`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`1/17
`
`POLICY —
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone
`
`Steve Jobs reportedly called Android a "stolen product." If he was right, then …
`
`SUBSCRIBE
`
`SIGN IN
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 1
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`2/17
`
`TIMOTHY B. LEE
`
` - 2/23/2012, 9:00 AM
`
`rett jordan
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 2
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`3/17
`
`Urban street artist Banksy and Apple CEO Steve Jobs, kindred souls?
`
`According to his official biographer, Steve Jobs went ballistic in January 2010 when he saw HTC's newest Android phones. "I want
`you to stop using our ideas in Android," Jobs reportedly told Eric Schmidt, then Google's CEO. Schmidt had already been forced to
`resign from Apple's board, partly due to increased smartphone competition between the two companies. Jobs then vowed to
`"spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank to right this wrong."
`
`Jobs called Android a "stolen product," but theft can be a tricky concept when talking about innovation. The iPhone didn't emerge
`fully formed from Jobs's head. Rather, it represented the culmination of incremental innovation over decades—much of which
`occurred outside of Cupertino.
`
`Innovation within multitouch and smartphone technology goes back decades—the first multitouch devices were created in the
`1980s—and spans a large number of researchers and commercial firms. It wouldn't have been possible to create the iPhone
`without copying the ideas of these other researchers. And since the release of Android, Apple has incorporated some Google ideas
`into iOS.
`
`The "Digital Desk" in action, showing a pinch-to-
`resize gesture in 1991.
`
`You can call this process plenty of names, some less than complimentary, but
`consumers generally benefit from the copying within the smartphone market. The
`best ideas are quickly incorporated into all the leading mobile platforms.
`
`Pierre Wellner
`
`The current legal battles over smartphones are a sequel to the "look and feel" battle
`over the graphical user interface (GUI) in the late 1980s. Apple lost that first fight
`when the courts ruled key elements of the Macintosh user interface were not eligible
`for copyright protection. Unfortunately, in the last 20 years, the courts have made it
`much easier to acquire software patents. Apple now has more powerful legal
`weapons at its disposal this time around, as do its competitors. Together, there's a
`real danger that the smartphone wars will end by stifling competition.
`
`Photograph by br
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 3
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`4/17
`
`Multitouch in the lab
`
`High-tech innovations are often developed by laboratory researchers long before they're introduced into the commercial market.
`Multitouch computing was no exception. According to Bill Buxton, a multitouch pioneer now at Microsoft Research, the first
`multitouch screen was developed at Bell Labs in 1984. Buxton reports that the screen, created by Bob Boie, "used a transparent
`capacitive array of touch sensors overlaid on a CRT." It allowed the user to "manipulate graphical objects with fingers with excellent
`response time."
`
`In the two decades that followed, researchers experimented with a variety of techniques for building multitouch displays. A 1991
`Xerox PARC project called the "Digital Desk" used a projector and camera situated above an ordinary desk to track touches. A
`multitouch table called the DiamondTouch also used an overhead projector, but its touch sensor ran a small amount of current
`through the user's body into a receiver in the user's chair. NYU researcher Jeff Han developed a rear-projection display that
`achieved multitouch capabilities through a technique called "frustrated total internal reflection."
`
`Advertisement
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 4
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`5/17
`
`While they refined multitouch hardware, these researchers were also improving the
`software that ran on it. One of the most important areas of research was developing a
`vocabulary of gestures that took full advantage of the the hardware's capabilities. The
`"Digital Desk" project included a sketching application that allowed images to be re-
`sized with a "pinch" gesture. A 2003 article by researchers at the University of Toronto
`described a tabletop touchscreen system that included a "flick" gesture to send
`objects from one user to another across the table.
`
`TED
`
`By February 2006, Han brought a number of these ideas together to create a suite of
`multitouch applications that he presented in a now-famous TED talk. He showed off a
`photo-viewing application that used the "pinch" gesture to re-size and rotate
`photographs; it included an on-screen keyboard for labeling photos. He also
`demonstrated an interactive map that allowed the user to pan, rotate, and zoom with dragging and pinching gestures similar to
`those used on modern smartphones.
`
`Jeff Han demonstrating his multitouch work in
`2006.
`
`Commercializing multitouch
`
`In 2004, a French firm called Jazzmutant unveiled the Lemur, a music controller many consider the world's first commercial
`multitouch product. The Lemur could be configured to display a wide variety of buttons, sliders, and other user interface elements.
`When these were manipulated, the device would produce output in the MIDI-like Open Sound Control format. It debuted in 2005
`and cost more than $2,000.
`
`The market for the Lemur was eventually undercut by the proliferation of low-cost tablet computers like the iPad. But Jazzmutant
`now licenses its multitouch technology under the name Stantum. It raised $13 million in funding in 2009.
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 5
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`6/17
`
`Jazzmutant Lemur in 2005
`
`sonicstate.com
`
`Jeff Han also moved to commercialize his research, founding Perceptive Pixel in 2006. The firm focuses on building large, high-end
`multitouch displays and counts CNN among its clients. The DiamondTouch also became a commercial product in 2006.
`
`Microsoft says its researchers have worked on multitouch technologies since 2001. Microsoft's Andy Wilson announced Touchlight,
`a multitouch technology using cameras and a rear projector, in 2004. Touchlight had an interface reminiscent of Minority Report — a
`three-dimensional object would be displayed on the screen and the user could rotate and scale it with intuitive hand gestures.
`
`Wilson was also a key figure in developing Microsoft Surface, a tabletop touchscreen system that used a similar combination of a
`rear-projected display and cameras. According to Microsoft, the hardware design was finalized in 2005. Surface was then introduced
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 6
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`7/17
`
`as a commercial product in mid-2007, a few months after the iPhone was unveiled. It too used dragging and pinching gestures to
`manipulate photographs and other objects on the screen.
`
`Another key figure in the early development and commercialization of multitouch
`technologies was Wayne Westerman, a computer science researcher whose PhD
`dissertation described a sophisticated multitouch input device. Unlike the other
`technologies mentioned so far, Westerman's devices weren't multitouch displays; they
`were strictly input devices. Along with John Elias, Westerman went on to found
`FingerWorks, which produced a line of multitouch keyboards that were marketed as a
`way to relieve repetitive stress injuries.
`
`Microsoft
`
`Microsoft's Touchlight in 2004
`
`Advertisement
`
`Fingerworks was acquired by Apple in 2005 and Westerman and Elias became Apple employees. Their influence was felt not only in
`the multitouch capabilities of the iPhone and the iPad, but also in the increasingly sophisticated multitouch capabilities of Mac
`trackpads.
`
`Touchscreen phones
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 7
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`8/17
`
`IBM's Simon, introduced in 1993, is widely regarded as the first touchscreen phone. It had a black-and-white screen and lacked
`multitouch capabilities, but it had many of the features we associate with smartphones today. Users dialed with a onscreen keypad,
`and Simon included a calendar, address book, alarm clock, and e-mail functionality. The e-mail app even included the ability to click
`on a phone number to dial it.
`
`The Simon was not a big hit, but touchscreen phones continued improving. In the
`early 2000s, they gained color screens, more sophisticated apps, and built-in cameras.
`They continued to be single-touch devices, and many required a stylus for precise
`user input. Hardware keypads were standard. These phones ran operating systems
`from Microsoft, Palm, Research in Motion, and others.
`
`April 2005 saw the release of the Neonode N1m. While lacking the sophistication of
`the iPhone, it had a few notable features. It was one of the few phones of its
`generation not to have a hardware keypad, relying almost entirely on software
`buttons for input. It supported swiping gestures in addition to individual taps. And it
`employed a "slide to unlock" gesture, almost identical to the one the iPhone made
`
`IBM's Simon, introduced in 1993
`
`famous.
`
`TekGadg
`
`More sophisticated touchscreen interfaces began to emerge in 2006. In October, Synaptics unveiled the Onyx, a proof-of-concept
`color touchscreen phone that included a number of advanced features. While it may not have been a true multitouch device, its
`capacitive touch sensor included the ability to tell the difference between the user's finger and his cheek (allowing someone to
`answer the phone without worrying about accidental inputs) and to track a finger as it moved across the screen.
`
`The Onyx's phone application had an intuitive conference calling feature, and the device included a music player, an interactive
`map, and a calendar.
`
`That December, LG announced the LG Prada — beating the iPhone to market by several months. The two devices shared several
`common features. The Prada dispensed with a traditional keypad, relying on software buttons for most input. It included the ability
`to play music, browse the Web, view photos, and check e-mail.
`
`The iPhone was finally unveiled in January 2007. LG accused Apple of copying its design, saying it was disclosed in September 2006
`in order to compete for an IF Design Award (which it won). The accusation doesn't hold much credibility, however. Although the
`phones have undeniable similarities, the iPhone features a more sophisticated user interface. For example, the iPhone used the
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 8
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`9/17
`
`LG Prada in March 2007
`
`giiks
`
`flick-to-scroll gesture now common on smartphones; the LG Prada used a desktop-style
`scroll bar. The two phones were likely developed independently.
`
`So is Android a stolen product?
`
`Great artists steal
`
`In a sense, the answer is almost certainly "yes." It's hard to imagine how Google could have prevented some iPhone innovations
`from seeping into Android design. The iPhone was the talk of Silicon Valley in 2007 and 2008. It would have been practically
`impossible for the Android development team to avoid learning about iPhone features. Once Google's engineers were exposed to
`the concepts Apple pioneered, they couldn't help but be influenced by them.
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 9
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`10/17
`
`But if Google is guilty of using Apple's ideas, Apple is equally guilty. Many researchers and companies invented technologies that
`predate the iPhone but made it possible. As Microsoft's Buxton points out, Wayne Westerman (the multitouch researcher who sold
`his startup and became an Apple employee in 2005) cited the work of numerous early multitouch researchers in his 1999 PhD
`thesis. The iPhone incorporated key innovations pioneered by Bob Boie, IBM, Jazzmutant, Jeff Han, and others.
`
`Indeed, what made the iPhone such a great product was precisely that Apple drew together a number of innovations already
`developed separately—touchscreen phones, capacitive touchscreens, sophisticated multitouch user interfaces—and combined
`them in a product greater than the sum of its parts. This pattern of combining and refining of previous innovations is the rule, not
`the exception, in innovative industries. Android is simply the latest example of the pattern.
`
`While Android clearly adapted some important iPhone innovations, Google's engineers also added refinements of their own where
`they felt Apple's approach lacked them. For example, the early iPhone notification system left much to be desired. As we put it last
`year:
`
`Every new SMS or push alert showed up as a modal dialog box in the center of the screen, forcing the user to make a
`decision immediately. The system also offered no way to see multiple notifications at once.
`
`Google came up with a more flexible notification scheme. Rather than presenting them in a modal dialog box requiring immediate
`input before a user could proceed, Android displayed notifications briefly at the top of the screen, then added an icon atop the
`screen to signal existing notifications. When a user was ready to respond, she simply pulled down the notification bar to see a list of
`all pending notifications.
`
`Apple revamped its notification system in iOS 5, introducing a Notifications Center
`that was strikingly similar to Android's notification scheme. Apple added its own
`refinements, such as the ability to add widgets displaying the weather, stock prices,
`and other frequently-updated information. But the basic approach—notifications
`displayed at the top of the screen accessible through a pull down gesture—is virtually
`identical to the approach Google invented.
`
`The Notifications Center in iOS 5, 2011
`
`Apple Inc.
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 10
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`11/17
`
`Advertisement
`
`Users benefit from this kind of copying. Google's notification scheme was better than the original iPhone notifications, so it is in iOS
`users's interests for Apple to copy the idea. The alternative—a world in which companies scrupulously avoid using each other's
`ideas—would be much worse. It would become impossible to buy a smartphone incorporating the best innovations from across the
`industry.
`
`Inventing in the dark
`
`Legally, the question is whether Google infringed on Apple's patent, copyright, or other possessions. Google appears to be on safe
`ground from a copyright perspective. Android is built on Linux and uses a Java-like virtual machine; iOS is built on Darwin and uses
`NeXT-derived Objective C frameworks. We don't know of any allegations that Android was developed with literal copies of iOS code.
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 11
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`12/17
`
`But whether Google infringed on Apple's patents is a harder question. And it would have been especially difficult to answer as
`Google was creating the first versions of Android.
`
`Patent law generally gives a firm like Apple one year from the public disclosure of an invention to file for a patent on it. Apple
`unveiled the iPhone in January 2007, so the filing deadline for iPhone-related inventions would have been in January 2008. After
`filing, there is an additional 18-month delay before applications are made public. So if Apple filed an iPhone-related patent
`application on the last day before the deadline, Google wouldn't have learned of its existence until July 2009—almost a year after
`the first Android phone hit the market.
`
`And even after patent applications are made public, it can take several more years for the patent office to make a decision on them.
`There's also no certainty about what a granted patent covers or whether it will stand up in court.
`
`In short, Eric Schmidt's Android development team would have had no idea in 2008 which ideas were, legally speaking, Apple's
`ideas. The only foolproof way to avoid infringing Apple's patents would have been to avoid a multitouch phone OS at all.
`
`History repeating
`
`Steve Jobs eventually made good on his threats against Android. While Apple has not sued Google directly, Cupertino is now locked
`in legal battles with a number of major Android vendors. And unlike Microsoft, which has focused on signing licensing revenues
`with its patents, Apple seems genuinely determined to drive Android devices off the market.
`
`Advertisement
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 12
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`13/17
`
`Xerox Alto, which pioneered the graphical
`user interface in the 1970s
`
`This isn't the first time Apple built a new user interface based on the ideas of others,
`then sued competitors for using those same ideas. The graphical user interface now
`standard on desktop computers can be traced back to the invention of the mouse by
`SRI's Doug Engelbart in the 1960s. The ideas were refined at Xerox PARC in the 1970s,
`where Steve Jobs famously led a group of Apple engineers to visit in 1979. Five years
`later, Apple introduced the Macintosh. Those ideas then found a much larger audience.
`
`Marcin Wichary
`
`Microsoft scrambled to catch up, releasing the first version of Windows in 1985. In 1988,
`Apple filed a lawsuit accusing Microsoft of stealing the "look and feel" of the Macintosh.
`Xerox got involved in 1989 with a lawsuit accusing Apple of stealing the ideas behind the
`Macintosh from Xerox researchers. The courts eventually ruled key user interface
`concepts behind the Macintosh were not copyrightable, removing the legal cloud that
`had hung over early GUIs.
`
`In many ways, today's smartphone litigation is a sequel to that far-off "look and feel"
`fight. But there's an important difference: a series of court decisions in the 1990s
`effectively legalized software patents. As a result, incumbents like Apple have more
`powerful legal weapons to use against would-be competitors.
`
`Google has spent billions on patents to help it fight back against legal actions by Apple, Microsoft, and others. The search giant may
`have deep enough pockets to buy the patents it needs to defend itself, vindicating its right to compete in the mobile computing
`market.
`
`But firms without billions may not be so lucky. The failure of Apple's original look and feel lawsuit cleared the way for smaller firms
`(like Jobs's own NeXT) to compete in the desktop computing market. In contrast, if a firm today has a great idea for a mobile OS but
`lacks thousands of patents or the billions of dollars it takes to acquire them, it will likely be defenseless against angry patent
`lawyers. Apple's demand that companies "stop using our ideas" will have real teeth.
`
`That's bad for firms that want to get into the mobile OS market. It's also bad for users, who may be deprived of innovations these
`firms can bring to the market. But it's great for patent lawyers.
`
`READER COMMENTS
`
`664
`
`SHARE THIS STORY
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 13
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`14/17
`
`READER COMMENTS
`
`664
`
`SHARE THIS STORY
`
`TIMOTHY B. LEE
`Timothy is a senior reporter covering tech policy, blockchain technologies and the future of transportation. He lives in Washington DC.
`
`EMAIL timothy.lee@arstechnica.com // TWITTER @binarybits
`
`Advertisement
`
`SITREP: F-16 replacement
`search a signal of F-35
`fail?
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 14
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`15/17
`
`Sitrep: Boeing 707
`
`The F-35's next tech
`upgrade
`
`WATCHWATCH
`SITREP: F-16 replacement search a
`SITREP: F-16 replacement search a
`SITREP: F-16 replacement search a signal of
`signal of F-35 fail?
`signal of F-35 fail?
`F-35 fail?
`
`Footage courtesy of Dvids, Boeing, and The United States Navy.
`
`US Navy Gets an Italian
`
`+ More videos
`
`← PREVIOUS STORY
`
`Related Stories
`
`NEXT STORY →
`
`HTC feeling Apple's fury over
`smartphone patents
`
`Too broad or too narrow? Apple
`multitouch patent sparks debate
`
`Apple can now swing +6 mace of
`multitouch at enemies
`
`How today’s touchscreen tech put
`the world at our fingertips
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 15
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`16/17
`
`Sponsored Stories
`Recommended by
`
`We are selling off our
`remaining magic metal
`windmills. Great…
`acsthper
`
`Average Retirement
`Savings By Age: Are You
`Normal?
`SmartAsset
`
`Banned Movies That
`You Will Never See
`Again
`Definition
`
`Remember Kandi From
`'Two And A Half Men'?
`This Is Her Now
`Definition
`
`These Cars Are So
`Loaded It's Hard to
`Believe They're So…
`New Cars | Search Ads
`
`Most Americans With A
`Windows PC Didn't
`Know This (Do It Now)
`Safe Life Tips
`
`Today on Ars
`
`GameStop refused to pay $30
`million bill from consulting firm,
`lawsuit says
`
`Google Play’s billing crackdown
`arrives soon, but Spotify has a
`special deal
`
`Dell updates its XPS 17 and 15
`laptops
`
`Stop treating cheaters in online
`games as “the enemy”
`
`FBI trolls Russian embassy with
`geotargeted ads for disgruntled
`spies
`
`You can now buy a road-legal
`replica of Porsche’s mighty 917K
`racer
`
`A mysterious satellite hack has
`victims far beyond Ukraine
`
`Legally, Russia can’t just take its
`Space Station and go home
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 16
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`
`
`3/24/22, 12:06 PM
`
`If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone | Ars Technica
`
`https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
`
`17/17
`
`STORE
`SUBSCRIBE
`ABOUT US
`RSS FEEDS
`VIEW MOBILE SITE
`
`CONTACT US
`STAFF
`ADVERTISE WITH US
`REPRINTS
`
`NEWSLETTER SIGNUP
`
`Join the Ars Orbital Transmission
`mailing list to get weekly updates
`delivered to your inbox.
`
`SIGN ME UP →
`
`CNMN Collection
`WIRED Media Group
`© 2022 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (updated 1/1/20) and Privacy
`Policy and Cookie Statement (updated 1/1/20) and Ars Technica Addendum (effective 8/21/2018). Ars may earn compensation on sales from links on this site. Read our
`affiliate link policy.
`Your California Privacy Rights | Do Not Sell My Personal Info
`The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast.
`Ad Choices
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2019
`Page 2019 - 17
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`