Apple now going after Galaxy S3

[vzwuser76]

Apple won, validating certain claims. It makes sense for Apple to go after more products from Samsung that they feel are infringing on certain patents validated by the prior case.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

A lot of that trial was handled poorly, and not just by Samsung's legal team. Excluding relevant evidence (F700) due to not being filed on time, what's that accomplish? It gives Samsung grounds for appeal and a second trial. Why not try and get as much of the evidence out of the way rather than tying up the courts on appeals.

Second, the jury's handling was horrible. First they ignored the trial instructions (this from the jury foreman). If that happened in a capital crime that would be grounds for dismissal. If both sides are expected to follow the rules of the court, the jury sure as hell should otherwise what's the point of the jury? Next they decided to skip over prior art because it was bogging them down. If it was bogging them down then it obviously meant some of he jury saw merit in the prior art. And if there was prior art that could've eliminated some if not all of Apple's claims. Lastly the jury foreman said they wanted to send a message to Samsung and punish them. Again this was outside the jury's purview. Their jobs was (supposed) to be the first find if Apple's patents were valid, and if they were to find if Samsung indeed violated those patents, and finally if the did so willfully. Once they find one way or another, the judge is supposed to set punishment.

Just because a jury found one way does not mean it was right. A jury found OJ innocent, so that means the killer(s) are still out there!

 

[JHBThree]

A lot of that trial was handled poorly, and not just by Samsung's legal team. Excluding relevant evidence (F700) due to not being filed on time, what's that accomplish? It gives Samsung grounds for appeal and a second trial. Why not try and get as much of the evidence out of the way rather than tying up the courts on appeals.

It doesn't give Samsung anything. The first question the appeals court will ask is why Samsung feels they are above the rules of the court in attempting to get evidence in after a deadline they knew about for months. Something tells me samsungs answer won't sway the appeals court.

Second, the jury's handling was horrible. First they ignored the trial instructions (this from the jury foreman). If that happened in a capital crime that would be grounds for dismissal. If both sides are expected to follow the rules of the court, the jury sure as hell should otherwise what's the point of the jury?

The foreman said no such thing.

Next they decided to skip over prior art because it was bogging them down. If it was bogging them down then it obviously meant some of he jury saw merit in the prior art. And if there was prior art that could've eliminated some if not all of Apple's claims.

You misunderstood the context of that statement. They didn't say they ignored it, they said they decided to evaluate the prior art later since it was something they didn't all agree on. Thats common practice for a jury in a case with as many issues as this. Also, the prior art presented wouldn't have invalidated any of apples claims.

Lastly the jury foreman said they wanted to send a message to Samsung and punish them. Again this was outside the jury's purview. Their jobs was (supposed) to be the first find if Apple's patents were valid, and if they were to find if Samsung indeed violated those patents, and finally if the did so willfully. Once they find one way or another, the judge is supposed to set punishment.

Just because a jury found one way does not mean it was right. A jury found OJ innocent, so that means the killer(s) are still out there!

This is troubling, but I'm sure other jurors have other perspectives. The problem is that we have only been given one view of this through his comments. In the appeals other views will come out and I would expect a different picture will emerge.

 

[jroc]

The majority of those images have been discredited.

No they havent. These too:

1960s Braun Products Hold the Secrets to Apple's Future

 

[JHBThree]

No they havent. These too:

1960s Braun Products Hold the Secrets to Apple's Future

Yes, they have.

And if you followed apples history, you'd know they follow Braun's design philosophies.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jroc]

Yes, they have.

And if you followed apples history, you'd know they follow Braun's design philosophies.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

No they havent.

And the Braun designs.....makes them hypocrites...with a capital H. Anybody who doesnt follow Apple's history can see they follow Braun's designs....by just reading that article and looking at the pics.

This too:

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/gadg...ople-think-apple-invented-but-actually-didn-t

 

[vzwuser76]

It doesn't give Samsung anything. The first question the appeals court will ask is why Samsung feels they are above the rules of the court in attempting to get evidence in after a deadline they knew about for months. Something tells me samsungs answer won't sway the appeals court.


The foreman said no such thing.

Sorry, I didn't mean to say he outright said it, but from how I typed it that is how it read. What I meant was that after watching his interview and reading what was supposed to happen, they didn't follow instructions.


You misunderstood the context of that statement. They didn't say they ignored it, they said they decided to evaluate the prior art later since it was something they didn't all agree on. Thats common practice for a jury in a case with as many issues as this. Also, the prior art presented wouldn't have invalidated any of apples claims.

Same as the last, what I meant was that by skipping over the prior art and going to infringement first, your asked if these phones infringe the patents, then after you've assigned blame, you decide if they are invalid or not? You're already in the process of thinking that they infringed, so that works in Apple's favor.


This is troubling, but I'm sure other jurors have other perspectives. The problem is that we have only been given one view of this through his comments. In the appeals other views will come out and I would expect a different picture will emerge.

Actually we've been given 2 perspectives, the foreman and one of the jurists. Both versions seem to jive.

 

[Ry]

No they havent.

And the Braun designs.....makes them hypocrites...with a capital H. Anybody who doesnt follow Apple's history can see they follow Braun's designs....by just reading that article and looking at the pics.

This too:

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/gadg...ople-think-apple-invented-but-actually-didn-t

What smartphone did Apple steal from Braun again?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[jroc]

What smartphone did Apple steal from Braun again?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

First....never said anybody stole anything. Just that Apple is the biggest hypocrites walking the face of the Earth in the tech industry.

2nd....just talking about designs of Apple devices....their inspirations. Apple makes more than iPhones, right?

Guy above said if one followed Apple they would already know about Apple getting inspiration from Braun. I was a big Apple fan back in the day when Win 98 was new...and I never knew about this. All I knew about Braun was razors...

I can almost guarantee more folks know Google bought Android than Apple and their design cues from Braun.....even on Apple centric sites. I would be willing to bet some actual money on that.

 

[tony477g]

This reminds me of one of ricky carmichaels quotes (im into mx/sx) "If you cant win, crash someone that can!" This is ridiculous

 

[JHBThree]

No they havent.

And the Braun designs.....makes them hypocrites...with a capital H. Anybody who doesnt follow Apple's history can see they follow Braun's designs....by just reading that article and looking at the pics.

This too:

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/gadg...ople-think-apple-invented-but-actually-didn-t

For the last time, yes they have. That F700 image was debunked as inaccurate. The Neonode unlocking mechanism is completely different than Apple's. The Jobs quote from Picasso was taken completely out of context. I could go on and on. Images like that are red meat for fanboys, but laughably inaccurate for everyone else.

Hypocrites? No. Apple didn't steal Braun's designs nor do they look entirely the same. To put it in terms of what Apple sued Samsung over: apples designs are distinct enough to avoid violating Brauns trade dress.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jroc]

For the last time, yes they have. That F700 image was debunked as inaccurate. The Neonode unlocking mechanism is completely different than Apple's. The Jobs quote from Picasso was taken completely out of context. I could go on and on. Images like that are red meat for fanboys, but laughably inaccurate for everyone else.

Hypocrites? No. Apple didn't steal Braun's designs nor do they look entirely the same. To put it in terms of what Apple sued Samsung over: apples designs are distinct enough to avoid violating Brauns trade dress.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

For the last time, no they havent....and I fail to see where they are laughably inaccurate.

And yet Apple can sue Samsung over the iPad....when Samsung had the digital photo frame in 2006.

Different products like Brauns and Apples, right? So...Apple can take cues from products in a different industry....and Samsung cant? From their own at that? Apple also tried to sue Motorola for the Xoom...for hardware.

So...please tell us where Samsung products look so much like Apples....but Apples dont look like so much like Brauns....

Hypocrites....the biggest of the biggest. Apple can be inspired by Braun...but Samsung cant be inspired by Apple or themselves?

The F700 debunked as the wrong release date....but a few months between both phone showings.....makes it invalid? So Samsung can make a phone in a month....it was on display at a show while the iPhone was still absent. That was from the court case....

That shows Samsung had round corners and a single home button...that Apple claims Samsung copied from them. Round corners....ppl focus on what Apple won....lets not forget what they were suing for.

Slide to unlock didnt stop Apple from trying to sue HTC for the same thing. Apple lost that part of the case against HTC....btw. Jobs quote isnt taken out of context....ppl just chose to see what they wanna see. That quote also labels them as hypocrites

It isnt red meat for fanboys....ppl just choose to see/not see what they wanna see/not see. So...if one sees it different than you....are they a fanboy? Or are they looking at differently than you?

Say what you will about Apple..but there are some things I will never agree on when it comes to them. Innovative? Yea they are. Hypocrites.....yea....to the fullest.

But hey....all this might be on the back burner soon as for as stories:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120904081835685

Long live the patent wars....

 

[JHBThree]

For the last time, no they havent....and I fail to see where they are laughably inaccurate.

And yet Apple can sue Samsung over the iPad....when Samsung had the digital photo frame in 2006.

Different products like Brauns and Apples, right? So...Apple can take cues from products in a different industry....and Samsung cant? From their own at that? Apple also tried to sue Motorola for the Xoom...for hardware.

So...please tell us where Samsung products look so much like Apples....but Apples dont look like so much like Brauns....

Hypocrites....the biggest of the biggest. Apple can be inspired by Braun...but Samsung cant be inspired by Apple or themselves?

The F700 debunked as the wrong release date....but a few months between both phone showings.....makes it invalid? So Samsung can make a phone in a month....it was on display at a show while the iPhone was still absent. That was from the court case....

That shows Samsung had round corners and a single home button...that Apple claims Samsung copied from them. Round corners....ppl focus on what Apple won....lets not forget what they were suing for.

Slide to unlock didnt stop Apple from trying to sue HTC for the same thing. Apple lost that part of the case against HTC....btw. Jobs quote isnt taken out of context....ppl just chose to see what they wanna see. That quote also labels them as hypocrites

It isnt red meat for fanboys....ppl just choose to see/not see what they wanna see/not see. So...if one sees it different than you....are they a fanboy? Or are they looking at differently than you?

Say what you will about Apple..but there are some things I will never agree on when it comes to them. Innovative? Yea they are. Hypocrites.....yea....to the fullest.

But hey....all this might be on the back burner soon as for as stories:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120904081835685

Long live the patent wars....

Horsehockey. Every single element of that has been proven to be demonstrably false. Remove your fanboy goggles and actually participate in a meaningful fashion. Regurgitating false information that has been proven to be inaccurate isn't doing so.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jroc]

Horsehockey. Every single element of that has been proven to be demonstrably false. Remove your fanboy goggles and actually participate in a meaningful fashion. Regurgitating false information that has been proven to be inaccurate isn't doing so.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I offered my meaningful opinions about what you claim is demonstrably false. Proven by whom? Forum folks? I mentioned 2 things that involved actual court cases.... The F700 was on display in 2006...while an actual model of the iPhone had yet to be shown:

Samsung trial evidence reveals Apple patting itself on the back for silent presence at events, studying the competition

The LG Prada was also shown at that same show... The date of the slides....Feb 2006. Regurgitate the same false info? The pic showing the F700 had the wrong date, I admitted that. What I posted wasnt a regurgitation of those pics. Apple taking design cues from Braun is demonstrably false? WOW.... And please read the article before attempting to respond. Thanks.

*** After looking at the slides....THATS where the 2006 date for the F700 comes from. Not from CeBit....but from the 3GSM Congress Trade Show*** Proven demonstrably false? Right.... A lil nugget for some folks that dont know....Apple tried to sue the folks behind the Meizu phone a few years ago....and lost. THAT phone was at the same show.

BTW.....ppl dogging Samsung for changing the Galaxy Tab hardware when the iPad launched....check the slides where Apple did measurements of various phones. Thanks.

I'm coming with actual facts...what are you coming with? A mythical person(s) who proved every element of what has been posted about how hypocritical Apple is to be demonstrably false.... I could say the same thing about fanboy goggles....to you. So in your world...if I disagree with you...I'm a fanboy.....Alrighty then....

Yea.. this is my cue to bow out of any more discussions with you....lol. Especially concerning Apple. I kinda knew before....but this proves it. Look for at least one more post from me directed at you about the GS3, RAZR HD and the S4 tho...

 

[vzwuser76]

Something Samsung could try to get the F700 in would be to go with another legal team claiming insufficient defense. A poor legal defense in the original trial is grounds for evidence to be reconsidered on appeal. Most everyone, legal sites included, have been questioning what Samsung's legal team was doing at trial. They missed the deadline for what could've been key evidence, then leaking it to the public after the judge ruled against it.

As far as the F700, there is no way that they could get a working model together in a couple months. A mockup unit sure, but not a working unit, especially considering that they hadn't done a touchscreen phone previously, that puts the concept to finished product at about a couple of years minimum. Today a few months would be possible, since everyone has a number of touchscreen phones under their belts. But back then with everyone just getting their feet wet with touchscreens (by that I mean touchscreens controlled by fingers, not a stylus). Look how long Apple said they took to come up with a finished product, which was around 2-3 years, how would Samsung come out with one in 2-3 months?

 

[john181818]

I am one of the Apple haters.

Since my original HTC Droid Incredible can't hold a charge for three hours and I was eligible for a new phone as of Saturday I went ahead and ordered the Galaxy S III from Verizon knowing that they can't take a purchased phone away from you even if Apple manages to get a ban on the sale of the phone. So mine will be here Wednesday and I am looking forward to receiving it and using it.