2013-02-23, at 12:51 PM, David Chittenden <dchitten...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I do not know. I received the message from another list. I'm sure if you >>> do a google search, you will be able to find the publication. >>> >>> David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA >>> Email: dchitten...@gmail.com >>> Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 24/02/2013, at 2:30, Craig Werner <coffeeb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>>> write? >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden <dchitten...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>>> <blind-democr...@octothorp.org> >>>>>> >>>>>> Even if Samsung does not succeed in their action, the very fact >>>>>> they've >>>>>> even tried it guarantees I will never buy a Samsung product. >>>>>> And to think Samsung was instrumental in establishing the guide dog >>>>>> school >>>>>> in Korea. >>>>>> Unconscionable. >>>>>> Alice >>>>>> Samsun g struggles to block iPhone function for the blindBy Leo >>>>>> Kelion >>>>>> >>>>>> Technology reporter >>>>>> >>>>>> The VoiceOver function is designed to help >>>>>> blind and partially sighted consumers use the >>>>>> iPhone Samsung has suffered a setback in its >>>>>> effort to win an iPhone ban based on a function >>>>>> making its software accessible to blind people. >>>>>> >>>>>> The South Korean firm had sought an injunction in >>>>>> a German court arguing Apple's VoiceOver >>>>>> screen-access facility infringed one of its patents. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, the judge has ordered the case to be >>>>>> suspended pending another ruling that could invalidate Samsung's >>>>>> claim. >>>>>> >>>>>> Disability campaigners had expressed concern about the case. >>>>>> >>>>>> Apple's VoiceOver function is used by blind and >>>>>> partially-sighted people to hear a description of >>>>>> what the iPhone is showing by touching its screen. >>>>>> >>>>>> The software covers text and icons including >>>>>> audio descriptions of the battery level and >>>>>> network signal. It also allows the phones to be >>>>>> operated via Braille-based add-ons. >>>>>> >>>>>> Samsung had argued that Apple had failed to >>>>>> licence a patent it owned which describes >>>>>> pressing a button to make a handset describe its >>>>>> display. The basis for this was that VoiceOver >>>>>> could be switched on by triple-clicking the iPhone's home button. >>>>>> >>>>>> Apple declined to comment. >>>>>> >>>>>> A statement from Samsung said: "For decades, we >>>>>> have heavily invested in pioneering the >>>>>> development of technological innovations in the >>>>>> mobile industry, which have been constantly reflected in our products. >>>>>> >>>>>> "We continue to believe that Apple has infringed >>>>>> our patented mobile technologies, and we will >>>>>> continue to take the measures necessary to >>>>>> protect our intellectual property rights." >>>>>> >>>>>> 'Regrettable in the extreme' >>>>>> >>>>>> Patent consultant Florian Muller, who was first >>>>>> to report the Mannheim Court's decision, questioned Samsung's tactics. >>>>>> >>>>>> "If Samsung had only requested monetary >>>>>> compensation in this action, it would have made a >>>>>> much better choice than by trying to achieve, >>>>>> through the pursuit of an injunction, the >>>>>> deactivation or (more realistically) degradation >>>>>> of the voiceover functionality Apple provides to >>>>>> its German customers," he wrote on his blog. >>>>>> >>>>>> The British Computer Association of the Blind >>>>>> said it was worried such an important feature might be threatened. >>>>>> >>>>>> "A lack of access to information is arguably the >>>>>> biggest potential barrier to inclusion in society >>>>>> for blind and partially-sighted people," a spokesman told the BBC. >>>>>> >>>>>> "If something as important as access to telephone >>>>>> technology had been blocked by the actions of one >>>>>> company over another the consequences for blind >>>>>> people everywhere would be regrettable in the extreme." >>>>>> >>>>>> The Wall Street Journal's AllThingsD tech site was more damning. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Leaving aside the ethics of asserting a patent >>>>>> against a feature designed to help the blind, >>>>>> this is unwise," wrote John Paczkowski. >>>>>> >>>>>> "It's the PR equivalent of punching yourself in >>>>>> the face. Samsung has now identified itself as a >>>>>> company willing to accept the loss of >>>>>> accessibility for the vision-impaired as >>>>>> collateral damage in its battle with Apple." >>>>>> >>>>>> Apple and Samsung have fought a number of patent >>>>>> cases against each other in courts across the world. >>>>>> >>>>>> The biggest award involved a US jury ordering >>>>>> Samsung to pay Apple $1.05bn (£688m) in damages. >>>>>> The judge in the case later rejected Apple's call >>>>>> for the sum to be increased and a sales ban on some Samsung handsets. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Blind-Democracy mailing list >>>>>> blind-democr...@octothorp.org >>>>>> http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >>>>> Google >>>>> Group. >>>>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups >>>>> "VIPhone" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an >>>>> email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >>>> Google Group. >>>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >>>> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "VIPhone" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >>> Google Group. >>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >>> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "VIPhone" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google >> Group. >> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >> http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "VIPhone" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google > Group. > To search the VIPhone public archive, visit > http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. > To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "VIPhone" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google Group. To search the VIPhone public archive, visit http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "VIPhone" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
