三星：除了苹果这些不算专利的专利，我们都没抄

在日前针对苹果(Apple)控告三星(Samsung)手机侵犯专利权一案的法庭听证会上，来自三星的专家主张，苹果某项 iPhone 技术专利其实是抄袭旧PC时代的产品，该专利应属无效。 一 位三星专家证人在法庭上指出，1984年问世的DOS架构个人行事历应用程序Sidekick，所采用的技术与苹果专利编号647的快速连结(quick links)技术十分类似；该位专家并以1991年美国研究机构Xerox PARC的EmbeddedButtons软件开发案做为专利无效的例证。 苹果的快速链接专利描述了检测电话号码的方法，并会自动开启例如电话拨号器等相关的应用程序；在法庭上展示的Sidekick与EmbeddedButtons 两项软件工具功能大致相似，只不过所使用的是“古色古香”DOS时代纯文本接口。

三星专家指出，1984年问世的Sidekick 应用程序与2007年的iPhone专利技术雷同
KHJesmc

为 三星担任专家证人的美国北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)计算机科学系主任Kevin Jeffay表示，就算苹果的专利有效，三星的手机与Google的程序代码都没有侵犯该专利，三星手机程序代码与苹果的专利采用不同的技术。 “检 测与连结必须用分析服务器(analyzer server)以额外的方式完成，根据我的分析，在三星的手机中没有分析服务器或是动作处理器(actions processor)；”Jeffay指出，对于该项专利最简单的绕道方法(workaround)就是不要使用其中所叙述，提供用户选项的跳出式窗口 (pop-up window)。 三星专家证人指苹果通用搜寻专利无效 电 脑科技领域的资深工程师Brewster Kahle在法庭上短暂现身，他陈述了在1990年代初期主导开发的一项广域信息服务器(wide area information server，WAIS)项目：“WAIS系统的概念是能在同一时间进行本机与远程的数据搜寻。” 三 星采用了上述的早期版本网络服务器做为苹果专利号码959通用搜寻技术──搜寻手机本地数据与网络数据──的前例，担任三星专家证人的麻省理工学院 (MIT)计算机科学教授Martin Rinard并在陪审团前展示某个版本的WAIS软件，也能执行本地与远程数据的搜寻。 Rinard的证词还包括7,653,614号专利在内的另外两项专利，也可被考虑为苹果通用搜寻专利的技术前例；他举出市场研究报告显示，手机内的资料搜寻器有98%是扫描网络数据，并非本机数据：“这显示人们不会使用本机搜寻功能，几乎完全不会。” 第 三位三星专家证人则是提出另一款智能手机与一份研究报告，能证明苹果的172号滑动解锁(slide-to-unlock)专利无效。这位来自加拿大卡加立大学(University of Calgary)的教授Saul Greenberg指出，瑞典公司Neomode在2005年推出的N1手机，早在iPhone上市之前就已采用类似的解锁功能。 Greenberg并展示了一段视频，来自在1991年人机互动(Computer Human Interaction ，CHI)研讨会上针对滑动解锁功能所发表的一篇论文。 在 交叉诘问中，苹果律师Harold McElhinny 则表示，专利审查员已经看过来自N1手机与CHI研讨会的论文：“他们也有这样的信息，是因为苹果的专利律师提供的。”他并询问Greenberg，专利审查员是否在授予专利时出了错。对此Greenberg的回答是：“授予专利是他们的结论，但我认为他们出了差错…而这也是为什么我们会在这里。” 在 这场美国时间4月15日举行的法庭听证会中，最后一位三星专家证人指出苹果172号自动拼字校正(automatic spelling correction)专利是无效的；该位专家指出，专利编号7,880,730就是其技术前例。这位专家的证词将于下一次开庭时继续进行，估计整场诉讼的开庭还将持续到本月底。 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 编译：Judith Cheng 参考英文原文：Old DOS app surfaces at Apple v. Samsung，by Rick Merritt

相关阅读：
• “苹果你够了！”谷歌出面为三星撑腰
• 苹果三星专利诉讼战火恐波及Android？
• 苹果再告三星：打的就是你，与谷歌无关KHJesmc

{pagination} PC Prior Art Cited on iPhone Rick Merritt Old DOS app surfaces at Apple v. Samsung SAN JOSE, Calif. — Old PC-era products invalidate Apple's iPhone patents, Samsung experts claimed in testimony here Tuesday. Samsung cited Borland's Sidekick and WAIS servers as examples of prior art in its defense against two of Apple's five patent infringement claims. A Samsung expert witness said the Sidekick, a DOS-based personal organizer launched in 1984, used similar techniques as Apple's '647 patent on quick links. He also cited the 1991 EmbeddedButtons research project at Xerox PARC as prior art invalidating the patent. Apple's patent describes ways to detect telephone numbers, for example, and to call up relevant apps automatically, such as a phone dialer. Court demonstrations showed the Sidekick and EmbeddedButtons performing roughly similar tasks, though in the vintage world of DOS-era text interfaces. Borland's Sidekick, introduced in 1984, did things Apple patented for the 2007 iPhone, Samsung claimed. Borland's Sidekick, introduced in 1984, did things Apple patented for the 2007 iPhone, Samsung claimed. Even if the patents are valid, Samsung phones and Google code don't infringe on them, said Kevin Jeffay, chairman of the computer science department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a Samsung expert witness. The smartphone code uses different techniques from what Apple's patent describes, he said. "Detecting and linking has to be done in a particular way with an analyzer server, and in my analysis, there is no analyzer server or actions processor" in the Samsung phones, Jeffay said. The simplest workaround for the patent is not using the pop-up window it describes for offering users options. Next page: Handsets and web servers Handsets and web servers The computer veteran Brewster Kahle made a brief appearance at the trial. He described the wide area information server (WAIS) project he led in the early 1990s. "The idea of the WAIS system is it could be [searching] local and remote [data] at the same time." Samsung used early web servers as an example of prior art for Apple's '959 patent on universal search, a technique for searching local and web data. Jurors were shown a demonstration using a version of the WAIS software that also searched local and remote data sources. Martin Rinard, an MIT computer science professor and Samsung expert witness, created the WAIS demo. He also testified that two other patents, including No. 7,653,614, could be considered prior art for the Apple universal search patent. Rinard also underscored market research that showed 98% of mobile searchers scanned web data, not local data. "What it shows is people aren't using this local functionality, hardly at all." A third Samsung expert testified that another smartphone and a research paper invalidate Apple's '172 slide-to-unlock patent. Saul Greenberg, a professor at the University of Calgary, said the Neomode Inc. N1 phone used a similar unlocking feature before the iPhone. He showed a video from a paper presented at the 1991 Computer Human Interaction conference demonstrating a slide-to-unlock feature. Under cross-examination, Apple attorney Harold McElhinny said patent examiners reviewed information on both the N1 and the CHI paper. "They had that information because Apple's patent attorneys gave it to them." He asked Greenberg if the patent examiners were wrong in granting the patent. "That was their conclusion, but I think they got it wrong… and that's why we are here," he said. A final expert testifying Tuesday said Apple's '172 on automatic spelling correction is invalid. This expert cited prior art from patent No. 7,880,730. Testimony is scheduled to resume Friday. The case is expected to go to the jury at the end of the month.