在日前針對蘋果(Apple)控告三星(Samsung)手機侵犯專利權一案的法庭聽證會上，來自三星的專家主張，蘋果某項 iPhone 技術專利其實是抄襲舊PC時代的產(chǎn)品，該專利應屬無效。 一 位三星專家證人在法庭上指出，1984年問世的DOS架構個人行事歷應用程序Sidekick，所采用的技術與蘋果專利編號647的快速連結(quick links)技術十分類似；該位專家并以1991年美國研究機構Xerox PARC的EmbeddedButtons軟件開發(fā)案做為專利無效的例證。 蘋果的快速鏈接專利描述了檢測電話號碼的方法，并會自動開啟例如電話撥號器等相關的應用程序；在法庭上展示的Sidekick與EmbeddedButtons 兩項軟件工具功能大致相似，只不過所使用的是“古色古香”DOS時代純文本接口。

三星專家指出，1984年問世的Sidekick 應用程序與2007年的iPhone專利技術雷同
qrnesmc

為 三星擔任專家證人的美國北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)計算機科學系主任Kevin Jeffay表示，就算蘋果的專利有效，三星的手機與Google的程序代碼都沒有侵犯該專利，三星手機程序代碼與蘋果的專利采用不同的技術。 “檢 測與連結必須用分析服務器(analyzer server)以額外的方式完成，根據(jù)我的分析，在三星的手機中沒有分析服務器或是動作處理器(actions processor)；”Jeffay指出，對于該項專利最簡單的繞道方法(workaround)就是不要使用其中所敘述，提供用戶選項的跳出式窗口 (pop-up window)。 三星專家證人指蘋果通用搜尋專利無效 電 腦科技領域的資深工程師Brewster Kahle在法庭上短暫現(xiàn)身，他陳述了在1990年代初期主導開發(fā)的一項廣域信息服務器(wide area information server，WAIS)項目：“WAIS系統(tǒng)的概念是能在同一時間進行本機與遠程的數(shù)據(jù)搜尋?！? 三 星采用了上述的早期版本網(wǎng)絡服務器做為蘋果專利號碼959通用搜尋技術──搜尋手機本地數(shù)據(jù)與網(wǎng)絡數(shù)據(jù)──的前例，擔任三星專家證人的麻省理工學院 (MIT)計算機科學教授Martin Rinard并在陪審團前展示某個版本的WAIS軟件，也能執(zhí)行本地與遠程數(shù)據(jù)的搜尋。 Rinard的證詞還包括7,653,614號專利在內的另外兩項專利，也可被考慮為蘋果通用搜尋專利的技術前例；他舉出市場研究報告顯示，手機內的資料搜尋器有98%是掃描網(wǎng)絡數(shù)據(jù)，并非本機數(shù)據(jù)：“這顯示人們不會使用本機搜尋功能，幾乎完全不會?！? 第 三位三星專家證人則是提出另一款智能手機與一份研究報告，能證明蘋果的172號滑動解鎖(slide-to-unlock)專利無效。這位來自加拿大卡加立大學(University of Calgary)的教授Saul Greenberg指出，瑞典公司Neomode在2005年推出的N1手機，早在iPhone上市之前就已采用類似的解鎖功能。 Greenberg并展示了一段視頻，來自在1991年人機互動(Computer Human Interaction ，CHI)研討會上針對滑動解鎖功能所發(fā)表的一篇論文。 在 交叉詰問中，蘋果律師Harold McElhinny 則表示，專利審查員已經(jīng)看過來自N1手機與CHI研討會的論文：“他們也有這樣的信息，是因為蘋果的專利律師提供的?！彼⒃儐朑reenberg，專利審查員是否在授予專利時出了錯。對此Greenberg的回答是：“授予專利是他們的結論，但我認為他們出了差錯…而這也是為什么我們會在這里。” 在 這場美國時間4月15日舉行的法庭聽證會中，最后一位三星專家證人指出蘋果172號自動拼字校正(automatic spelling correction)專利是無效的；該位專家指出，專利編號7,880,730就是其技術前例。這位專家的證詞將于下一次開庭時繼續(xù)進行，估計整場訴訟的開庭還將持續(xù)到本月底。 本文授權編譯自EE Times，版權所有，謝絕轉載 編譯：Judith Cheng 參考英文原文：Old DOS app surfaces at Apple v. Samsung，by Rick Merritt

相關閱讀：
• “蘋果你夠了！”谷歌出面為三星撐腰
• 蘋果三星專利訴訟戰(zhàn)火恐波及Android？
• 蘋果再告三星：打的就是你，與谷歌無關qrnesmc

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