Apple v Samsung Patent verdict is out

murpho999

jonnny68 wrote: »

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

This makes me laugh.

A lot of Samsung supporters seem to believe that Apple about to turns us all into citizens of planet iEarth whilst Samsung are the corporate heroes making fantastic phones to protect us all from Apple's evil empire.

Please wake up both organisations are just technology companies and both are in the business of making money. Nothing more, nothing less.

Blazer

jonnny68 wrote: »

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

lol...it's amazing how stupid fanboys of whatever company they support come across regardless whether it's
Apple vs Samsung
iOS vs Android
ATI vs Nvidia
Intel vs AMD
Microsoft vs Linux and so on and on...

They just seem to regurgitiate whatever crap they read about and then take it as fact...
Wake up...just use whatever phone etc you like best and stop spouting rubbish.

The Mad Hatter

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.

If by "borrowed" you mean "bought". Apple paid for the Parc patents - admittedly they got it for an insanely low price, because the top brass at Xerox didn't know what a goldmine they were sitting on. Apple offered to license the infringing patents to Samsung, but Samsung said no.

Creamy Goodness

This sums up the case for me

https://mobile.twitter.com/danfrakes/status/239453665319088130

5 years ago the iPhone launched and was dismissed for its lack of buttons, but now five years later this design is obvious?

DubDJ

I knew it would play out like this. If Samsung won everyone would of said well done and the usual stuff. But because Apple won, Judges and Jury we're bribed and influenced. People saying Apple are using litigation to defeat competitors? But Samsung we're suing them too. It's a simple case, Apple think Samsung copied the design and features of their phone. A judge and jury agreed. Before this all went to trial Apple offered these patents to Samsung to use in their devices, but Samsung refused. Instead they went ahead and used them anyway without paying for them. Competition is great. But don't just go and make your phone look like the company your competing against. Do something different. That's what Apple did and it's worked out well for them so far.

I thought the ruling would stop all the bashing saying Apple compete in court, how they don't innovate. I was wrong. If Apple aren't innovating, then what have Google, Samsung or HTC brought to the table lately that's amazing and different. And don't say Notification Centre please.

blankblank

DubDJ wrote: »

I knew it would play out like this. If Samsung won everyone would of said well done and the usual stuff. But because Apple won, Judges and Jury we're bribed and influenced..

That must be some crystal ball you have there.

You dont know what would have been said if Samsung had won as they didn't.

It's not a case of which company is better than the other and which one can come up with more amazing products. The fact is Apple will now have a monopoly (at least for the time being) over the high end smart phone market until Samsung/other companies can come up with designs that don't infringe on their patents i.e rounded corners. That is not fair competition. If apple products are the supposed pinnacle of design they claim to be then why not let them stand side by side with the likes of the GSII and allow consumers make their own decision.

And this rubbish of "people were confused over which product they were buying", what a load of bull. Really, someone who buys a product in store with the name samsung on the stand/product itself, brings home the box with the wording samsung on it, has a charger with the name samsung on it, sees samsung everytime the phone is turned on. And they still think they have an apple product? Those people are clearly slaves to a brand, not informed consumers trying to make a conscious decision.

DubDJ

Davie89 wrote: »

That must be some crystal ball you have there.

You dont know what would have been said if Samsung had won as they didn't.

It's not a case of which company is better than the other and which one can come up with more amazing products. The fact is Apple will now have a monopoly (at least for the time being) over the high end smart phone market until Samsung/other companies can come up with designs that don't infringe on their patents i.e rounded corners. That is not fair competition. If apple products are the supposed pinnacle of design they claim to be then why not let them stand side by side with the likes of the GSII and allow consumers make their own decision.

And this rubbish of "people were confused over which product they were buying", what a load of bull. Really, someone who buys a product in store with the name samsung on the stand/product itself, brings home the box with the wording samsung on it, has a charger with the name samsung on it, sees samsung everytime the phone is turned on. And they still think they have an apple product? Those people are clearly slaves to a brand, not informed consumers trying to make a conscious decision.

It probably wouldn't of went to trial of Samsung has paid royalties to Apple for the use of the patents in the first place. But they refused. I don't think people should mix up both phone's. But when a phone is so close to the design of your phone, and you've spent millions on it in R&D, I think would be a little upset about it. The newer Samsungs arent so alike the iPhone now but previous models have been. I still don't think Apple have a monopoly. Still plenty of choice out there. Try a Nexus or HTC.

Tea 1000

DubDJ wrote: »

It probably wouldn't of went to trial of Samsung has paid royalties to Apple for the use of the patents in the first place. But they refused. I don't think people should mix up both phone's. But when a phone is so close to the design of your phone, and you've spent millions on it in R&D, I think would be a little upset about it. The newer Samsungs arent so alike the iPhone now but previous models have been. I still don't think Apple have a monopoly. Still plenty of choice out there. Try a Nexus or HTC.

But clever design was never something that other companies patented. They'd come up with something clever after years of R&D, put it to the market and if it worked with the consumer, get the lead in the race. Everyone else will copy, slightly modify and compete, but as you have the lead it's up to you to continue to innovate and push.
But it seems that's not the Apple way. People here praising them as if they're the only company ever who put a few years of thought into a product. What if Ford patented independent rear suspension in a hatchback back in the late 90's? All that serves is to stifle competition. Instead they ran with their innovative idea, got priased for it, enjoyed their lead, others caught up, Ford need to push ahead to keep ahead, not cry to a judge and say it's unfair that you're combined ideas from previous existing ideas should be patented so no one else can ever compete.
I don't think design patents should exist. Functional is a different story, but not design ones. What if TV companies behaved the same way?
"Sorry, you'll just have to invent a triangular TV, we already have a rectangle one with numerical sequencing for channels!"

D_BEAR

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

This sums up the case for me

https://mobile.twitter.com/danfrakes/status/239453665319088130

5 years ago the iPhone launched and was dismissed for its lack of buttons, but now five years later this design is obvious?

LG seemed to think it was obvious back in 2006.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/15/the-lg-ke850-touchable-chocolate/

DubDJ

Tea 1000 wrote: »

But clever design was never something that other companies patented. They'd come up with something clever after years of R&D, put it to the market and if it worked with the consumer, get the lead in the race. Everyone else will copy, slightly modify and compete, but as you have the lead it's up to you to continue to innovate and push.
But it seems that's not the Apple way. People here praising them as if they're the only company ever who put a few years of thought into a product. What if Ford patented independent rear suspension in a hatchback back in the late 90's? All that serves is to stifle competition. Instead they ran with their innovative idea, got priased for it, enjoyed their lead, others caught up, Ford need to push ahead to keep ahead, not cry to a judge and say it's unfair that you're combined ideas from previous existing ideas should be patented so no one else can ever compete.
I don't think design patents should exist. Functional is a different story, but not design ones. What if TV companies behaved the same way?
"Sorry, you'll just have to invent a triangular TV, we already have a rectangle one with numerical sequencing for channels!"

The whole rectangle thing is rediculous too. It's not that Samsung made a rectangle phone. It's that they made one so close to the look of the iPhone that made them unhappy.

And the guts of the patents in this trial we're related to function instead of design. The fact is anything Apple has brought to the table over the last few years, be it the iMac, MacBooks, iPhone or iPad, a few months to years later there are hundreds of companies using the same designs. Strikingly similar ones. I'm not saying the general shape of these things. I'm talking about everything down to colour and keyboard design. And I'm in no way saying Apple invented these things. They paid designers millions to go through these designs and find one that works. I don't think it should be fair that other companies just as big decide to skip over that process and copy what's already there.

Innovation is coming up with your own designs and ideas and reimagining whats already there. Not taking what's there and adding a new OS.

opinion guy

The only people who win from this are patent lawyers.

The simple fact is - patent law is outdated. This kind of law suit is retarded. They should all just get on with making better products

Kiith

Not too happy with the result, but it's not that surprising. The whole patent system in the US is a joke anyway. Samsung probably did use similar designs to Apple's in some of their products, but companies have been doing that forever. Is this actually going to change things?

Also, anyone who accidentally buys a Samsung phone, thinking it was an iPhone, is a ****ing moron and doesn't deserve either phone.

tallus

Tazium wrote: »

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.

Thanked for the Moses comment

whiterebel

DubDJ wrote: »

The whole rectangle thing is rediculous too. It's not that Samsung made a rectangle phone. It's that they made one so close to the look of the iPhone that made them unhappy.

And the guts of the patents in this trial we're related to function instead of design. The fact is anything Apple has brought to the table over the last few years, be it the iMac, MacBooks, iPhone or iPad, a few months to years later there are hundreds of companies using the same designs. Strikingly similar ones. I'm not saying the general shape of these things. I'm talking about everything down to colour and keyboard design. And I'm in no way saying Apple invented these things. They paid designers millions to go through these designs and find one that works. I don't think it should be fair that other companies just as big decide to skip over that process and copy what's already there.

Innovation is coming up with your own designs and ideas and reimagining whats already there. Not taking what's there and adding a new OS.

Thats why they sue. Apple pay Ives handsomely for his designs. Its not right that others just come along and copy them.

pfurey101

An American court finds in favour of an American company - wow!

Google v Apple v Samsung. Cant see Apple winning in the long term, this is not how you handle competition (and many say superior products). They have done themselves no favours outside of the US and all Apple fanboys.

Its just as well they dont make TV's!

I hope Apple are studying Nokias demise and learn from it.

Is this Betamax v VHS again? Apple being Betamax and VHS being the rest of the world.

Creamy Goodness

pfurey101 wrote: »

An American court finds in favour of an American company - wow!

apple were suing three companies in this court case

samsung electronics USA.
samsung telephony USA.
samsung electronics Korea.

it's not a case of patriotism in the slightest.

Apple and Google won't sue each other, they will settle and get on with things.

Zascar

No, Beatmax was better than VHS but unfortunately they lost.

pfurey101

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

apple were suing three companies in this court case

samsung electronics USA.
samsung telephony USA.
samsung electronics Korea.

it's not a case of patriotism in the slightest.

Thats stretching it a bit!

Apple = American (albeit built in China)
Samsung = Not American (albeit with American offices)

I thought Apple hated Google (as they hate everything non Apple) - no Google Maps, no Youtube and god knows what else.

Ive always wondered why Adobe dont start suing due to the Flash ban?

pfurey101

Zascar wrote: »

No, Beatmax was better than VHS but unfortunately they lost.

I was trying to appease the Apple fanboys, after all this is their forum.

DubDJ

pfurey101 wrote: »

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

apple were suing three companies in this court case

samsung electronics USA.
samsung telephony USA.
samsung electronics Korea.

it's not a case of patriotism in the slightest.

Thats stretching it a bit!

Apple = American (albeit built in China)
Samsung = Not American (albeit with American offices)

I thought Apple hated Google (as they hate everything non Apple) - no Google Maps, no Youtube and god knows what else.

Ive always wondered why Adobe dont start suing due to the Flash ban?

Why would they sue Apple? It's up to them what they put on their phone. They didn't want flash, and as Adobe has discontinued mobile flash it turned out to be the right decision, so they didn't install it on their devices. I rarely ever need flash for anything. Deleting the Google apps is like a new feature of iOS 6 for me. Regular updates to their apps is a good thing.

Creamy Goodness

pfurey101 wrote: »

Thats stretching it a bit!

Apple = American (albeit built in China)
Samsung = Not American (albeit with American offices)

I thought Apple hated Google (as they hate everything non Apple) - no Google Maps, no Youtube and god knows what else.

Ive always wondered why Adobe dont start suing due to the Flash ban?

it's not, the majority of the samsung phones in the case are their american versions and ones that are only sold in america.

google and apple hate each other but they won't sue each other, they'll settle. imagine the consequences if either of them won? one or the other could be put out of business.

adobe have opening admitted that flash is dead and inadvertently declaring that apple were right. just last week they pulled it from the google play store.

Soarer

Pfft! I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox and Sorny!

jonnny68

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-31/apple-loses-japan-patent-lawsuit-against-samsung-over-devices.html


Just in case you don't know - also in the UK,Holland and Australia Apple have not gotten the verdict they had hoped for but unsurprisingly enough in USA they did funny how this ruling in Japan or none of the others didn't get the media coverage the American one did, the rotten fruit are become more and more desperate by the day knowing full well Samsung and Android in particular have overtaken them and they will go to extreme lengths to try and put a stop to this, any respect i ever had for Apple as a company who innovate has gone, they come across as an increasingly desperate corporation who have been knocked off their perch and are like a "wounded animal" as it were.

thomasj

jonnny68 wrote: »

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-31/apple-loses-japan-patent-lawsuit-against-samsung-over-devices.html


Just in case you don't know - also in the UK,Holland and Australia Apple have not gotten the verdict they had hoped for but unsurprisingly enough in USA they did funny how this ruling in Japan or none of the others didn't get the media coverage the American one did, the rotten fruit are become more and more desperate by the day knowing full well Samsung and Android in particular have overtaken them and they will go to extreme lengths to try and put a stop to this, any respect i ever had for Apple as a company who innovate has gone, they come across as an increasingly desperate corporation who have been knocked off their perch and are like a "wounded animal" as it were.

Don't forget south Korea where the judge ruled against both apple and Samsung and products including the iPhone 4, iPhone 3s, ipads 1 and 2, galaxy s and s2 have been banned from stores in south Korea. Okay, Samsung have had some of their older products banned but apple have as well.

There are reports that Samsung plan on taking action against apple if its next iPhone is lte/4g capable. At the moment the current ipads (latest version) is 4g capable but Samsung is waiting to see if apple introduces the technology in its next iPhone. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/9511192/Samsung-may-sue-Apple-over-LTE-technology.html at the moment Nokia and Samsung share a major portion of the lte patent.

Something seems strange that this trial took place down the road from apples HQ. Furthermore when you consider how long it took the jury to deliberate and that not one of samsungs patents were agreed by the jury. Having said that there were times that Samsung blew it for themselves.

Kiith

Apple are now seeking to include the Galaxy S3 and the Galaxy Note in the list of products that infringe on its patents.

BBC wrote:

Apple has added the best-selling Samsung Galaxy S3 handset to a list of products it says infringe its patents.

The Galaxy Note tablet is also included in a new list of 21 gadgets submitted to a court in California.

It is not the same court that last month awarded Apple $1.05bn (£644m) after finding Samsung guilty of "wilful" copyright infringement.

If the new court initially finds infringement, it has the power to halt Galaxy sales in the US before trial.

"Rather than innovate and develop its own technology and a unique Samsung style for its smartphone and tablet computer products, Samsung has chosen to copy Apple's technology, user interface, and innovative style," Apple said in a legal document, as reported by the AP news agency.

Consumer choice
Samsung in turn accused the US tech giant of limiting consumer choice.

"Apple continues to resort to litigation over market competition in an effort to limit consumer choice," Samsung said in a statement.

Product designer Geoff McCormick strips down an iPhone to explain patents
"We will continue to take the necessary legal measures to ensure the availability of our innovative products in the United States."

More than 10 million Galaxy S3 handsets have been sold worldwide since its launch in May 2012.

Stuart Miles, editor of the Pocket Lint website, told the BBC Apple "would be stupid not to" seek to have other infringing products banned from sale, but he did not believe consumers would suffer.

"Consumers will benefit as Samsung will have to innovate even further - it means we'll have better choice," he said.

"If you like the iPhone OS you'll go for iPhone, and if you don't, Samsung will have other cool features."

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19463693