[swyost]

Well for starters it is all too common given Korean court ruled that they both infringed on one another there. But there the Galaxy S2 got banned but also did the iPad1 & 2, iPhone 3GS, and iPhone4. Which I found hillarious Apple lost bigger than they gained in that country. Made up for it in this case though.

The judge didn't let Samsung present the same type of evidence that Apple presented. Emails and documents that said Apple was using designs from other companies like Sony to design the original iPhone and iPad. In truth it is common practice for companies to buy a competitors product, disect it, and then design their own thing based off the various things that they find and creating their own tech to a point. Samsung had their documents shared in court stating to that fact. That's what killed them.

I own a lot of Samsung things, dislike Apple for the fact they lock so much stuff down and charge more or at all for things I can get for free or use otherwise. My sadness about all this is as a tech lover and geek. This just opens the flood gates for people to create devices left and right just to patent design and make it harder for individual companies to come out with their own because the corners look too much like the iPhone or any other companies devices. This case will be used as precedent in so many other patent cases that it will kill a lot of innovative start ups before they can start.

That the judge did not allow Samsung to present evidence Apple used the same tactics with other companies was absolutely the correct decision. There is no tenet in the American legal system that says the laws are waived because you did it yourself to someone else. If Sony was suing Apple then they would be justified but that was not the case.

I am also really tired of these doom saying comments about how this is going to destroy innovation or people are going to patent everything. Innovation is stifled when inventors, whether they be a one person shop or Apple, or Google, or Microsoft, etc., can have their creations appropriated by others with the inventor receiving no benefit. If Samsung benefitted by abusing Apple's patents, that gave them a competitive advantage over other manufacturers. By not negotiating licensing terms, that could have also given Samsung an unfair cost advantage. People on this site otherwise seem rather bright. but on this issue, take off the blinders, look at the patent laws, and consider the evidence in that light. Apple did not win on every count. They won on those that were pretty clear cut and also supported by Samsung's own documents that were produced in the discovery phase.

The patent system actually still works and this is an example of that fact. Samsung could not prove their case, and evidence from their own records supported Apple's contention about copying elements of Apple products that were already patented. As at least one analyst noted, over a decade ago Apple lost its look and feel argument against Microsoft and almost went under as a result. I would suggest, they would not have pulled this trigger unless they were convinced the preponderance of the evidence (and the resulting odds) would be in their favor.

The thing this decision may really influence is the extent to which large companies may be willing to push the envelope with respect to utilizing elements that might be considered part of someone else's patent. Guess what? That might actually lead companies to think outside of the box and really innovate, or put up the money to get access to the patents of innovators. BTW, look and feel have been patented for as long as there has been a patent system. Every manufacturer selling products in the US knows this fact. They also should understand the risk of making their product too much like something else on the market that may be patented.

[swyost]

It was not a fair trial. And this is what happens when a judge allows this kind of case to go forward and be decided by people who have no idea what they are looking at or how to judge it. And then withholding the evidence that shows that Apple did not even originate their own design. Some common sense would go a long way too. I mean, how different is a phone going to look. I knew this would happen with this being decided in the Bay Area and ***** fans wanting to give Steve Jobs his dying wish.

Of course if the decision went the other way, the jury would have been composed of the most forward thinking people in the country. While not perfect, the jury system is a lot better than the alternative. I would rather not see elements of fascism in the judicial system any more than I want it in the political system. BTW, the argument that the jurors who have "no idea" shouldn't be on a jury is really just silly. Last time I checked, you do not have to be a murderer to be a juror on a murder trial. Sarcasm aside, jury selection can be a long and tedious process and Samsung's lawyers accepted these jurors. They also didn't exactly try to force a change of venue. My bet is that, statistically, a male skewed jury would also probably be seen to favor Android/Samsung over Apple. As far as "how different can a phone look," grab any Nokia Windows phone (or actually any Windows Phone in reality), any BlackBerry, or any slider phone and then try to ask that question. For that matter, there are lots of Samsung phones, past and present, that were not found to infringe on the iPhone look and feel.

[corydorcutt]

That the judge did not allow Samsung to present evidence Apple used the same tactics with other companies was absolutely the correct decision. There is no tenet in the American legal system that says the laws are waived because you did it yourself to someone else. If Sony was suing Apple then they would be justified but that was not the case.

I am also really tired of these doom saying comments about how this is going to destroy innovation or people are going to patent everything. Innovation is stifled when inventors, whether they be a one person shop or Apple, or Google, or Microsoft, etc., can have their creations appropriated by others with the inventor receiving no benefit. If Samsung benefitted by abusing Apple's patents, that gave them a competitive advantage over other manufacturers. By not negotiating licensing terms, that could have also given Samsung an unfair cost advantage. People on this site otherwise seem rather bright. but on this issue, take off the blinders, look at the patent laws, and consider the evidence in that light. Apple did not win on every count. They won on those that were pretty clear cut and also supported by Samsung's own documents that were produced in the discovery phase.

The patent system actually still works and this is an example of that fact. Samsung could not prove their case, and evidence from their own records supported Apple's contention about copying elements of Apple products that were already patented. As at least one analyst noted, over a decade ago Apple lost its look and feel argument against Microsoft and almost went under as a result. I would suggest, they would not have pulled this trigger unless they were convinced the preponderance of the evidence (and the resulting odds) would be in their favor.

The thing this decision may really influence is the extent to which large companies may be willing to push the envelope with respect to utilizing elements that might be considered part of someone else's patent. Guess what? That might actually lead companies to think outside of the box and really innovate, or put up the money to get access to the patents of innovators. BTW, look and feel have been patented for as long as there has been a patent system. Every manufacturer selling products in the US knows this fact. They also should understand the risk of making their product too much like something else on the market that may be patented.

When you can patent shapes and contours, the patent system is in trouble.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

[swyost]

Plain and simple the patent system was designed to protect start up companies and inventors, not allow multi billion dollar companies to bully the competition. Maybe apple isn't a monopoly yet, but it what they are pushing for.

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

The patent system was absolutely not designed to protect start-up companies. It has always been about protecting intellectual property and it doesn't matter whether it is a billion dollar company or a person in their garage. Do you think Ford stopped patenting things once Henry Ford became a millionaire? Actually, I can't remember which car is being advertised since I have only ever heard the commercial in the background on BBC America, but there is an add running on a pretty regular basis that just touts the thousands of patents that went into producing the car.

As much as I dislike Apple they are also not a monopoly and really don't even bring particularly monopolistic practices to the table. You are only locked into their ecosystem if you choose their products but they are not in any way the only option. If you want to consider a company that actually does engage in monopolistic practices, take a look at the one down the road with the smiley faces and lava lamps (Google to those who miss the description). Google uses its search engine to leverage the company's position with respect to internet ad revenues. It also gives away an operating system that then allows Google to further leverage its position in mobile technology and reinforce the dominance of its search engine (and ad revenue stream) . These revenues then allow Google to design or buy software and technology (and companies) that let it further expand its share in multiple markets. The Google trajectory, if unchecked, can lead to a situation where consumers on one level or another have no choice, and may not even be aware that they have been captured by Google (with no easy opt out). It is not a monopoly yet but anyone who does not recognize that is the intent is being very naïve....

[Ry]

When you can patent shapes and contours, the patent system is in trouble.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Doesn't Coca-Cola have a patent on the "Coke-bottle" shape?

Other Android OEMs have made tons of devices that don't look like iPhones. Just sayin'.

Just saying.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

[Andrew Martonik]

When you can patent shapes and contours, the patent system is in trouble.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Interestingly that's one of the things that the court today didn't hold up. The Galaxy Tab was found to not infringe on the iPad design patent.

[JHBThree]

Having a high % of the profits and high margins isn't illegal though.

I know. That's why all of the monopoly talk is nonsense.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[JHBThree]

Interestingly that's one of the things that the court today didn't hold up. The Galaxy Tab was found to not infringe on the iPad design patent.

Which, like the rest of the decisions, was reasonable. Although the galaxy tab looks similar, it is different enough from the patent not to infringe.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[deucalion]

Why is it anyone speaking rational thought is branded as a cultist or a agenda person. Mob mentality at its best.

Apple won, fair and square because they were right. Samsung and others have to stop copying - pure and simple.

Its easy to hate. Hate Oracle, hate Microsoft and now hate Apple - such poison and irrationality.

People are supporting a cheater and copycat company like Samsung. What a warped sense of right or wrong we have now.

[deucalion]

Could we move onward and drop the whole "colorful" metaphors, etc.... I think we still achieve our point without going down that street.

Thanks everyone...

I am a newcomer here mate, and the amount of hate and irrationality spewed against Apple (deserved or not) is evidence of a thread, board and forum already down to mob status.

Its already just another useless Internet board. With the only issues being addressed are peoples hurt egos by this verdict.

Mods need to step up.

[cormaster628]

I apologize for being a jerk last night. I was really angry and thinking irrationally. I'll be fair in saying that when I got my Captivate and used touch wiz for the first time my first thought was "Apple is going to sue them". If apple forces them to kill touchwiz then the verdict is a good thing. Touchwiz is absolutely terrible, even worse than HTC Sense. At least sense is original and doesn't mimic apple.

As far as apple goes I try not to be an android fanboy. Let's face it iphones are easy to use. A buddy of mine whose not a techie at all bought an evo 4g when they came out, returned it the next day for a basic Sanyo flip phone because he couldn't figure it out. More recently I recommended by get a iphone because it's easier to use and he did and loves it. I've also recommended them to my parents too.

Honestly if they jury did side with Samsung it was a loss too. Imo android and Apple can peacefully coexist but not with apples ridiculous book of patents. Overall I'm sick of all patent trials, whoever wins, we the consumer loose. It time to change the patent laws.

I guess for me I just don't get why else apple would need retribution for damages. It doesn't seem to make that Samsung has cost apple any money at all, Apple people will buy iphones regardless and they just got labeled the most valuable company of all time. I really don't think Samsung was hurting anything.

But yeah Samsung did a bad job presenting itself so yes I agree in that aspect the verdict was fair. Samsungs case seemed to be "yeah we copied because this stuff shouldn't be patented anyway". Fail Samsung, fail.
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

[MERCDROID]

Honestly, I can understand people being angry at this verdict, but the fact is that Samsung copied Apple, blatantly. And this is coming from someone that has the Galaxy S3 and absolutely loves it. We criticize iOS users as being cultist, but when we hear news that we don't agree with, our inner fanboy comes out and clouds our judgement. This may seem bad at first, but in reality it is a blessing in disguise. And to be honest, it is a short term and hallow victory at best for Apple. Why? When a company is backed into a corner, they are forced to change. In this case, Samsung is forced to think out of the box and innovate. Because of this ruling, the Galaxy S4 may be even more amazing when it launches next year. Many or all of Samsung's future phones will have different design language, and possibly have stripped down versions of Touchwiz or even be exclusively AOSP. And not just Samsung, but all Android OEMs can benefit from changing their tactics. Just my opinion

[cormaster628]

Yeah maybe it'll make Touchwiz more appealing. Touchwiz used to be pretty light but now it's over intrusive and the whole point of it seems to be that it's different from stock Android and has a apple look to it. It's not better. Kudos for Htc because at least sense does try to actively improve android, though for a purist like me I don't care for it much.

Also the verdict at this point won't change anything. Samsung owes apple a billion dollars, pocket change to the largest company that came out of Korea, and they are going to appeal anyway. Nothing is banned, if your wanting a galaxy nexus or a galaxy s3, today, the day after, they are still being sold and will continue to be for any foreseeable future

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[corydorcutt]

Doesn't Coca-Cola have a patent on the "Coke-bottle" shape?

Other Android OEMs have made tons of devices that don't look like iPhones. Just sayin'.

Just saying.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

I think you'll find Glass Pepsi bottles look nearly indistinguishable from coke bottles. Devices like the Galaxy Nexus look NOTHING like the iPhone but still supposedly violate their trade dress. It's like a car company patenting round wheels. This is the same company who patented multi-touch after someone else invented it.

Look, I wouldn't take issue over Samsung receiving a fair fine over the fact that touch wiz honestly looks similar to iOS. But a BILLION dollars because Apple's patented the rectangle and freakin rubber banding?! Microsoft used to try to pull this kind of crap too and it was just as despicable and against the spirit of Capitalism. If you think Apple won't be going after every other Android manufacturer now that they've set a precedent than you've got another thing coming.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

[corydorcutt]

Interestingly that's one of the things that the court today didn't hold up. The Galaxy Tab was found to not infringe on the iPad design patent.

The tab was not. Many phones were. Their trade press patents held up.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

[cormaster628]

I really don't see how the tablet is a rip off at all, first of all the ipad has a 4:3 aspect ratio while the tab 10.1 uses 16:9 so the ipad looks more like a square while the tab looks like a rectangle. Secondly the ipad has a physical home button, the tab has no physical buttons on the front. Thirdly even with touchwiz the tabs ui looks more like stock honeycomb and honeycomb looks completely different from the ipads phone like ui. The only thing that is similar at all is the gigantic black slab which imo makes all android tablets infringe on Apple patents

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

[Ry]

Why is it anyone speaking rational thought is branded as a cultist or a agenda person. Mob mentality at its best.

Apple won, fair and square because they were right. Samsung and others have to stop copying - pure and simple.

Its easy to hate. Hate Oracle, hate Microsoft and now hate Apple - such poison and irrationality.

People are supporting a cheater and copycat company like Samsung. What a warped sense of right or wrong we have now.

Apparently when you activate an Android phone, there's something in the terms that says you must blindly support any and every Android OEM whether they are right or wrong.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

[Ry]

Honestly if they jury did side with Samsung it was a loss too. Imo android and Apple can peacefully coexist but not with apples ridiculous book of patents. Overall I'm sick of all patent trials, whoever wins, we the consumer loose. It time to change the patent laws.

I guess for me I just don't get why else apple would need retribution for damages. It doesn't seem to make that Samsung has cost apple any money at all, Apple people will buy iphones regardless and they just got labeled the most valuable company of all time. I really don't think Samsung was hurting anything.

But yeah Samsung did a bad job presenting itself so yes I agree in that aspect the verdict was fair. Samsungs case seemed to be "yeah we copied because this stuff shouldn't be patented anyway". Fail Samsung, fail.
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

So you're saying Apple should have won but received no compensation from Samsung after Samsung was found by a jury to infringe on Apple's IP just because Apple is the most valuable company in the world?



Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

[Ry]

Honestly, I can understand people being angry at this verdict, but the fact is that Samsung copied Apple, blatantly. And this is coming from someone that has the Galaxy S3 and absolutely loves it. We criticize iOS users as being cultist, but when we hear news that we don't agree with, our inner fanboy comes out and clouds our judgement. This may seem bad at first, but in reality it is a blessing in disguise. And to be honest, it is a short term and hallow victory at best for Apple. Why? When a company is backed into a corner, they are forced to change. In this case, Samsung is forced to think out of the box and innovate. Because of this ruling, the Galaxy S4 may be even more amazing when it launches next year. Many or all of Samsung's future phones will have different design language, and possibly have stripped down versions of Touchwiz or even be exclusively AOSP. And not just Samsung, but all Android OEMs can benefit from changing their tactics. Just my opinion

Spot on. Thank you.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

[Ry]

I think you'll find Glass Pepsi bottles look nearly indistinguishable from coke bottles. Devices like the Galaxy Nexus look NOTHING like the iPhone but still supposedly violate their trade dress. It's like a car company patenting round wheels. This is the same company who patented multi-touch after someone else invented it.

Look, I wouldn't take issue over Samsung receiving a fair fine over the fact that touch wiz honestly looks similar to iOS. But a BILLION dollars because Apple's patented the rectangle and freakin rubber banding?! Microsoft used to try to pull this kind of crap too and it was just as despicable and against the spirit of Capitalism. If you think Apple won't be going after every other Android manufacturer now that they've set a precedent than you've got another thing coming.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

I thought the Galaxy Nexus lawsuits didn't involve any trade dress- it was all software patents mainly related to search.

Going back to Coke vs. Pepsi- I'm pretty sure the story was Coca-Cola wanted a unique bottle for their products, so unique that one could tell they were holding a Coke bottle if they were in the dark. This was ages ago though, not sure how long trade dress or design patents last. If Pepsi changed their can to red and their logotype to a white script, I'm pretty sure Coke would sue.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

[cormaster628]

So you're saying Apple should have won but received no compensation from Samsung after Samsung was found by a jury to infringe on Apple's IP just because Apple is the most valuable company in the world?



Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

No what I'm saying is how did this go to court anyway? Patents are to protect from another company ripping off and damaging another company. Samsung isn't damaging Apple, not at all so what is the issue exactly? I guess I just get mad when I hear about how the Galaxy s phones did irreparable harm to apple. All the Apple fans are going to by apple regardless so I just don't see how they did any irreparable harm or hurt apples reputation.

I'll bring it fair in saying Touchwiz and the gigantic physical home button mimic apple but even then the galaxy S doesn't look identical to the iphone nor does Touchwiz look and work exactly like ios. Last I checked Touchwiz has this thing called "homescreens" something ios doesn't have. Also every tablet style touch screen phone looks like an iphone to someone who doesn't know better.

You know what was a direct rip off of an apple product? The Microsoft Zune. It looked and felt like an ipod and even had proprietary software to sync to and from the pc similar to itunes. In about every way shape and form the Zune was an ipod rip off but I don't recall apple claiming it did irreparable harm to the company and hitting Microsoft will a patent lawsuit. The difference is the Zune was a market flop while Samsung has had considerable success with their galaxy s phones.

Thats why I can't help but think this is apples way of bullying the competition. I agree the verdict was fair given the cases presented and the evidence. It just their shouldn't have been a case to begin with.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[thenameisnigel]

No what I'm saying is how did this go to court anyway? Patents are to protect from another company ripping off and damaging another company. Samsung isn't damaging Apple, not at all so what is the issue exactly? I guess I just get mad when I hear about how the Galaxy s phones did irreparable harm to apple. All the Apple fans are going to by apple regardless so I just don't see how they did any irreparable harm or hurt apples reputation.

I'll bring it fair in saying Touchwiz and the gigantic physical home button mimic apple but even then the galaxy S doesn't look identical to the iphone nor does Touchwiz look and work exactly like ios. Last I checked Touchwiz has this thing called "homescreens" something ios doesn't have. Also every tablet style touch screen phone looks like an iphone to someone who doesn't know better.

You know what was a direct rip off of an apple product? The Microsoft Zune. It looked and felt like an ipod and even had proprietary software to sync to and from the pc similar to itunes. In about every way shape and form the Zune was an ipod rip off but I don't recall apple claiming it did irreparable harm to the company and hitting Microsoft will a patent lawsuit. The difference is the Zune was a market flop while Samsung has had considerable success with their galaxy s phones.

Thats why I can't help but think this is apples way of bullying the competition. I agree the verdict was fair given the cases presented and the evidence. It just their shouldn't have been a case to begin with.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

As a user with the SGS II (Epic 4G Touch) I can say that it is very iOS like. But the point is Samsung as well as Apple used other OEM's design to base there product off of. No doubt about it. Yes, Apple won. But if the leaked pictures of the iPhone 5 is true, then best believe that phone is darn skippy based of Samsung-Model phones.

[Ry]

No what I'm saying is how did this go to court anyway? Patents are to protect from another company ripping off and damaging another company. Samsung isn't damaging Apple, not at all so what is the issue exactly? I guess I just get mad when I hear about how the Galaxy s phones did irreparable harm to apple. All the Apple fans are going to by apple regardless so I just don't see how they did any irreparable harm or hurt apples reputation.

I'll bring it fair in saying Touchwiz and the gigantic physical home button mimic apple but even then the galaxy S doesn't look identical to the iphone nor does Touchwiz look and work exactly like ios. Last I checked Touchwiz has this thing called "homescreens" something ios doesn't have. Also every tablet style touch screen phone looks like an iphone to someone who doesn't know better.

You know what was a direct rip off of an apple product? The Microsoft Zune. It looked and felt like an ipod and even had proprietary software to sync to and from the pc similar to itunes. In about every way shape and form the Zune was an ipod rip off but I don't recall apple claiming it did irreparable harm to the company and hitting Microsoft will a patent lawsuit. The difference is the Zune was a market flop while Samsung has had considerable success with their galaxy s phones.

Thats why I can't help but think this is apples way of bullying the competition. I agree the verdict was fair given the cases presented and the evidence. It just their shouldn't have been a case to begin with.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Are you possibling buying into Samsung's "this phone's sales were miniscule so you shouldn't bother us" argument?

There should be monetary damages because Samsung was found to have been ripping off Apple.

Plus those sales could have been iPhone sales- copying to create confusion.

Samsung is the top phone maker in terms of volume. It's not like Apple is bullying a Meizu in this case.

I own a Zune. The original and the HD. The only thing similar between the two was that they played back media. The Zune desktop software was NOTHING like iTunes. The Zune interface on their devices was NOTHING like any iPod's interface. The Zune basically started Microsoft's shift to the "don't call it Metro anymore" UI style, which looks nothing like anyone else's interface.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

[cormaster628]

I just sold my original zune 30 for money towards my Nexus 7 and i'll agree with you that the software was completely different but the fact it used software is an apple concept as every other media player is drag and drop. And the cable, nearly identical to the ipod. Even the reviews said "about the only reason to buy it, is to not buy an ipod". I had one because I needed a high capacity media player and newegg had a refurbished with the free car kit for 100. I had no complaints but still it looked like an ipod and functioned like one.

As far as "those sales could of been apple sales" so what competing companies aren't allowed to compete? And I can't speak for everyone but Apple wasn't selling me an iphone regardless. As far as I'm concerned, HTC lost a sale as I was drooling over the nexus one, then Samsung showed off their galaxy s phones and I was in love, and even more excited finding out it was coming to at&t and I could get one on contract. So I got a captivate instead.

I'm not going to lie, I really kinda wanted an iphone when they came out. But while they were a step ahead of many things, they were a step behind on the basics like multitasking, 3G, and mms and that's why I never bought one and eventually android came along and then I no longer cared to own one. Apple basically created their own worst enemy by keeping it on one carrier till 2010 and not including certain base features. Had it been on all 4 android would either cease to exist or might be more of a blackberry alternative. Form follows function. Apple definitely changed everything with the iphone but they gotta let people compete and they gotta be more innovative theirselves. I even have a friend who just sold his iphone 4s after owning a 4 and a 3G and bought a galaxy nexus for something different. The iphone has only really had minor changes over the years and is terribly outdated compared to say the Galaxy S3 or HTC one X.

The point is above all this is Apple people buy apple, android people buy android, and if apple people are buying Samsung instead then it their own fault.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[cormaster628]

You also gotta figure Samsung is the top phone maker because they make 100 different models from android phones to windows phone 7 models to bada phones to dumb phones. Samsungs was probably one of the top phone makers before the iphone release. I've had more Samsung phones than any other manufacturer and only one was a smartphone. Sgh-X427, Sync A707, Eternity A867, Mythic A897, and Captivate i897. Thats a span from 2003 to 2010.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2