UK judge forces Apple to state on its site that Samsung didn't copy the iPad

PogMoThoin

Apple is being forced by a British judge to tacitly state that Samsung didn't copy its iPad design. According to Bloomberg, Judge Colin Birss said that Apple has to post a notice both on its website and several British newspapers and magazines, to help correct the "damaging impression the South Korea-based company was copying Apple's product." The online part will reportedly stay there for six months. Apple lost its case against Samsung in the UK earlier this month, with the same judge awkwardly branding the 10-inch Android tablet "not as cool" as the iPad.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/18/uk-judge-forces-apple-samsung-tablet-not-ipad-copy/

Delighted by this, I'm sick to fúck of Apple patent trolling.

Pushtrak

Tacitly? Tacitly is where something is implied, but not stated. This is asking for something to be stated on the site. Article fail.

ejmaztec

They should have a financial health warning on them as well: "This product is vastly over-priced and could seriously damage your wealth".

efb

anti apple thread yawn...

PogMoThoin

efb wrote: »

anti apple thread yawn...

Nope, anti patent trolling thread.

efb

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Nope, anti patent trolling thread.

yes, the posts seem to reinforce this... tacitly, of course...

PogMoThoin

Imagine what the world would be like if Henry Ford sued the shít out of anyone who put an engine in a carriage, this is how stupid this is.

Wibbs

To be somewhat fair to Apple(and they can be and are right cnuts at times, actually a lot of the time and getting worse) there are a lot of suspiciously iphone/ipad near clones out there. I suppose they're still fuming because the lost the original desktop GUI "war", a GUI they went a helluva way in coming up with*.

I also find it interesting that those who whine about how apple are shíte when they come up with something, then get real hardons when other companies follow/copy them. Ever see an original pre iphone Android mockup? It looks like a Blackberry and acted like one too, cos that's where they thought the market was. Hell I recall many anti apple types laughing at the iphone at first. Funny how things change eh? Now if a dyed in the wool iphone user was given the average Android phone they'd have few problems picking it up. However if they were given a phone with the newer MicroSoft phone OS there would be a learning curve, because to give credit to MS they actually made an effort(good one IMHO) and re imagined the phone GUI.








*before someone starts wittering on about them nicking the idea from Xerox, read more. No really. Then download a X parc GUI emulator, then do the same with the first apple GUI, then compare and contrast. Apple came up with among other things we take for granted today like double clicking icons, dragging, dropdown menus, a menubar, and a trash/recycle folder/can and had already written most of the code before they went to Palo Alto. Plus they paid to licence the ideas.

At the time Bill Gates was concerned that Apple would sue over the Windows they were coming up with because of how closely it followed the Mac. Why do we (thankfully)have windows today? The guy runnung apple at the time John Sculley(Beige biz school type), signed an agreement to allow Microsoft to use Mac OS concepts. Gobshíte, but good for the rest of us.

Never mind other innovations. If you're using a laptop, take a look at it. Keyboard at top with palmrests below? That was apple. Trackpad? Guess who. USB, first wireless laptop, first CD/CD writer built in the list is very long. They made multimedia and plug and play a reality when the rest of the PC world was still looking at command lines, hoping for the best.

Shryke

Apple brought a competitor to court over having a Slide to Unlock bar. That's how ridiculous Apple are being with this global bombardment of litigation.

RUCKING FETARD

HANDS people who knew this Thread was moved from AH from post 3....

PogMoThoin

The BBC running the story now

A UK judge has ordered Apple to publish announcements that Samsung did not copy the design of its iPad, according to the Bloomberg news agency.

It said the judge said one notice should remain on Apple's website for at least six months, while other adverts should be placed in various newspapers and magazines.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18895384

RUCKING FETARD

Apple’s lawyers sharpen their knives: Nexus 7 has hidden Smart Cover feature [video]


Patent war talks to be hosted by UN agency to protect innovation

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Never mind other innovations. If you're using a laptop, take a look at it. Keyboard at top with palmrests below? That was apple. Trackpad? Guess who. USB, first wireless laptop, first CD/CD writer built in the list is very long. They made multimedia and plug and play a reality when the rest of the PC world was still looking at command lines, hoping for the best.

Toshiba released the first laptop with a CD-ROM drive, approx a year before Apple.

Apple were definitely not the first computer with USB ports. Most major manufacturers had computers with USB ports, again about a year before Apple.

Odaise Gaelach

Deleted User wrote: »

Toshiba released the first laptop with a CD-ROM drive, approx a year before Apple.

Apple were definitely not the first computer with USB ports. Most major manufacturers had computers with USB ports, again about a year before Apple.

Didn't Apple have Firewire instead?

PrzemoF

Wibbs wrote: »

To be somewhat fair to Apple(and they can be and are right cnuts at times, actually a lot of the time and getting worse) there are a lot of suspiciously iphone/ipad near clones out there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone

Hint: compare the dates

RUCKING FETARD

Mac OS is unix based aswell. Tell ya that themselves.


http://support.apple.com/kb/TA25634

yoyo

The whole Apple patent thing does amuse me. Android was in development around the same time as ios, its quite obvious a touchscreen with icons would be the choice for a smartphone (after all my ancient Palm Pilot had a dashboard/launcher with similar icons...). I was reading recently Apple won't allow developers make a web browser for ios (Google Chrome for Ios is merely a skin on top of Safari), and any browser must use the Safari rendering engine, as well as Safari remains the default browser (can't be changed).
Microsoft has been brought to EU courts and sued because they included Internet Explorer with their OS, seemingly Apple are never anti competitive... I'm delighted to hear this and hopefully it will make Apple think twice about more stupid lawsuits. Patenting the "Slide to Unlock" feature that some swedish manufacturer used on a touch phone years ago...

Nick

PrzemoF

yoyo wrote: »

The whole Apple patent thing does amuse me.

Me too, except that WE are paying for it. Lawyers are not earning peanuts and there is also m$ tax on quite a few android devices. :mad:

witnessmenow

RUCKING FETARD wrote: »

Apple’s lawyers sharpen their knives: Nexus 7 has hidden Smart Cover feature [video]


Patent war talks to be hosted by UN agency to protect innovation

In the video you've linked to, the nintendo DS did that first. When you closed over the lid, the magnet in the speaker triggered a sensor to turn off the screen ... nintendo to sue apple ?

Janedoe10

I think these 2 links some up this thread.

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/gadgets/1286638/top-ten-things-people-think-apple-invented-but-actually-didn-t/2


http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/01/09/apple-didnt-invent-______-but-apple-made-it-better/

yoyo

witnessmenow wrote: »

In the video you've linked to, the nintendo DS did that first. When you closed over the lid, the magnet in the speaker triggered a sensor to turn off the screen ... nintendo to sue apple ?

The Dell XPS M1530 also uses a magnet to detect if the lid is open or closed. Next to the webcam in the screen is a small magnet, when the lid is closed this magnet hits off a spot on the palm rest which triggers the mode, and the XPS was out well before the iPad :rolleyes:

Nick

Overheal

yoyo wrote: »

The whole Apple patent thing does amuse me. Android was in development around the same time as ios, its quite obvious a touchscreen with icons would be the choice for a smartphone (after all my ancient Palm Pilot had a dashboard/launcher with similar icons...). I was reading recently Apple won't allow developers make a web browser for ios (Google Chrome for Ios is merely a skin on top of Safari), and any browser must use the Safari rendering engine, as well as Safari remains the default browser (can't be changed).
Microsoft has been brought to EU courts and sued because they included Internet Explorer with their OS, seemingly Apple are never anti competitive... I'm delighted to hear this and hopefully it will make Apple think twice about more stupid lawsuits. Patenting the "Slide to Unlock" feature that some swedish manufacturer used on a touch phone years ago...

Nick

How do you explain Photon?

PogMoThoin

Overheal wrote: »

How do you explain Photon?

"Apps that browse the Web must use the iOS WebKit framework and WebKit JavaScript," state the current version of the guidelines.

One of the top-five browser makers, Norway's Opera Software, has circumvented the rule, and had its Opera Mini approved for App Store distribution, because its software isn't really a stand-alone browser. Instead, Opera Mini is a proxy that takes URL requests, sends them to Opera's servers, where the pages are rendered and compressed before the data heads back to the device.

Opera Mini debuted on the App Store in April 2010.

Apple has not suddenly voided the WebKit requirements, as Google confirmed today. "Rendering and the JavaScript engine are provided by iOS through UIWebView, so Chrome for iOS does not use Chrome V8 JavaScript engine," a Google spokeswoman said in an email reply to questions.

From here:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9228636/Google_touts_release_of_Safari_ized_Chrome_for_iPhone_iPad?mm_ref=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252Fsearch%253Fhl%253Den%2526gl%253DIE%2526ie%253DUTF-8%2526source%253Dandroid-browser%2526q%253Dios%252Ball%252Bbrowsers%252Bsafari%252Bengine

yoyo

Overheal wrote: »

How do you explain Photon?

It appears the browser streams the flash content which is probably running on another server, although I don't know how it works. The actual app doesn't seem to be rendering flash (it references to activating a button for streaming). Its probably like the OnLive gaming platform works

Nick

Snowbat

yoyo wrote: »

Microsoft has been brought to EU courts and sued because they included Internet Explorer with their OS, seemingly Apple are never anti competitive...

Apple does not have a dominant position to abuse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law#Dominance_and_monopoly

If a firm has a dominant position, because it has beyond a 39.7% market share[19] then there is "a special responsibility not to allow its conduct to impair competition on the common market"[20]

Apple has been investigated before, but that was for a possible violation EU free-trade rules.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#European_antitrust_investigation

The Commission began an antitrust investigation in 2007 of Apple's business practices after the complaint was made,[18] but ultimately the Commission probe found no agreements between Apple and major record labels on how iTunes is run in Europe,[19] only that Apple had been paying higher wholesale prices to U.K. music labels and was passing the cost along to U.K. customers.[20][19]

PogMoThoin

How about refusing to give a two year warranty, expecting the customer to pay for after care.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/02/apple-italy-antitrust-idUSL6E8I2FRD20120702

RUCKING FETARD

RUCKING FETARD

They got a stay on having to put the notice on their site. For now. lol.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-26/apple-gets-stay-on-posting-notice-over-samsung-tablet.html

RUCKING FETARD

Here we go, this is the big one....

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57482823-37/apple-samsung-trial-gets-its-jury/

RUCKING FETARD

Didn't think it would...Apple want $2.5Billion, Samsung want $455million....judge has discretion to triple any judgement if infringement took place....

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/261234/applesamsung_patent_battle_now_in_jurys_hands.html

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-08-21/apple-samsung-trial/57194440/1

Overheal

I wonder how they found an impartial jury. They'd have to find 12 people in California. In California. That have not used or are not all that initially familiar with either Apple or Samsung products. How they pulled that off, I have no clue.