Ridiculous verdict in Apple/Samsung case

[bschrib]

I'm not sure what the huge deal is... This is mostly design related. Samsung got dinged for copying their patented designs (mainly). Oh well, pay up and go home. Another jury and another judge would probably have ruled less severe, and they probably will. But it's nothing worrisome.

The true Android related item, pinch to zoom, should get tossed out by a real trial specific to tossing it out as prior art or obvious. I don't think page bounce is part of Stock Android... So not a big deal for overall Android.

Nothing much I'm concerned about for the good of Android....just Samsung/TouchWiz...

Yeah but didn't the DiamondTouch and LaunchTile systems show that even Bounceback looks to be prior art? I'd agree that a separate and specific trial to invalidate the patent would be the way to go, but it seems pretty clear-cut that it's prior art and should never have been allowed to be patented in the first place (at least by Apple).

 

[anon(631531)]

I don't even care about this post, but i love controversy. Let's keep it going.

 

[Johnly]

Yes, watch Apple's death begin. In the next few years you can bet they will decline. This is a global economy and if Apple can think they can do it alone, so be it. Watch them slouch, cough, and die.

 

[Ry]

Actually Coke has a trademark not a patent

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Thanks!

While not completely the same, the Coke-bottle shape would still be protected though, right?


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Johnly]

Thank god that is clear.

 

[sirheck]

Sorry but just have to post this again, too funny.

Apple kills Star Trek - YouTube

 

[andribble]

something I made the other day. Should give everyone a chuckle.

APPLE VS THE 10 OF SPADES.
http://db.tt/HuszZsp9

I liked it.

I copied your idea, tweaked it and added a new feature. Sue me!

 

[crackberrytraitor]

Thanks!

While not completely the same, the Coke-bottle shape would still be protected though, right?


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

Apparently not. Take a look at a Pepsi bottle.

Sent from my One X using Android Central Forums

 

[Johnly]

Too funny

 

[TenshiNo]

The way I saw the Samsung evidence against Apple was that it clearly showed that Apple was doing design exercises on what the next evolution of the smartphone would be. What would "company A" do didn't necessarily translate to "let's copy what company A is currently doing - at least not from my perspective.

The way I saw the Apple evidence against Samsung was that it clearly showed that Samsung was clearly comparing their devices to the iPhone. Spelling out changes that Samsung could make to make it a supposed better experience like the iPhone was enough evidence needed for me to believe that Samsung clearly intended to directly copy Apple.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

Actually, for a company to say "what is that other company doing that successful in the market, and how can we emulate that?" is very common practice. In order to "directly copy Apple" their phone would need to look exactly the same and run software that worked the way that iOS does. Neither of these is the case.

The reality of the situation here is that iOS has changed to be more like Android than the other way around. But that's not to say that Samsung isn't looking at market data and saying "The iPhone is successful. What features to people like about the iPhone that we could try and implement in Android?"

That's completely common business practice.

And if you think Apple's not doing the *exact* same thing with Android, I direct your attention to the new iOS Notification Center.

Hell, half of the concepts for both operating systems originated with the Palm Pre and WebOS.

 

[Ry]

Actually, for a company to say "what is that other company doing that successful in the market, and how can we emulate that?" is very common practice. In order to "directly copy Apple" their phone would need to look exactly the same and run software that worked the way that iOS does. Neither of these is the case.

The reality of the situation here is that iOS has changed to be more like Android than the other way around. But that's not to say that Samsung isn't looking at market data and saying "The iPhone is successful. What features to people like about the iPhone that we could try and implement in Android?"

That's completely common business practice.

And if you think Apple's not doing the *exact* same thing with Android, I direct your attention to the new iOS Notification Center.

Hell, half of the concepts for both operating systems originated with the Palm Pre and WebOS.

I'm speaking about the specifics of this case.

I completely understand that companies research each other all the time. I've had to produce documents on competing products before (mobile/social games related) but I wasn't at Zynga so we weren't making blatant copies of the works of other companies.

I feel EA vs. Zynga (or the guys who made Tiny Tower vs. Zynga, or Buffalo Studios, who made Bingo Blitz, vs. Zynga) is very similar to Apple vs. Samsung in this case.

IMO, there was enough evidence to paint Samsung copying Apple vs. Samsung being inspired by Apple to earn Apple the win in this particular case.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Ry]

And if you think Apple's not doing the *exact* same thing with Android, I direct your attention to the new iOS Notification Center.

While Apple may infringe on the patent that Google is trying to get for their Notification Bar, Google hasn't been awarded that yet and based on analysis by others, Apple may have done enough to not be in violation of what Google is actually applying for. From what I've seen so far, Apple may infringe on a very small part but again, Google doesn't have the patent yet so no one is sure how much of Google's original filing will stick.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[JHBThree]

Yeah but didn't the DiamondTouch and LaunchTile systems show that even Bounceback looks to be prior art? I'd agree that a separate and specific trial to invalidate the patent would be the way to go, but it seems pretty clear-cut that it's prior art and should never have been allowed to be patented in the first place (at least by Apple).

No. Those two examples used a very different implementation and was very different in practice. The verge had a good breakdown of how they were different than what apple patented.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[dmmarck]

No. Those two examples used a very different implementation and was very different in practice. The verge had a good breakdown of how they were different than what apple patented.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

It doesn't hurt that they have an actual IP attorney working for them .

 

[JHBThree]

It doesn't hurt that they have an actual IP attorney working for them .

Yup. The first thing Nilay and Matt Macari noted was how different it looked than apples implementation.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[tcournoy]

Since rounded rectangles are obviously patented, when can I get my rounded triangle?

 

[andribble]

Since every motion of one human hand with five fingers against a small flat surface (and there is a limit to the number of them) can be patented when associated with a function in the user interface of a program, it looks like pretty soon all motions will be used up, unless you want to tap to scroll and pinch to select, and so forth.
Touch panel device makers will have to design a nose interface -- there you go, 'new innovations, good for the consumers!' --, or pay through their noses.

 

[JHBThree]

Since every motion of one human hand with five fingers against a small flat surface (and there is a limit to the number of them) can be patented when associated with a function in the user interface of a program, it looks like pretty soon all motions will be used up, unless you want to tap to scroll and pinch to select, and so forth.
Touch panel device makers will have to design a nose interface -- there you go, 'new innovations, good for the consumers!' --, or pay through their noses.

I could see apple/other manufacturers and some touchscreen manufacturers getting multitouch gestures certified as a standard. Ones like pinch to zoom aren't going away regardless of who holds the patent, so turning them into a standard would make sure everyone that had any input in creating the software and hardware behind them were compensated.

 

[jova33]

Since every motion of one human hand with five fingers against a small flat surface (and there is a limit to the number of them)

I was able to get 11 touch points registered on my GNex.... not gonna say how, but anyway, what is the limit?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[badbrad17]

Actually Coke has a trademark not a patent

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

I believe that they have a trademark on their logo. The bottle would fall under trade dress.

Sent from my SGH-T989D using Android Central Forums