Word has it that HTC released the following statement:

The US availability of the HTC One X and HTC EVO 4G LTE has been delayed due to a standard U.S. Customs review of shipments that is required after an ITC exclusion order. We believe we are in compliance with the ruling and HTC is working closely with Customs to secure approval. The HTC One X and HTC Evo 4G LTE have been received enthusiastically by customers and we appreciate their patience as we work to get these products into their hands as soon as possible.

What do you think? Will this affect the pre-orders and in stores stock, just in store stock?

This news was first posted on The Verge.

Story developing…

UPDATE:  It seems as if the first 10 complaints filed in march have been reviewed by the ITC, and the ITC has shot down 8 of the 10 patents and found HTC guilty of violating 2 of them. With 10 more still up for evaluation.

U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647 on a “system and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data” – such as recognizing of phone numbers.

U.S. Patent No. 6,343,263 on a “real-time signal processing system for serially transmitted data”

Both patents seem to be over 15 years old and very generic.

As always, Apple is requesting a ban on all imports of HTC products. But don’t fret, HTC is expected to file a claim for an appeal. We may just have to wait for some time, occupying ourselves with other things such as partypoker and our other electronic devices. And Motorola is already working on getting those patents invalidated by the UPSTO.

If worse comes to show, HTC still has another trick up their sleeve in the form of S3 Graphics which it acquired recently.   A few month back, Apple has been found in violation of (2) S3 Graphics  patents by the ITC. Thus if the appeal fails, and Motorola is unable to invalidate those patents, HTC can always hold these 2 patents as a bargaining chip to achieve a cross licensing deal.

—–

So today Apple files a new patent complaint with the International Trade Commission looking to block the sale of several HTC devices it claims infringe on Apple patent. Apple recently filed a similar complaint with te ITC looking to block several Samsung smartphones and tablets. Apple feels that Samsung and HTC are copying the iPhone and iPad devices. The move was the latest in an ongoing legal battle between Samsung and Apple surrounding multiple patent disputes.

Apple’s patent disputes with HTC date back even further, however Apple filed first with a patent complaint against the Taiwan-based smartphone maker in early 2010. HTC responded by denying claims that it was infringing on Apple Patents, and the HTC later filed a counter suit in May 2010 alleging that Apple was in fact infringing on five of its patents.

The ITC Lawyer said ealier this year that siding with HTC in the patent disputes was best for the public, and today’s filing suggests that Apple is undeterred by the lawyer’s recent comments.

So what do you think is Apple just making these arguments to stay top-dog i nthe phone world? Or are companies like HTC, Samsung (and others possibly) really infringing on Apple’s patents? You tell us PPCGeekers!

Source: BGR

As it seems to reason, all shorthand textual communication is now patented by IBM. At least this is the conclusion I came to after reading the following on TechDirt–

theodp writes “The USPTO has granted IBM a patent covering the Resolution of Abbreviated Text in an Electronic Communications System, lawyer-speak for translating “IMHO” to “In My Humble Opinion” and vice versa. From the patent: “One particularly useful application of the invention is to interpret the meaning of shorthand terms…For example, one database may define the shorthand term ‘LOL’ to mean ‘laughing out loud.'”

I for one am interested in what implications this could have on our increasingly textual-heavy way of communicating with each other. Will it spell the end to such speech? Or is IBM merely patenting this concept so others will not abuse it? Only time will tell.

Further reading-

IBM’s Patent

Artistic example of said patent