Apple / Samsung Court Ruling

[RichardRight]

Lots of blind product support in this thread, especially those that are swearing off any Apple products (limiting your options only hurts you, but go right ahead) but this statement is just false. Neither of these features are Android. In fact, the bound back behavior was removed long ago because of this. That is why we have the "glow" once you read the furthest point in a particular direction.

Edited by moderator.

Maybe you should read the conversation in context. The person you quoted was not saying that android rather than Apple invented those features. Rather, he was saying that not all issues in the lawsuit were specific to Samsung. He was pointing out that at least a couple of them were all Android devices and not just Samsung. It appears he was not the stupid one after all.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[jschu22]

Maybe you should read the conversation in context. The person you quoted was not saying that android rather than Apple invented those features. Rather, he was saying that not all issues in the lawsuit were specific to Samsung. He was pointing out that at least a couple of them were all Android devices and not just Samsung. It appears he was not the stupid one after all.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Regardless of the context, the statement was wrong.

Thanks for helping prove both of my points by the way.

 

[jschu22]

Anyone confused as to why Samsung was "targeted" should try to understand that while Google may have created the OS, it is the handset manufacturer that will typically be challenged. They are the ones that made it available to the public and chose what parts of the OS to use and/or alter. Samsung's size, and possibly arrogance, put them right in the cross hairs.

 

[rootbrain]

Anyone confused as to why Samsung was "targeted" should try to understand that while Google may have created the OS, it is the handset manufacturer that will typically be challenged. They are the ones that made it available to the public and chose what parts of the OS to use and/or alter. Samsung's size, and possibly arrogance, put them right in the cross hairs.

Samsung's size and arrogance? Get real, it's Apple's arrogance that puts everyone in the crosshairs.

You'd think Steve Jobs built the smart phone market by himself. Glad to see now that the 7" tablet that was no good according to Jobs will now be coming to Apple products?

 

[jschu22]

Samsung's size and arrogance? Get real, it's Apple's arrogance that puts everyone in the crosshairs.

You'd think Steve Jobs built the smart phone market by himself. Glad to see now that the 7" tablet that was no good according to Jobs will now be coming to Apple products?

Publicly Samsung will no doubt challenge this ruling and question its merits. Privately, I wouldnt be surprised if some heads roll because it likely would have been much less costly to deal with Apple out of court than to fight what any logical and rational person could have seen as a losing battle. Samsung thought they were above needing to do this. That's why I called them arrogant. Case in point: HTC One X. They knew the didn't stand a chance, made the changes necessary to avoid further losses.

 

[RichardRight]

Regardless of the context, the statement was wrong.

Thanks for helping prove both of my points by the way.

His comment was that some of the matters in the lawsuit were not specific to Samsung, but were in all Android devices. Some how you interpreted that to mean that android invented those things. [Edited by moderator]

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[swyost]

One thing I don't understand about this patent case, why is Apple going after Samsung?

Isn't stuff like pinch to zoom and bounceback a part of Android? Samsung didnt make android, so why isn't the lawsuit against Google?

I assume they're only going after Samsung because the Galaxy sales are cutting into iPhone, but if anything I think this ruling will HELP Samsung in the long run. Forget fanboys on either side, the average consumer may now view Apple as an unreasonable bully. Apple as the most powerful company will be seen to many as Microsoft was in the 90s -- huge backlash which led the company to start stumbling as people moved to competitor products. I can see the same thing happening to Apple.

The reason Apple goes after hardware manufacturers is very simple. Just compare the approaches of Microsoft and Google. Microsoft sells OS licenses and indemnifies the hardware partners. That means that if someone wants to sue over Windows, Windows Phone, etc., they will typically only sue Microsoft and even if they try to sue a hardware partner, they are insulated by Microsoft and its legal department. Google gives away android (technically) and makes money off the back end, which places the hardware partners between them and any legal action. I expect Apple will continue to sue hardware companies who have not reached patent agreements with them until they design well clear of the patents, drive a wedge between Google and those companies, or draw Google out to settle the original dispute.

FWIW, the Samsung suit was not heard by an idiot jury and anyone who says that understands neither the patent system nor trial by jury. Whether people like it or not, Apple did demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence, that Samsung engaged in practices that violated a series of patents. Some were technical and some were look and feel - both are modern versions of things patented for as long as there has been a patent system. BTW, Microsoft licensed the relevant patents from Apple. Samsung could have done the same thing....

 

[seriyb]

Regardless of the context, the statement was wrong.

Thanks for helping prove both of my points by the way.

Funny, I have a pure Android device (Nexus 7) and I have Pinch Zoom and when I get to the end of my apps in the apps "drawer" (whatever you want to call it), I see this rubber snap back effect.

Not going to bother calling you names. I've seen enough of your kind.

 

[jschu22]

His comment was that some of the matters in the lawsuit were not specific to Samsung, but were in all Android devices. Some how you interpreted that to mean that android invented those things. Edited by moderator.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

I think you are proving that to be you actually. I made no interpretation s whatsoever. Maybe I need to say it in another language, but regardless if it was in vanilla Android, Samsung chose to put it on their device. Hence, Samsung's at fault. These were specific to Samsung, even if present in other devices, because the suit was targeting.... Samsung. The same would be said of any other manufacturer, if they were being sued. They weren't.

 

[jschu22]

Funny, I have a pure Android device (Nexus 7) and I have Pinch Zoom and when I get to the end of my apps in the apps "drawer" (whatever you want to call it), I see this rubber snap back effect.

Not going to bother calling you names. I've seen enough of your kind.

Check again. You most definitely do not see the snap back that Apple has patented years ago. Pinch to zoom, well I'm afraid we will see that removed if the necessary licenses are not purchased.

 

[navinag]

The jurors must be loving their new ipads...


Apple stole from Palm.....Samsung stole from Apple.....Apple's wins suit....says..."it's wrong to steal?.......everyone believes Apple........

The next iPhone might have wireless charging......then everyone will know Apple invented it....

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Cory Streater]

I don't like insulting people I don't know, but some of you are just plain stupid.

That's a bit of an oxymoron. Please control yourself.

 

[jschu22]

That's a bit of an oxymoron. Please control yourself.

Look up oxymoron, but you're right. I should control myself better.

 

[Sailor1962]

Here we go again Apple flexing their little muscles.

They tried to do the same to Microsoft when they bought out Windows as Apple claimed it was a copy of their MacOS at the time.

MIcrosoft then paid a fee to Apple and bailed them out of trouble.

Are Apple again heading for finacial ruin, but this time there is no Steve Job to bail them out and turn the company round again.

I once heard that Apple claimed to have invented the portable music player, yet we call them MP3 players not iPods. I think the MP3 player companies should sue Apple for copyright infringement.

 

[pete_lockwood]

FWIW, the Samsung suit was not heard by an idiot jury and anyone who says that understands neither the patent system nor trial by jury.

Beg to differ. Perhaps clueless is a better word but it adds up to the same.

Groklaw - Jury in Apple v. Samsung Goofed, Damages Reduced -- Uh Oh. What's Wrong With this Picture? ~pj Updated 3Xs

 

[rootbrain]

Publicly Samsung will no doubt challenge this ruling and question its merits. Privately, I wouldnt be surprised if some heads roll because it likely would have been much less costly to deal with Apple out of court than to fight what any logical and rational person could have seen as a losing battle. Samsung thought they were above needing to do this. That's why I called them arrogant. Case in point: HTC One X. They knew the didn't stand a chance, made the changes necessary to avoid further losses.

Perhaps, but logically and rationally this was not a losing battle. Samsung hasn't "won" anything outright, but they haven't "lost" anywhere except 9 miles from Cupertino. If at least a few of the jurors in this case aren't related to, don't know someone, don't do business with someone, have a friend or relative that is realated to someone, knows someone or does business with someone from Apple 9 miles down the road, I would be VERY surprised.

And Apple is a bit shocked because this is turning out not so bad for Samsung. People (average mom and pop consumers, not techie types) are basically saying now that Samsung products (phones and tablets) are the same as iPhones and iPads, except way less expensive.

 

[radar320]

Myself and several others have mentioned that this whole thing could have and should have been avoided if the patent office wasn't broken and was actually doing their job. How can you grant a loosely worded patent on a concept you didn't create, just find another use for, and was prior art? These patents are so loosely worded that it is imo entrapment. This is going to be hurtful to innovation, and is an attempt to kill off any and all competition. I say it is going to hurt innovation because with how broad and loosely worded these patents are, by the time a company comes up with a new innovation, Apple is going to find a way to say that it infringes on one of their sham patents.

 

[flip0810]

Someone who built a chair, doesnt owe dues to the first person that made the chair.

 

[Rominucka]

You know what would help Samsung and Android out a little....if they started calling it 'spread to zoom' instead. That sounds sexier anyway.
I can see the ads now....A female hand on an Android screen and the slogan says: "It gets bigger when she spreads". HIYOOO!!!!

I'm gonna go copyright this now and if I see this on an ad, I'm gonna SUE SUE SUE!!!

 

[anon(41073)]

Hopefully this will carry some weight. Google Sues Apple for Patent Infringement | NBC Chicago