While this is a significant victory in the sense it paves the way for similar judgements against other Android handset vendors, such as Samsung, in reality it is not as big a deal as you might think.
Let's start with the patent itself:
A system and method causes a computer to detect and perform actions on structures identified in computer data. The system provides an analyzer server, an application program interface, a user interface and an action processor. The analyzer server receives from an application running concurrently data having recognizable structures, uses a pattern analysis unit, such as a parser or fast string search function, to detect structures in the data, and links relevant actions to the detected structures. The application program interface communicates with the application running concurrently, and transmits relevant information to the user interface. Thus, the user interface can present and enable selection of the detected structures, and upon selection of a detected structure, present the linked candidate actions. Upon selection of an action, the action processor performs the action on the detected structure.
Translated into English, this is the standard smartphone feature which allows you to select a phone number and be presented with an option to dial or select an address and be asked if you want to map it. Although it was HTC who lost the case, it is an Android feature so other vendors have to be paying attention.
However, the ban doesn't go into effect until next April. That gives Google some time to figure out a different method for performing the same operation which doesn't infringe on Apple's patent. Assuming they can do that, there will be no ban.
And of course it only applies to HTC phones right now. On the other hand, it is more or less inevitable Apple will win similar victories against other vendors eventually unless the feature is either disabled or replaced with a non-infringing alternative.
Assuming an alternative is developed, this becomes a hollow victory for Apple. Ultimately it will have cost them millions of dollars to force Google to develop a new piece of code.
On the other hand, it may cost the public plenty. Besides the developer efforts diverted to duplicating a feature that already works, the costs related to pursuing and defending against actions like this will ultimately be passed on to consumers.
Perhaps more notable is the fact Apple's complaint was over 10 patents. While an initial ITC ruling earlier this year found HTC infringed on two of them, the most recent decision narrowed that to just one.
Written by: Rich Fiscus @ 20 Dec 2011 1:14
