General discussions : General : Samsung ordered to pay Apple more than $1Billion after jury says they Stole patented iPhone designs
>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
General
> Samsung ordered to pay Apple more than $1Billion after jury says they Stole patented iPhone designs
Bookmark topic
On 2012-08-25 23:34:42, chunkybeats wrote:
This is pathetic and really makes me hate Apple even more. etaab you are bang on about the Americans they love suing the shit out of each other! Apple tried to do the same thing in Austrailia and ban the galaxy tab 10.1, but people were smart and imported in from hong kong. The. Aussie court reacted the same as the UK. I think there is a bit of political motives behind Apple's intentions, I think it's sick. and really if we all ended up with Apple products the world would be a VERY boring and restrictive. place!
You know, people like you make me really SICK!!! Open yours eye for god sake that Samsung always steal from other companies who invest heavily in their tech.
[ This Message was edited by: worf1000 on 2012-08-25 22:38 ]
--
Posted: 2012-08-25 23:36:46
Edit :
Quote
Etaab
+1, nail on the head.
Thanks for that worf1000
Your links only proved that LIKE ANY OTHER tech company Samsung has had its share of lawsuits.
In some of your links it was clear cross licensing deals were struck, showing that those who sued Samsung were also guilty of as you like to say being "copycats", and also violating Samsung patents.
These tech companies have all sued each other at some points, if you are going to call Samsung copycats due to some lawsuits, many of which were either thrown out, landed up in cross licensing or loss here and there, then EVERYONE is a "copycat".
Chunkybeats
Precisely! There's a lot more to this than IP, and im sure it will all soon come to light with time.
The fact that an Oz court, UK court and even Korean court had similar rulings is very interesting.
Another thing to consider is how Samsung won their appeals outside the US.
--
Posted: 2012-08-25 23:52:56
Edit :
Quote
Remember guys...it's not just about copying. There's intent on Samsung's part, malice so to speak.
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 01:19:33
Edit :
Quote
Samsung still have a huge fanbase out there who hate Apple. This won't damage them much. If Apple intend on banning the sale of certain goods of Samsung in the US who is that down to the Government or courts?? Apple cannot do that themselves. I think if that happened what limited choice the US will end up with. Think it may cause an Apple backlash. @etaab yes I too think people forget about the pull down notification bar which Apple copied yet nothing happens to them about it. Much as I am not the biggest Samsung fan(prefer Sony) I really hate Apple.
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 02:33:00
Edit :
Quote
On 2012-08-25 23:04:56, rikken wrote:
Bose opened their first store in 1993:
Apple opened their first store in 2001
Who is copying who ?
Sorry but that is a ver pathetic comparison! Not even close to the same industry! I could say Kresgee, Walmart Kmart etc all opened stores before Bose/Apple - yet what would be the point and how relevant would it be.
Copying is not the issue, willful copying when knowing there is a patent that secures the engineering for the work created in a product THAT is the point if both of us went to the same high school and university courses and profession with you cheating off all my tests & exams, along with getting a higher salary because you scored slightly higher or didn't need to take as long to complete each test - no need to double check the work - you can be sure I'd sue you & kick your ass!
Too many people her don't like apple even long before their lawsuits, and chose with their wallets for Windows as their main OS; that is perfectly fine I did too for many years - but through theft via online downloading of the OS. Many of those same people couldn't care less when Apple was almost 3 myths for bankruptcy and going out of business. here like Microsoft was in their prime (the Gates golden years) Apple is at the top of their game and like a mob salivating for a hanging in Shakespeare's plays, everybody loathes a "king" !!!
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 03:44:44
Edit :
Quote
On 2012-08-25 23:06:55, etaab wrote:
The latter i reckon.
Apple blatantly copied Android with their version of the pull down notification shade. But these pro-Apple drones forget things like that.
No I'm not a drone! Stop using childish aphorisms display lack of original thought (verbatim from non intelligent Android fans); you're better than this etaab. And no I haven't forgotten about the notification drape, but did Google/Android PATENT THIS?! NO so why use it as an example?!! Its NON-VALID beyond stating "I seen it here first". Apple didn't try to patent this either so it's irrelevant to this rebuttal, court case, or thread. The BIG difference ANDROID fans do NOT see is that the END user can CONTROL WHAT is shown in that Notification bar & drop-down curtain where as Android you cannot have complete control. THAT is innovation and against the common belief that Apple is no the controlling entity in the commercial 1984 (which is always used out of context).
On 2012-08-25 23:06:55, etaab wrote:
This whole thing is ridiculous and so typical of a US courtroom, no offence to any Americans here on Esato but they're the only country that can strike up court cases for such ridiculous reasons. Anyone ever watched Judge Judy ?
LOL I cannot fight THAT! I completely agree, yet lets go back to WWDC 2007 with iPhone announcement 6 months prior to shipping date, a pre-announcement if you will.
On 2012-08-25 23:06:55, etaab wrote:
US court, US judge, US citizens regardless of their nativity, there could only be one winner.
Odd, I see nobody taking this stance with Google vs Apple, or Motorola vs Apple in the USA or vice versa with any Android manufacturer in Germany, S. Korea, or UK vs Apple with their wins/losses there, hmm. All evidence leads to Apple clearly having a majority win against Samsung's willful acts.
On 2012-08-25 23:06:55, etaab wrote:
Apple tried the same trick in a UK court recently, the judge basically told them to **** off and threw the case out. Over here, we've got our bad habbits but our judicial system has been on the go for hundreds of years. We know whats sensible and whats just showbusiness.
Yes that is true. What's odd is the UK court judge didn't seem to have the proper experience to judge such a case and didn't want to "waste the courts time against a valid court". The court made that statement after Apple went for injunction before the court completed proceedings, a wrong & premature act by Apple. Dumb really. That particular judge had no respect for company's fighting over non-essential patents over the length of the past 4yrs, and that is what was meant by wasting the courts time.
On 2012-08-25 23:06:55, etaab wrote:
I agree though, i dont think Samsung copied at all. They did obviously took some inspiration, but then so did Nokia, HTC, the lot of them ! And, i do think Samsung will probably turn out to be the better of the two with this loss(?), if you can call it a loss.
^ really?! REALLY?! Did you fully read all the patents, and the history of Samsung's products? or did you skim the details? You make an obvious claim that the notification ribbon was copied by Apple but you cannot see the violation of so many patents and product design?
To me I see two sides of Patents, like yourself in different industries:
1. Product patents for hardware/software protect companies ability to sell such products/services to end users or other companies, keeping them viable, and most importantly keeping EMPLOYEES, well employed and paid ... it makes the economy go round!!
2. Product patents for medicine: vaccines, remedies, cures, etc. THESE I consider are ESSENTIAL to the livelihood of ALL HUMAN beings - essential to longevity and health of life. From the common cold syrup (costing $4.99 to 7.99CAN) to Athletes foot/ringworm ($9.99-12.99CAN) to HPV/TB/Pocks vaccinations, or the top HIV vaccinations which costs $????.
^ yet we have patent laws globally that even BAYER aspirin could NOT be copied in a generic "brand" form for 5-10yrs!! is that NOT insane?!
In example 1 above I condone NO ACT of a company protecting these types of patents if A) They make NO product/service to use it, no effort to sell the right to use these patents and B) ONLY move to protect them AFTER several years when a company is liable for violating them AFTER making a fortune; example NTP vs RIM/Good Technologies/Motorola! (billions boys and girls, billions & this was 5yrs ago).
In example 2 above I'll NEVER understand the right any company/government has in making money against the deaths, or suffering of human beings! I believe research is valid, I believe a government should be communistic in paying for such R&D and equally paying those that work (at different levels of course) to the creation, producing and distribution of such medicine/remedies for the common good. I feel the United Nations SHOULD make such a move mandatory: but "until the colour of a man's skin is of no more significant than the colour of his eye's" we'll never see commonality for the right to medicine on a global scale.
Peace.
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 05:46:33
Edit :
Quote
To think that even Google warned Samsung...
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 11:00:54
Edit :
Quote
Wtf is wrong with You people? This discussion doesn't have sense if You won't accept one simple thing, there are patents and "patents". Apple is using "patents" and that is the point of this whole case...
And no I haven't forgotten about the notification drape, but did Google/Android PATENT THIS?!
So You are saying that stealing is ok when the other side didn't file a silly patent?
willful copying when knowing there is a patent that secures the engineering for the work created in a product
Can You explain me exactly what kind of engineering work is behind rectangular shape?
I'll try images to explain to all of You what is what, because there is some serious misunderstanding here...
Now a little explanation:
Picture 1: This is a copy, notice the look of the phone and the name is like iPhone, to confuse customers into buying their product. Now this is bad, and this should be excluded from market. Note that Apple didn't sue sciphone
Picture 2: This is not a copy, the look of the phone, the dimensions it's different (Notice the scale is about 99,9% right, not like the shit comparision on internet where SII has the same height as iPhone...). Now it might look alike, but it's still not a copy...
Picture 3: Just to show a real difference between patents and "patents".
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 11:35:43
Edit :
Quote
@hardened you need to calm down. @ahmad well pointed out there. Since when was rectangular shape of a device a patent?? So,what happens if the next iPhone is more square in shape or has even more curves?? My HTC Mozart has the same 4 corner curved chassis as the iPhone. All mobile screens,laptops,tablets,TVs etc have a rectangular shape. Did Appple invent that shape?? Nope. Apple never invented icon based OS or voice activation either.
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 13:15:00
Edit :
Quote
I thought is about software like the scrolling bounce back effect and not the shape of the phone??
--
Posted: 2012-08-26 13:48:15
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
