Apple v Samsung Patent verdict is out

whiterebel

Big win for Apple v Samsung on the iPhone, but not iPad. They won most of it, and are awarded over $1Bn damages.
Macrumors

sullzz

whiterebel wrote: »

Big win for Apple v Samsung on the iPhone, but not iPad. They won most of it, and are awarded over $1Bn damages.
Macrumors

Big blow for samsung , and google

blankblank

And a big loss for consumers me thinks ,,,,,,,,,,

andy1249

The full Verdict and Details are here ,

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120824175815101

There are a huge number of inconsistencies , along with the fact that the Judge refused Samsung permission to present evidence showing prior art belonging to Sony ,

Because of that , this stands a very likelihood of being overturned , and the legal press in the US are calling it a "Farce" and a "Preposterous Result" and that this is almost certain to happen.

Zascar

A Massive loss for consumers. Taking what makes sense and developing further upon it is now illegal? Nice work apple.

Gumbo

Zascar wrote: »

A Massive loss for consumers. Taking what makes sense and developing further upon it is now illegal? Nice work apple.

Could also be worded :

A Massive loss for consumers. Taking what makes sense and developing further upon it is now illegal? Nice work Samsung.

Their both as bad as each other in my opinion. They should just join hands and release an Apple Galaxy S4GS or something.

McGrath5

As much as I like Apple products, this statement from Samsung does highlight what a bad day for consumers this is,

Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.

ZETOR_IS_BETTER

From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts viewed Samsung as the underdog in the case. Apple's headquarters is a mere 10 miles from the courthouse, and jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where Apple's late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer.

Poor sammy didnt have a chance :pac:

Link

Johnmb

Perfect Choice wrote: »

As much as I like Apple products, this statement from Samsung does highlight what a bad day for consumers this is,

Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.

I'd actually have thought it would lead to more choice. It's always been pretty clear that Samsung just copied the iPhone (it was just a matter of whether or not Apple could claim ownership of the designs). Now Samsung will have to go and innovate something different. With their money and resources, they should be able to come up with something new and unique, something Apple hasn't already come up with. Then, instead of just having the current choice of an iPhone or a cheaper knock-off, you'd have a choice of an iPhone or a unique Samsung phone that looks and feels completely different. Of course, if Samsung can't innovate something new they are in trouble, but that could be a life line to Nokia.

jonnny68

Apple are the most pathetic company ive ever come across, they know full well Samsung and especially Android are light years ahead of them in every respect so they go to extreme lengths and probably pay off judges to sue them, stick your walled garden where the sun don't shine.

jenno86

jonnny68 wrote: »

Apple are the most pathetic company ive ever come across, they know full well Samsung and especially Android are light years ahead of them in every respect so they go to extreme lengths and probably pay off judges to sue them, stick your walled garden where the sun don't shine.

Maybe Samsung shouldn't have infringed their patents.

Tazium

I find it odd that they can maintain their part supply trade business while all this is happening. Does this mean that Microsoft can now sue Apple for their iPad designs against Microsofts Tablet PC design? Where does it all end?

FWIW, Moses was the first dude with tablets.

blankblank

It will most likely lead to less competition in the market.

Companies will all be running scared in case there new phone resembles the iphone in some way.

Ive had an iphone for years and recently switched to a galaxy. I dont think either are better than the other, different strokes for different folks and all that. I just find it ridiculous that apple can claim they own the image of a phone with rounded corners. Complete bull!

And this whole argument of individuals will confuse apple products with samsung products? Rubbish. If a person is not competent enough to realise they are buying an apple product or a samsung product they shouldn't have such a high end phone.

A victory for apple yes, but shame on them.

JTMan

It is a sad reflection on Apple, that they choose to use bullying tactics to pursue flimsical patent claims.

Apple 1 Innovation 0.

The Mad Hatter

Davie89 wrote: »

It will most likely lead to less competition in the market.

Companies will all be running scared in case there new phone resembles the iphone in some way.

Ive had an iphone for years and recently switched to a galaxy. I dont think either are better than the other, different strokes for different folks and all that. I just find it ridiculous that apple can claim they own the image of a phone with rounded corners. Complete bull!

And this whole argument of individuals will confuse apple products with samsung products? Rubbish. If a person is not competent enough to realise they are buying an apple product or a samsung product they shouldn't have such a high end phone.

A victory for apple yes, but shame on them.

A lot of people are going on about the rounded corners, but that was only a small part of the suit. The larger part of Apple's claim was not simply that Samsung copied the iPhone, but that they copied it so closely that customers would have trouble distinguishing between them. To support this, Apple had logged calls from customers who owned Samsung phones which they thought were iPhones.

There was also the 126-page internal Samsung memo, comparing an early Samsung smartphone with the iPhone side by side, and showing how the Samsung phone could and should be made more like the iPhone.

There was also the memo from Google to Samsung saying, in effect, "make your phones less like the iPhone or you'll get sued."

Samsung's more recent phones have been innovative and have differentiated themselves from iPhones, but it's been built on the back of profits made on phones which did copy Apple's design and, given the enormous amount of resources put by Apple into R&D, marketing, and negotiating with carriers, I'm glad that the court has recognised that.

A Primal Nut

Johnmb wrote: »

I'd actually have thought it would lead to more choice. It's always been pretty clear that Samsung just copied the iPhone (it was just a matter of whether or not Apple could claim ownership of the designs). Now Samsung will have to go and innovate something different. With their money and resources, they should be able to come up with something new and unique, something Apple hasn't already come up with. Then, instead of just having the current choice of an iPhone or a cheaper knock-off, you'd have a choice of an iPhone or a unique Samsung phone that looks and feels completely different. Of course, if Samsung can't innovate something new they are in trouble, but that could be a life line to Nokia.

Samsung Galaxy phones are just as expensive as IPhones, if not more so. They are not cheap knock-offs. Actually many people would say they are better with more features.

Inquitus

This will be overturned on appeal, its far from over.

blankblank

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

A lot of people are going on about the rounded corners, but that was only a small part of the suit. The larger part of Apple's claim was not simply that Samsung copied the iPhone, but that they copied it so closely that customers would have trouble distinguishing between them. To support this, Apple had logged calls from customers who owned Samsung phones which they thought were iPhones.

There was also the 126-page internal Samsung memo, comparing an early Samsung smartphone with the iPhone side by side, and showing how the Samsung phone could and should be made more like the iPhone.

There was also the memo from Google to Samsung saying, in effect, "make your phones less like the iPhone or you'll get sued."

Samsung's more recent phones have been innovative and have differentiated themselves from iPhones, but it's been built on the back of profits made on phones which did copy Apple's design and, given the enormous amount of resources put by Apple into R&D, marketing, and negotiating with carriers, I'm glad that the court has recognised that.

But does this ruling not ruin the whole concept of "innovation" which keeps cropping up ?

You build a phone, i improve on, you then improve on that etc etc? This process will now be far more complicated with apple handing out licensing to everyone, driving up the prices of handsets.

Do you think that apple would have such a nice iOS if it wasnt for the competition from android over the past few years pushing them to make something better and cutting edge that would keep their customers?

Essentially apple now have a monopoly. They will come out with a new phone this september and it will probably be fantastic, and next september another new phone etc etc. and THEY will be the ones who decide what is current, what is "fantastic" and what customers will have, because they'll have this patent case to back them up against the likes of Samsung who may offer something similar on paper yes, but the iphone and GSII are completely different mobile experiences.

It will stagnate the market

The Mad Hatter

Davie89 wrote: »

But does this ruling not ruin the whole concept of "innovation" which keeps cropping up ?

Nope. It's possible to innovate without copying. Like I said, look at Samsung's current phones. Look at Windows Phone.

You build a phone, i improve on, you then improve on that etc etc? This process will now be far more complicated with apple handing out licensing to everyone, driving up the prices of handsets.

There's plenty of licensed technology in all phones at the moment, including iPhones. Stuff that's essential for the technology to work (such as 3G radios, etc.) is required by law to be licensed under Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Notably, several companies - including Samsung and not including Apple - are suing over FRAND patents anyway. Some other companies have charged higher prices to Apple for these licenses, which seems to contradict the "Non-Discriminatory" requirement.

Do you think that apple would have such a nice iOS if it wasnt for the competition from android over the past few years pushing them to make something better and cutting edge that would keep their customers?

Absolutely not - competition is essential. But it's not the same thing as copying.

Essentially apple now have a monopoly. They will come out with a new phone this september and it will probably be fantastic, and next september another new phone etc etc. and THEY will be the ones who decide what is current, what is "fantastic" and what customers will have, because they'll have this patent case to back them up against the likes of Samsung.

It will stagnate the market

Um, no.



It will take a lot to reverse that, and the defeat of one single manufacturer in one single lawsuit won't be enough.

blankblank

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

It will take a lot to reverse that, and the defeat of one single manufacturer in one single lawsuit won't be enough.

Probably should have been clearer, im not talking about all of the android phone market, im talking about the high end models which compete directly with the iphone, ala the GSIII/GSII.

Never again will we see the likes of the GSII from samsung, which in MY OPINION (before people start calling me a troll) was a far superior product in terms of design, software and functionality to the iphone 4 at the time, after owing both products.

Stainless_Steel

Samsung ripped Apple off. Good decision by the courts IMO.

jonnny68

Stainless_Steel wrote: »

Samsung ripped Apple off. Good decision by the courts IMO.

Bulls*it, Samsung are an innovative corporation and if anything it's the half eaten fruit who infringed

cgarrad

Apple need to focus on new products not litigation.

New iPhone has very little new (going on the leaks so far).

New iPad has a better screen but is worse in several other respects.

iTV is nowhere?

iPad mini will be a loss leader.

NetNinja

Tazium wrote: »

FWIW, Moses was the first dude with tablets.

I wonder if they had rounded edges? :pac:

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

jonnny68

For those of you saying some of this stuff existed before Apple patented it, realize this is nothing new. Apple loves to patent stuff that already exists and say they created it, look at the GUI they "borrowed" from Xerox. In 1989 Xerox filed a lawsuit against Apple for copying the look and feel of their GUI. Funny thing is Apple has now accused Android of doing the same thing they did to Xerox.

They know that Samsung have knocked them off their perch as king of smartphones and Android is light years ahead of the walled garden that is IOS.

cookie1977

Mitsubishi had their diamond touch device with pinch to zoom. I think (i could be wrong) this was shown as evidence by samsung

Mitsubishi engineer Adam Bogue, testified that he showed the Diamond Touch to Apple engineers back in 2003.

http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/14/apple-samsung-patent-trial-rebuttal-diamond-touch/

whiterebel

jonnny68 wrote: »

For those of you saying some of this stuff existed before Apple patented it, realize this is nothing new. Apple loves to patent stuff that already exists and say they created it, look at the GUI they "borrowed" from Xerox. In 1989 Xerox filed a lawsuit against Apple for copying the look and feel of their GUI. Funny thing is Apple has now accused Android of doing the same thing they did to Xerox.

They know that Samsung have knocked them off their perch as king of smartphones and Android is light years ahead of the walled garden that is IOS.

"The Xerox lawsuit was dismissed because the presiding judge dismissed most of Xerox's complaints as being inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons"

Xerox gave them permission to use things they saw in PARC, and then realised they made a complete arse of it.

cookie1977

Excellent analysis of internal Apple memo to employees from Tim Cook on the win:
http://www.jacquesmattheij.com/tim-cook-memo-line-by-line/

I particularly like and completely agree with his view of:

We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth.

And you’re doing that by virtue of the millions upon millions of man-hours that went into the real innovations, the ones by people that did not bother to patent their ideas but that simply thought that these things are too obvious to even begin to think of patenting them. Patents are being abused by companies the world over to keep the competition at bay, not to foster innovation. A patent on a grid of rounded icons? How else would you arrange them? A bit sloppy maybe, make the corners protrude? What about that pinch to zoom thing? Any suggestions on how else any half decent developer would implement that? These are not patents on innovation, they’re patents on simple ideas and features that you didn’t even think of first but you were the first to patent.

PS I think all of these patent lawsuits (no matter who's suing whom) are for the most part ridiculous

latenia

Apple (and everyone else) would do well to remember that the company was saved by and hugely profited from piracy when it introduced the ipod. As their own website says, a 160gb ipod can hold up to 40,000 songs; I sincerely doubt that the owners of these €200 devices spent up to €40K to fill them with music from itunes. People didn't buy ipods because of the sound quality or Ives' design but because you could stuff them with as much free music as you and your friends could download.

whiterebel

latenia wrote: »

Apple (and everyone else) would do well to remember that the company was saved by and hugely profited from piracy when it introduced the ipod. As their own website says, a 160gb ipod can hold up to 40,000 songs; I sincerely doubt that the owners of these €200 devices spent up to €40K to fill them with music from itunes. People didn't buy ipods because of the sound quality or Ives' design but because you could stuff them with as much free music as you and your friends could download.

The first one could hold 1000 songs, and Apple made it accessible only through iTunes, or to add your own CDs, in an effort to stop piracy. Even today their idevices have a crippled Bluetooth system to stop the sharing of music and movies. The mp3 players before the iPod were much easier to swap music with. The iMac saved Apple, not the iPod.