Ridiculous verdict in Apple/Samsung case

[JHBThree]

Apple and Microsoft both stole Zerox's GUI design, with the whole mouse and pointer thing. And I'm sure Apple (along with every other company) pulled lots of other underhanded moves of the like throughout their history.

But that doesn't matter. The name of the game is: Don't Get Caught! Samsung f'ed up and basically broadcasted to the world, loud and clear, that they're directly copying Apple's look. They tried no real way of disguising it. Even if they weren't so blatant, Apple still would've sued over Android, it just would've taken a little longer...and from the looks of it, they're probably going try to collapse the entire OS.

When I worked as a VZW sales associate Android phones scared most customers with their comparative complexity. We pushed Samsung phones, more, because they looked more like the iPhone which comforted the customers (and they also yeilded a better profit).

Google and the other companies should've put more thought into the design, to make the phones more usable over the iPhone (as they are) but not take from the iPhone to make it more user friendly.

Android is in trouble and I hope they've been working on a reboot of the OS all this time so that I don't have to use a G'damn Windows phone in the future.

Apple sucks. They make the Toyota Corolla equivalent of electronics but sell them for Lexus IS prices.

Smarten up Google and get us out of this mess.

Sent from my Samsung Droid Charge 4G-LTE

Apple paid for access to PARC to the tune of a million bucks. They did not steal anything from xerox. And I'm not quite sure where you're getting the 'iPhone is the toyota corolla of cell phones' from. If that was the case, other manufacturers wouldn't be chasing them so hard.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

Do you understand what legal precedence is? They went after Samsung first because they were the biggest competitor. LG's ui looks more like the iPhone than Samsung. The Galaxy Nexus doesn't look like the iPhone either, but it's included in Apple's request of phones to be banned and in case you hadn't read up on it, the jury has stated quite clearly they mean to teach Samsung a harsh lesson and make an example of them. Now that they have a precedent to ride on, they'll be filing injunctions against every other OEM as fast as they can think them up. If you don't realize that this lawsuit was Apple's beachhead, then you've got another thing coming.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

The galaxy nexus was found to infringe mainly on utility patents, not trade dress.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Ry]

Do you understand what legal precedence is? They went after Samsung first because they were the biggest competitor. LG's ui looks more like the iPhone than Samsung. The Galaxy Nexus doesn't look like the iPhone either, but it's included in Apple's request of phones to be banned and in case you hadn't read up on it, the jury has stated quite clearly they mean to teach Samsung a harsh lesson and make an example of them. Now that they have a precedent to ride on, they'll be filing injunctions against every other OEM as fast as they can think them up. If you don't realize that this lawsuit was Apple's beachhead, then you've got another thing coming.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

..they went after Samsung on trade-dress because Samsung decided to copy the design of iPhone and iPad. The jury found that the evidence was good enough to rule that Samsung infringed on the iPhone in that regard.

I seriously doubt Apple is going to go after phones like the Motorola DROID RAZR, the HTC One series, or the Samsung Galaxy S III for trade dress claims because those phones look nothing like any iPhone Apple has released so far.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Rominucka]

And I'm not quite sure where you're getting the 'iPhone is the toyota corolla of cell phones' from. If that was the case, other manufacturers wouldn't be chasing them so hard.

The Corolla is the most successful car of all time. It's simple, reliable and completely boring...like the iPhone. In terms of them being copied by other car manufacturers, (which wasn't my point) I'm pretty sure every major mainstream car company uses the Corolla as a base to design their Corolla level cars. To me they all look like a version of the Corolla but I don't know enough about car history to say who did what first.

Back on topic though...I just read in the LA Times that Steve Jobs stated that he wanted to destroy Android for stealing the iPhone design. So for those selectively ignoring the big picture...there you go.

Also, how friggin dumb is Google (and the OEMs) to think they could get away with this? Don't they have patent lawyers to make sure shiz like this doesn't happen? Is this irresponsibility or have they been gambling on the notion that Apple wouldn't sue?
If Google doesn't fix this one good, this is going to be a nice shiner of a black eye in their well respected history.

Sent from my Samsung Droid Charge 4G-LTE

 

[cormaster628]

I think some patents just need thrown out. Like pinch to zoom, rounded corners, rectangular design with edge to edge touchscreen.

And yes I'm aware of what happens to the one x a couple months ago. Just sayin as it stands apple can't take out android all they can do is sue phone manufacturers for their current models and by the time they succeed the phones will be out of production anyway.

Endgadget made me laugh talking about apples market confusion argument, "It has a Samsung logo on the front! This is like someone confusing a Honda Odyssey for a Dodge Caravan!" In the end it's the patent Office that is the one to blame

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[crackberrytraitor]

..they went after Samsung on trade-dress because Samsung decided to copy the design of iPhone and iPad. The jury found that the evidence was good enough to rule that Samsung infringed on the iPhone in that regard.

I seriously doubt Apple is going to go after phones like the Motorola DROID RAZR, the HTC One series, or the Samsung Galaxy S III for trade dress claims because those phones look nothing like any iPhone Apple has released so far.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

Yes because the Galaxy Nexus looks so much more like the iPhone than the One X or the S3. I'd be willing to bet hard cash there will be another trade dress lawsuit within 6 months. I'd even place money into a Digital Bet Trust if anyone feels like making a friendly wager.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[g1toevo678]

I'd even place money into a Digital Bet Trust if anyone feels like taking me up on it.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Lol. Classic. So you want to bet money over an internet discussion...

Aside from this thread being, for some, a cathartic exercise for the self induced trauma brought on by the verdict in a suit over a phone, I'm not sure anyone is that invested. I could be wrong I suppose...this is the internet after all where getting the last word in and being right is cause for celebration and another bt.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[crackberrytraitor]

Lol. Classic. So you want to bet money over an internet discussion...

Aside from this thread being, for some, a cathartic exercise for the self induced trauma brought on by the verdict in a suit over a phone, I'm not sure anyone is that invested. I could be wrong I suppose...this is the internet after all where getting the last word in and being right is cause for celebration and another bt.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I love betting on things. I'll use any excuse I can find. I probably throw a couple hundred bucks a day on stupid random bets.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[DisplacedMic]

You have a choice, and that isn't going away. The only result of this is that Google and its partners are going to have to find different, and better, ways of doing things that won't infringe. That's how the market is supposed to work.

Also, your cheap shots and insults don't belong in this conversation. If you're actually interested in discussing this rationally, then you should behave rationally as well.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

i'm inclined to agree here. cormaster628, some of your posts are reasonable, but several of of your comments have also been appeals to emotion over logic, strawman arguments and ad hominems.

I found this verdict frustrating as well, but i have to concede that jhbthree has made some good points...

 

[sirheck]

Steve jobs was shameless about stealing others ideas.

Steve Jobs: Good artists copy great artists steal - YouTube

 

[badbrad17]

New violator of Apple patents!!!!

 

[bplewis24]

Look at the facts of the case, and you have to exclude anything not related to it as well. It is irrelevant that Apple didn't invent touchscreen phones, because that isn't what they sued over.

This verdict is not unfair to samsung. As a matter of fact, they should thank their lucky stars it wasn't worse.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I find it funny that this poster is completely full of sh** and yet has people thanking and liking his posts. Very odd. I'm guessing these are the same people that vote against their best interests in political campaigns.

 

[pauldroidr2d2]

Do you understand what legal precedence is? They went after Samsung first because they were the biggest competitor. LG's ui looks more like the iPhone than Samsung. The Galaxy Nexus doesn't look like the iPhone either, but it's included in Apple's request of phones to be banned and in case you hadn't read up on it, the jury has stated quite clearly they mean to teach Samsung a harsh lesson and make an example of them. Now that they have a precedent to ride on, they'll be filing injunctions against every other OEM as fast as they can think them up. If you don't realize that this lawsuit was Apple's beachhead, then you've got another thing coming.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

I don't think you need to talk down to people. I think many people in the forum understand what legal precedent is.

If you notice, the Galaxy Nexus was not included in this case. The judge required that Apple narrow down their list of devices which they did.

It appears some folks would have preferred the jury ignore some rather significant facts in this case in order to avoid setting a precedent. Out of curiosity, in the judges lengthy instructions to the jury, were they told to take into consideration the precedence their decision would create? I doubt it, because that is not a factor in a case like this one.

My opinion is that Samsung royally screwed up. It appears that the emails in which Samsung exec's comment on copying the iphone became the nail in the coffin. Personally, I have to agree with the jury's decision on this issue. Given the claims made by Apple in this case, Samsung did wrong. Samsung was too arrogant though in my opinion to be willing to settle out of court (something they were given ample opportunity to do.)

If we dislike cases like these, we need to seek a legislative change in how things are patented, and what can be patented. Until that happens, Samsung and the rest of the technology companies will need to be careful in how they design their products.

For those who have alleged that the jury didn't know what they were doing and that they didn't understand what was being presented to them, the following is some information from the C-Net article.

"I was vocal about the technical [issues], about the power controls, because I know that stuff," Ilagan said. "I work on that."
Ilagan has a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering and worked as a systems engineer for Western Electronic and as an applications engineer for Stanford Telecom.
Four of the nine jury members have experience working for technology companies, including Intel and AT&T. Hogan worked for a hard-drive company.
Finally, Ilagan was asked if the jury understood that this was a major case and the ramifications that its decision could have on the market.
"I realized that's a big deal if Samsung can't sell those phones," Ilagan said. "But I'm sure Samsung can recover and do their own designs. There are other ways to design a phone. What was happening was that the appearance [of Samsung's phone] was their downfall. You copied the appearance.... Nokia is still selling phones. BlackBerry is selling phones. Those phones aren't infringing. There are alternatives out there."

C-Net Article

These appear to be people who can comprehend the issue at hand. It's too bad Samsung didn't figure that out when they were offered the opportunity to settle out of court.

 

[pauldroidr2d2]

I find it funny that this poster is completely full of sh** and yet has people thanking and liking his posts. Very odd. I'm guessing these are the same people that vote against their best interests in political campaigns.

The post you have chosen to highlight does not support your claim.

 

[g1toevo678]

I find it funny that this poster is completely full of sh** and yet has people thanking and liking his posts. Very odd. I'm guessing these are the same people that vote against their best interests in political campaigns.

Just because someone isn't part of the privileged elite, who inherently know what is in the best interest of any and all who would dare disagree with them, is no reason to attack them. As tedious as facts and logic may be to someone so privileged, try to educate us.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[cormaster628]

I find it funny that this poster is completely full of sh** and yet has people thanking and liking his posts. Very odd. I'm guessing these are the same people that vote against their best interests in political campaigns.

I would like to know why people on "android central" are defending Apple on this. I read the verdict and I was so pissed off I had to walk outside, then I got on here and started ranting. Yes I was emotional over thinking but I came back and apologized the next day and tried to have a thoughtful discussion but seems every time I posted something some jack a$$ is quoting what I posted and giving me "well actually" responses. At least on xda you can have a discussion with people without people calling you ignorant, RE TARD ED, and telling you you lost all credibility.

Maybe i accidently signed up for Apple Central instead.

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[cliberti]

Doesn't the group getting sued, in this case Samsung, have the right to turn down a jury trial for a paneled trial? If so I would think it would be in the best interest of Samsung to request this and take their chances with a 3-7 judge panel. People are not educated in law and often do not understand what they see, not that judges are much better with technology, but they at least understand the law.

Personally, I think this is a BS case and I feel that many of these "patents" really should be standards. I mean, how can you patent the ability to search on a device by typing or a rectangular shape. Do they seriously expect a competitor to use an oval or octagon shape?

This decision basically has given Apple carte blanche as a monopoly who can sue everyone else out of the market.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

Cooler heads need to prevail here or this thread will be closed. I'm as much a fan as anybody for well-thought-out, fact-supported, maybe sometimes slightly heated discussions, but getting personal, bypassing the language filter, and attacking other members is not the way to do it.

FWIW, why hate the player when you should be hating the game? The patent system is broken, and this is just further evidence of that fact.

 

[luigy323]

I bet the jury dont even no Jack about cell phone designs and technology.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Android Central Forums

 

[anon62607]

This is going to seem like a silly question.
What exactly was Samsung found to infringe on, with what device, and how is it that Samsung is infringing when other devices are not?

I've heard a number of podcasts on the verdict and I've read through this and a few other threads but I've only seen the occasional comment about what the actual infringement is.