Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Probably not, it will just become a little less convenient. David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA Email: dchitten...@gmail.com Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 Sent from my iPhone On 24/02/2013, at 3:50, Jenifer Barr wrote: > If this actually is happening, but will happen. Will voice over go away? > > Jenifer Barr > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 23, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Ricardo Walker wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Its a BBC article. You can find it here. >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21552733 >> >> Ricardo Walker >> rica...@appletothecore.info >> Twitter:@apple2thecore >> www.appletothecore.info >> >> On Feb 23, 2013, at 8:30 AM, Craig Werner wrote: >> >>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>>> >>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> Samsung 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
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
If this actually is happening, but will happen. Will voice over go away? Jenifer Barr Sent from my iPhone On Feb 23, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Ricardo Walker wrote: > Hello, > > Its a BBC article. You can find it here. > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21552733 > > Ricardo Walker > rica...@appletothecore.info > Twitter:@apple2thecore > www.appletothecore.info > > On Feb 23, 2013, at 8:30 AM, Craig Werner wrote: > >> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? >> >> Craig >> >> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>> >>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> Samsung 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 extr
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
I don't think the fact that this was brought up in a German court should be considered sneaky. I doubt very much Samsung chose to bring this patent up in a German court just to avoid the scrutiny of blind consumers in the US. This may be unique to a German or European patent. It's also part of a larger patent battle between Samsung and Apple being waged in Europe and the US. Furthermore, Apple and Samsung sell quite a few smart phones in Europe,and there are quite a few blind people in Europe as well. On 23/02/13 01:29, Frank Ventura wrote: > Wow, if I am reading this correctly Samsung's claim is that tripple > clicking a button to turn VO on or off violates its patents. So they're > saying that pressing a button to turn on a feature is patented? Now > that's kind of broad isn't it? Of course, there is so much more at stake > here. Apple has accessibility onboard to maintain educational and > government contracts. Take that away from them and you can really drive > a stake through Apple's heart. And, doing it in a German court, largely > off of the radar screen of most US consumers is really pretty sneaky. > > Frank Ventura > Email: frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com > <mailto:frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com> > Voicemail: 781 492-4262 > Imessage: frankmvent...@mac.com <mailto:frankmvent...@mac.com> > > *Sent from my Mac Book Air* > > > > On Feb 23, 2013, at 1:55 AM, David Chittenden <mailto:dchitten...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> >>> *Subject:* *VoiceOver threatened by Samsung* >>> *Reply-To:* Blind Democracy Discussion List >>> mailto: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 >>> Samsung 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 >>&g
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Hi, I doubt it very much. They would just be duplicating the efforts of Talkback already found in Android. Ricardo Walker rica...@appletothecore.info Twitter:@apple2thecore www.appletothecore.info On Feb 23, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Philip S wrote: > Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing > some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from > Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? > Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone > accessibility project? > > > On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 >>> 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 wrote: >>>> >>>>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>>>> write? >>>>> >>>>> Craig >>>>> >>>>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> Samsung struggles to block iPho
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Just we have to see how the blind life of blind people is in south corea, and how is in the countries at the west. Like this, we can see how important is for samgsum their interest in the blind people. - Original Message - From: "Aman Singer" To: Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 3:57 PM Subject: Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Hi. I would be stunned if they had any interest in the blind/visually impaired market, that market is so close to nonexistence as to make little difference. Samsung has just been throwing all their patents at Apple and seeing what sticks. Apple has been doing the same. It's a shame people can't make new products rather than abusing the patent system by filing patents which try to swallow the hole world and forcing the courts to make them throw up. Aman On 2/23/13, Philip S wrote: Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone accessibility project? On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 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 wrote: David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? Craig On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List 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 Samsung 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 campai
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
well, the last of talksback is better than the older versions of this software. It is not like voiceOver, even though It is avery dirty way to get blind customers. It could be possible, in the business world is possible everything. In my opinion, compare voice Over with talks back is as compare a horse with a car. For a few things is better use a horse as transportation, but it is not very eficient. P - Original Message - From: "Philip S" To: Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 3:29 PM Subject: Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone accessibility project? On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 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 wrote: David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? Craig On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List 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 Samsung 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.
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Hi, Cheryl. I'm afraid they didn't lose the case, the judge has simply stopped it from moving forward for a period of time. That period of time will end when another court gives its decision. If the decision is favourable to Samsung and the patent, then the case starts up again. This is not a loss for Samsung, it's a delay of the case. I hope that's of use. Aman -- 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.
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
w. 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 wrote: >>> >>>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>>> write? >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> Samsung 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. >>>>>> >>>>>&
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Cheryl: The suit they previously lost relates to another patent. This doesn't just relate to the home button but relates to the touch screen technology itself. There are a lot of implications here. We need to watch this very closely. While the German proceeding has been stopped for the time being, it has not been stayed as previously indicated. It is simply being held and abeyance. Those Are two very different concepts. Bob Fenton Sent from my iPhone On 2013-02-23, at 2:13 PM, Cheryl Homiak wrote: > It's my understanding they already lost this suit. > > -- > Cheryl > > May the words of my mouth > and the meditation of my heart > be acceptable to You, Lord, > my rock and my Redeemer. > (Psalm 19:14 HCSB) > > > > On Feb 23, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Aman Singer wrote: > >> Hi. >> I would be stunned if they had any interest in the blind/visually >> impaired market, that market is so close to nonexistence as to make >> little difference. Samsung has just been throwing all their patents at >> Apple and seeing what sticks. Apple has been doing the same. It's a >> shame people can't make new products rather than abusing the patent >> system by filing patents which try to swallow the hole world and >> forcing the courts to make them throw up. >> Aman >> >> On 2/23/13, Philip S wrote: >>> Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing >>> some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from >>> Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? >>> Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone >>> accessibility project? >>> >>> >>> On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 >>>>> >>>&g
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
It's my understanding they already lost this suit. -- Cheryl May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable to You, Lord, my rock and my Redeemer. (Psalm 19:14 HCSB) On Feb 23, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Aman Singer wrote: > Hi. > I would be stunned if they had any interest in the blind/visually > impaired market, that market is so close to nonexistence as to make > little difference. Samsung has just been throwing all their patents at > Apple and seeing what sticks. Apple has been doing the same. It's a > shame people can't make new products rather than abusing the patent > system by filing patents which try to swallow the hole world and > forcing the courts to make them throw up. > Aman > > On 2/23/13, Philip S wrote: >> Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing >> some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from >> Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? >> Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone >> accessibility project? >> >> >> On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 >>>> 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 wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>>>>> write? >>>>>> >>>>>> Craig
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Hi. I would be stunned if they had any interest in the blind/visually impaired market, that market is so close to nonexistence as to make little difference. Samsung has just been throwing all their patents at Apple and seeing what sticks. Apple has been doing the same. It's a shame people can't make new products rather than abusing the patent system by filing patents which try to swallow the hole world and forcing the courts to make them throw up. Aman On 2/23/13, Philip S wrote: > Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing > some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from > Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? > Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone > accessibility project? > > > On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 >>> 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 wrote: >>>> >>>>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>>>> write? >>>>> >>>>> Craig >>>>> >>>>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>> A
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Just curious, is it possible that Samsung is thinking about capturing some of the blind/visually impaired consumer smartphone market from Apple, albeit in a very nasty and unwise way? Does anyone know if Samsung is working on some major smartphone accessibility project? On 2/23/13, Aman Singer 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=DE10040386B4&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 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 >> 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 wrote: >>> >>>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>>> write? >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> Samsung 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 i
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
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=DE10040386B4&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 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 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 wrote: >> >>> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion >>> write? >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>>> >>>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> Samsung 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. &g
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
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 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 wrote: > >> David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? >> >> Craig >> >> On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >>> >>>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> Samsung 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. >>>> >&
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
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 wrote: > David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? > > Craig > > On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >> >>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>> >>> 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 >>> Samsung 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 >>> ac
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Hello, Its a BBC article. You can find it here. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21552733 Ricardo Walker rica...@appletothecore.info Twitter:@apple2thecore www.appletothecore.info On Feb 23, 2013, at 8:30 AM, Craig Werner wrote: > David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? > > Craig > > On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: >> >>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>> >>> 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 >>> Samsung 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 >>&
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
David, what is the source of this article? For whom does Leo Kelion write? Craig On 2/23/13, David Chittenden wrote: > >> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >> >> 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 >> Samsung 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/
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Reminds me of O2 being trademarked by a telco hereappearing in science and chemistry books since the year Dot. Though Basmati rice was also trademarked in the US hwen the rice they sold had nothing to do with basmati or however it's spelled. Thisis all about as emotive and stupid as a good deal of the political correctness crap we have to wade through. Our disability forms have terms like blind and severely blind now and will be assessed (by sighted) on those premises. Almost as bad as legally (or illegally) blind over there. Rh. - Original Message - From: "Frank Ventura" To: Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 7:29 AM Subject: Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Wow, if I am reading this correctly Samsung's claim is that tripple clicking a button to turn VO on or off violates its patents. So they're saying that pressing a button to turn on a feature is patented? Now that's kind of broad isn't it? Of course, there is so much more at stake here. Apple has accessibility onboard to maintain educational and government contracts. Take that away from them and you can really drive a stake through Apple's heart. And, doing it in a German court, largely off of the radar screen of most US consumers is really pretty sneaky. Frank Ventura Email: frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com<mailto:frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com> Voicemail: 781 492-4262 Imessage: frankmvent...@mac.com<mailto:frankmvent...@mac.com> *Sent from my Mac Book Air* On Feb 23, 2013, at 1:55 AM, David Chittenden mailto:dchitten...@gmail.com>> wrote: Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List mailto: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 Samsung 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 identif
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
I agree although remember that apple has some ridiculous patents as well. Aaron Linson I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me Once an Eagle Always an Eagle On Feb 23, 2013, at 2:29 AM, Frank Ventura wrote: > Wow, if I am reading this correctly Samsung's claim is that tripple clicking > a button to turn VO on or off violates its patents. So they're saying that > pressing a button to turn on a feature is patented? Now that's kind of broad > isn't it? Of course, there is so much more at stake here. Apple has > accessibility onboard to maintain educational and government contracts. Take > that away from them and you can really drive a stake through Apple's heart. > And, doing it in a German court, largely off of the radar screen of most US > consumers is really pretty sneaky. > > Frank Ventura > Email: frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com > Voicemail: 781 492-4262 > Imessage: frankmvent...@mac.com > > *Sent from my Mac Book Air* > > > > On Feb 23, 2013, at 1:55 AM, David Chittenden wrote: > >> >>> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >>> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >>> >>> 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 >>> Samsung 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 ac
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Wow, if I am reading this correctly Samsung's claim is that tripple clicking a button to turn VO on or off violates its patents. So they're saying that pressing a button to turn on a feature is patented? Now that's kind of broad isn't it? Of course, there is so much more at stake here. Apple has accessibility onboard to maintain educational and government contracts. Take that away from them and you can really drive a stake through Apple's heart. And, doing it in a German court, largely off of the radar screen of most US consumers is really pretty sneaky. Frank Ventura Email: frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com<mailto:frank.vent...@littlebreezes.com> Voicemail: 781 492-4262 Imessage: frankmvent...@mac.com<mailto:frankmvent...@mac.com> *Sent from my Mac Book Air* On Feb 23, 2013, at 1:55 AM, David Chittenden mailto:dchitten...@gmail.com>> wrote: Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List mailto: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 Samsung 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<mailto:blind-democr...@octothorp.org> http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy -- You received this message
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
that's really stupid talk about samsung being a dumbass. Aaron Linson I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me Once an Eagle Always an Eagle On Feb 23, 2013, at 1:55 AM, David Chittenden wrote: > >> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung >> Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List >> >> 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 >> Samsung 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. >> >> >> >>
Re: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
Rubbish decision. Sent from my iPhone On 23-Feb-2013, at 12:25 PM, David Chittenden wrote: *Subject:* *VoiceOver threatened by Samsung* *Reply-To:* Blind Democracy Discussion List 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 Samsung 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 t
Fwd: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung
> Subject: VoiceOver threatened by Samsung > Reply-To: Blind Democracy Discussion List > > 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 > Samsung 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.
