Apple vs. Samsung, verdict reached quite quickly...

[vexorian]

They are about to announce the verdict in this trial.

A live blog: http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/

[lovinglinux]

Apple v. Samsung verdict is in: $1 billion loss for Samsung

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/08/jury-returns-verdict-in-apple-v-samsung/

[KiwiNZ]

Now for 15 years of appeals

[vexorian]

This is a super one sided verdict. Samsung infringes all patents Apple infringes none. Yeah right.

A lot of room for appeals, 15 years sounds like an underestimation.

Edit: http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/ Already many inconsistencies found in the verdict. If the jury took so little care and rush in filling the form, one wonders what else they screwed up.

[KiwiNZ]

I find it hard to believe that the Jury have deliberated on such a technical decision correctly in such a short time.

The Judges conduct throughout the trial has left it wide open for appeal.

[synaptix]

What was this all about again? Some useless patent infringement that cripples innovation?

[neu5eeCh]

Just got home and noticed the headline.

I couldn't care less about Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, or even Google. I just hope that by the time all the <snip> done rolling downhill, the open source community and its initiatives, which includes Ubuntu and Linux in general, isn't buried. I wonder how many of Apple's patents Ubuntu already violates (in Apple's opinion). We already know that Microsoft is successfully (or so they claim) suing Linux-based Android for patent violations.

[smellyman]

Sad verdict for the enitre tech industry.

Looking at my dual screen setup right now and my Samsung monitor looks black and rectanglular eerily similar to my LG one.

Someone needs to sue

[dmn_clown]

Good. Now Samsung can stop making cheap knockoffs and focus on innovative products.

[synaptix]

This is a super one sided verdict. Samsung infringes all patents Apple infringes none. Yeah right.

Seems to me like Apple bought out the courtroom.

What was this all about anyway?

[dmn_clown]

What was this all about anyway?

Samsung is making cheap knockoffs of the iPhone.

http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/images/2012/8/24//201282452720262734_20.jpg

via: http://www.aljazeera.com/business/2012/08/201282452423992519.html

[KiwiNZ]

Samsung is making cheap knockoffs of the iPhone.

http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/images/2012/8/24//201282452720262734_20.jpg

via: http://www.aljazeera.com/business/2012/08/201282452423992519.html

Samsung are making phones superior to the iPhone

[vexorian]

Samsung are making phones superior to the iPhone
The South Korea verdict was actually a huge win for Samsung. Court banned some Samsung phones and tablets but they banned ALL apple thingies.

The US trial while ridiculous and one-sided towards apple. Not even it could rule that Samsung are "cheap knock-offs" it just ruled that Samsung violated about 5 patents. We are talking about ridiculous things like rounded corners or a zoom feature that was actually found to exist before apple put it in its ithings. (And apple actually had knowledge of this product made by someone else before using the zoom feature).

[wewantutopia]

Samsung is making cheap knockoffs of the iPhone.

http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/images/2012/8/24//201282452720262734_20.jpg

via: http://www.aljazeera.com/business/2012/08/201282452423992519.html

This pic is deceiving, the iPhone is displaying the home screen but the Samsung is showing the app drawer. let's see that picture with both phones displaying their respective home screens.

[vexorian]

Even so they are clearly very different interfaces and phones. Samsung uses a different design philosophy in regards to the physical buttons to use . The only similarity in the interfaces is the icon tiling (Invented by windows 3.11, not apple, thank you very much) and using green for the call icon (I didn't know apple invented colors)

[Tombgeek]

Good. Now Samsung can stop making cheap knockoffs and focus on innovative products.

You clearly have not used a Galaxy Note or S3, have you?

[Primefalcon]

Windows 3.x was released on may 22... 1990
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/Windows_3.0_workspace.png/290px-Windows_3.0_workspace.png

the amiga 500 which yes has icons as well was released 3 years prior in 1987
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Amiga500_system.jpg/280px-Amiga500_system.jpg

Apple copied Microsoft... Microsoft copied Amiga

[drawkcab]

Windows 3.x was released on may 22... 1990
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/Windows_3.0_workspace.png/290px-Windows_3.0_workspace.png

the amiga 500 which yes has icons as well was released 3 years prior in 1987
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Amiga500_system.jpg/280px-Amiga500_system.jpg

Apple copied Microsoft... Microsoft copied Amiga


The guy who invented this should be suing the crap out of everyone:

http://history-computer.com/CalculatingTools/Abacus/RomanAbacus.jpg

[Erik1984]

Just got home and noticed the headline.

I couldn't care less about Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, or even Google. I just hope that by the time all the <snip> done rolling downhill, the open source community and its initiatives, which includes Ubuntu and Linux in general, isn't buried. I wonder how many of Apple's patents Ubuntu already violates (in Apple's opinion). We already know that Microsoft is successfully (or so they claim) suing Linux-based Android for patent violations.

Maybe in that regard it's a good thing Linux isn't so popular on the desktop. At 1% market share no one will see 'us' as a big threat :p

[alexfish]

Sitcom comedy at its best

Think of going back to square one

"It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners"

next they will be suing Who invented straight roads,

Drivers beware, Watch out for that bend or corner in the road,

What road,

The road that is not allowed a bend or corner,:D
or anything else they could think of in the future

Can't wait for the next Episode from the only "you know where".:popcorn:

[neu5eeCh]

This lawsuit hurts Google's Android the most. Seems to me that the next battle isn't Samsung's appeal, but Google's latest lawsuit and patent claims against Apple (in which they're asking the court to ban Apple's products -- period).

And this from PCWORLD (http://www.pcworld.com/article/261440/what_the_applesamsung_verdict_means_to_you.html#tk .hp_fv):

“Apple has already made a big statement, because they aren’t just going after Samsung,” said industry analyst Tim Bajarin (http://www.pcmag.com/author-bio/tim-bajarin). “At the very least, Samsung and other vendors are going to have to think twice about things like icons and other design elements. Google has to be very concerned about this.”


Brings me back to my previous post on <snip> rolling downhill. I do have to wonder whether Unity and Gnome's Iconization of their menus (which I personally detest) are blatant ripoffs of Apple's iOS.

[vexorian]

This lawsuit hurts Google's Android the most. Seems to me that the next battle isn't Samsung's appeal, but Google's latest lawsuit and patent claims against Apple (in which they're asking the court to ban Apple's products -- period).

And this from PCWORLD (http://www.pcworld.com/article/261440/what_the_applesamsung_verdict_means_to_you.html#tk .hp_fv):

“Apple has already made a big statement, because they aren’t just going after Samsung,” said industry analyst Tim Bajarin (http://www.pcmag.com/author-bio/tim-bajarin). “At the very least, Samsung and other vendors are going to have to think twice about things like icons and other design elements. Google has to be very concerned about this.”


Brings me back to my previous post on <snip> rolling downhill. I do have to wonder whether Unity and Gnome's Iconization of their menus (which I personally detest) are blatant ripoffs of Apple's iOS.
Not really. There are many more companies releasing Android. This is also not the Samsung loses a suit like this, they already dealt with this in Germany and Japan (I think) Samsung are great at adapting and in fact, this verdict tells Samsung what things to avoid.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/apple-wins-but-samsung-set-for-bounceback/993045/

The 1 billion figure is actually not so large from Samsung's perspective. What would be really lame is a ban on those products. But here is where Samsung has an advantage, and it is that the trial has enough dubious points that the appeals phase will last loooong. And there are so many issues, for example, it seems a software patent advocate single-steered the whole jury in one direction: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-25/apple-samsung-jury-may-have-leaned-on-engineer-patent-holder

If the appeals phase lasts 6 months of more, that is enough for Samsung to finish new phones and tablets that workaround these patents. That's the problem with this trial for apple, besides of it changing its image to the company that wins only by trial it has also revealed all of their best cards.

[mr john]

The court was always going to side with the US company over a foreign one. Sadly xenophobia is still rife. Apple are tyrants, even more "evil" than Microsoft.

Do we really want Apple to be the only company in computing? It seems they will do ANYTHING to shut down their competitors?

[whiskeylover]

700 questions answered in 2 days = around 4 minutes per question (assuming they never slept in those 48 hours)

The verdict is so open to appeals. :popcorn:

[neu5eeCh]

Not really. There are many more companies releasing Android.


http://static.indianexpress.com/frontend/iep/images/dot.jpg
Not sure how the number companies releasing Android relates to anything, and from that article you linked:



Also, Apple's demands for Samsung to pay it a royalty on its phone sales could hit rival phones using Google's Android operating system more than it hits Samsung...

Unity and G3 only adopted their wall-o-icons after iOS popularized the menu alternative. It's clearly a blatant rip-off. It may or may not be a patent violation.

[vexorian]

This lawsuit hurts Google's Android the most. Seems to me that the next battle isn't Samsung's appeal, but Google's latest lawsuit and patent claims against Apple (in which they're asking the court to ban Apple's products -- period).

And this from PCWORLD (http://www.pcworld.com/article/261440/what_the_applesamsung_verdict_means_to_you.html#tk .hp_fv):

“Apple has already made a big statement, because they aren’t just going after Samsung,” said industry analyst Tim Bajarin (http://www.pcmag.com/author-bio/tim-bajarin). “At the very least, Samsung and other vendors are going to have to think twice about things like icons and other design elements. Google has to be very concerned about this.”


Brings me back to my previous post on <snip> rolling downhill. I do have to wonder whether Unity and Gnome's Iconization of their menus (which I personally detest) are blatant ripoffs of Apple's iOS.
meh, PCWorld fud.

Like mentioned in this thread, Icon menus have been around us since windows 3.11 times. It was a rip off when Apple did it.

Edit: If you remembered the trial. The PC world does not talk about using icons for menus, but about which icons are used for menus. Since it turns out Apple "invented" using green background for the call icon, I guess Android will have to release a patch in which the background is blue.

[vasilbelarus]

Today we can really now that Apple have more $$$`s then Samsung! :)

[neu5eeCh]

meh, PCWorld fud.

Possibly, but they're not the only ones speculating along these lines. On the other hand, it could all be the punditocratic echo-chamber.


Like mentioned in this thread, Icon menus have been around us since windows 3.11 times. It was a rip off when Apple did it.

Yeah, but no. Whether it's a patent violation or not, it's definitely a design rip-off on Unity and Gnome's part. Based on your prior art argument, it's fair to point out that any linux distro could have come up with the wall-o-icons before Apple, but they didn't. It was only after Apple's iOS, and then Android, that Shuttleworth and others thought it was "great" idea to chase after them (did I mention I detest the iconification of Unity and Gnome?). Just saying...:popcorn:

[Copper Bezel]

The court was always going to side with the US company over a foreign one. Sadly xenophobia is still rife. Apple are tyrants, even more "evil" than Microsoft.

Do we really want Apple to be the only company in computing? It seems they will do ANYTHING to shut down their competitors?
The thing I can't stand here is how much it really proves that patents are about money, not about law. This kind of decision reinforces a system where it's easy for the big guys to strangle put the upstarts.

[kurt18947]

Also don't forget that awards are nearly always reduced on appeal. There was a personal injury suit a few years ago in a non-technology industry that had issues somewhat similar to this. The jury award was $50 million. The defendants (insurance) actually wound up paying around $1.5 or $2.0 million.

Ah, the U.S. personal injury/liability industry. One party wins, one party looses, both sets of lawyers get paid.

[mips]

I don't trust a jury. You have people with no legal background and probably very little technical knowledge on the subject matter the case resolves around deciding your fate, no thanks.

We're talking about people that have ignored solid scientific DNA evidence in criminal cases and steered purely be emotion. Really scary.

[vexorian]

Possibly, but they're not the only ones speculating along these lines. On the other hand, it could all be the punditocratic echo-chamber.



Yeah, but no. Whether it's a patent violation or not, it's definitely a design rip-off on Unity and Gnome's part. Based on your prior art argument, it's fair to point out that any linux distro could have come up with the wall-o-icons before Apple, but they didn't. It was only after Apple's iOS, and then Android, that Shuttleworth and others thought it was "great" idea to chase after them (did I mention I detest the iconification of Unity and Gnome?). Just saying...:popcorn:
Icon menus were in active use for things like control panels in windows and gnome continue. All modern cell phones long before the iphone were also using icon menus too. So it has functional written all over it.

That's probably the reason the actual "wall of icons" was not involved in this trial. It was the icons themselves. That's what PC world talks about when refering to how companies should worry about icons. The icon themes used by default in distributions don't look at all like the ithings' icons. So...

[neu5eeCh]

Icon menus were in active use for things like control panels in windows and gnome continue. All modern cell phones long before the iphone were also using icon menus too. So it has functional written all over it.

Yes, but somehow no other company or developer thought to put it all into a coherent interface until Apple did it, then Android, Unity and Gnome (even KDE (http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=144078)) were all scrambling to play ketchup. ;) One has to admit, and to Microsoft's credit (and for better or worse) they did come up with a DE and mobile interface that didn't slavishly copy Apple's innovations, unlike Google, Unity or Gnome.

Here, by the way, is the best summary of the design issues (http://news.cnet.com/2300-1001_3-10013305.html) I've come across.

[forrestcupp]

Well, I read that the court was 10 miles away from Apple's headquarters, while being on the other side of the world from Samsung's headquarters. When you pick a jury from that pool of people, what do you think is going to happen?

Also, I wonder how many people in this thread who are mad at Apple for doing this are some of the same ones in other threads wanting to lynch a company for using a logo that is slightly similar to Ubuntu's logo? ;)

[Darren Sparrow]

Good. Now Samsung can stop making cheap knockoffs and focus on innovative products.

Easy there cowboy! :guitar:

Any proof to back up your quote?

[mips]

the amiga 500 which yes has icons as well was released 3 years prior in 1987
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Amiga500_system.jpg/280px-Amiga500_system.jpg

Apple copied Microsoft... Microsoft copied Amiga

1985, Amiga 1000. Development started in 1982 and prototype shown in 1984.

http://oldcomputers.net/pics/A1000.jpg

[synaptix]

While not directly associated with the Apple v Samsung case, this is still Apple related...

Anyone remember this ?

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/8820/tabletm.png

[BigSilly]

I don't recall that. What is that device Bill Gates is holding? (No rude comments!)

[synaptix]

I don't recall that. What is that device Bill Gates is holding? (No rude comments!)

It's a tablet.

[BigSilly]

It's a tablet.

Well yes. Hur, hur. :p

But any ideas what it was called, and what happened to it.

[synaptix]

Well yes. Hur, hur. :p

But any ideas what it was called, and what happened to it.

It was simply called "Microsoft Tablet PC".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC

[neu5eeCh]

While not directly associated with the Apple v Samsung case, this is still Apple related...

Anyone remember this ?



The difference is that Bill Gates bolted XP, a desktop DE, onto a "tablet" that required a pen and a detachable keyboard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC) to use efficiently. Basically, what Gates presented to the world was a laptop with a detachable keyboard. What Steve Jobs gave to the world was something completely and utterly different.

[alphacrucis2]

The difference is that Bill Gates bolted XP, a desktop DE, onto a "tablet" that required a pen and a detachable keyboard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC) to use efficiently. Basically, what Gates presented to the world was a laptop with a detachable keyboard. What Steve Jobs gave to the world was something completely and utterly different.

Hyperbole. The form and function are not that different at all.

[neu5eeCh]

Hyperbole. The form and function are not that different at all.

Reductio ad absurdem: The form and function are completely different.

[alphacrucis2]

Reductio ad absurdem: The form and function are completely different.

So you can describe for us these completely different forms and functions.

[Mikeb85]

Reductio ad absurdem: The form and function are completely different.

Not really. And plenty of people buy detachable keyboards and styli for their iPads...

[alphacrucis2]

Not really. And plenty of people buy detachable keyboards and styli for their iPads...

Indeed. The two devices are aimed at the same purpose. Sure Apple certainly did it better.

[neu5eeCh]

So you can describe for us these completely different forms and functions.

Easy. Try to use that MS Tablet without a pen or a keyboard.


Not really. And plenty of people buy detachable keyboards and styli for their iPads...

But they don't need them.


Indeed. The two devices are aimed at the same purpose.

Wrong again. The target audience for the MS Tablet PC was very different than for the iPad. Jobs understood why the MS Tablet PC never caught on. Apple's revenue are evidence and proof that the difference between the two products is substantial.

[mastablasta]

hmm strange... how can it be that Jury ackgnowledged the samsung's patents but decided that apple is not infrigning them if they are using the patents in their devices and not paying some fee for the patents then one would say that this means they are infirnging them.

[vexorian]

hmm strange... how can it be that Jury ackgnowledged the samsung's patents but decided that apple is not infrigning them if they are using the patents in their devices and not paying some fee for the patents then one would say that this means they are infirnging them.
The guy among the jury that steered them all towards fast verdict probably has something to do with it. I wonder if we will see this new talent getting hired by Apple. Inc in the future.

[forrestcupp]

Well yes. Hur, hur. :p

But any ideas what it was called, and what happened to it.There were tons of tablet PCs way before the iPad came out. It's just that nobody liked them because they weren't very functional with XP on them.


The difference is that Bill Gates bolted XP, a desktop DE, onto a "tablet" that required a pen and a detachable keyboard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC) to use efficiently. Basically, what Gates presented to the world was a laptop with a detachable keyboard. What Steve Jobs gave to the world was something completely and utterly different.Nevertheless, Apple didn't invent the idea of having a computer in tablet form, by any means. All they did was take the idea and make it functional. The only reason people think it was their idea is that the old tablet PCs were so dismal that nobody outside the tech world knew they existed. I actually used to want one before the iPad came out.

[KiwiNZ]

There were tons of tablet PCs way before the iPad came out. It's just that nobody liked them because they weren't very functional with XP on them.

Nevertheless, Apple didn't invent the idea of having a computer in tablet form, by any means. All they did was take the idea and make it functional. The only reason people think it was their idea is that the old tablet PCs were so dismal that nobody outside the tech world knew they existed. I actually used to want one before the iPad came out.

The original tablets from HP early in the last decade were horrible.

[synaptix]

http://betanews.com/2011/12/20/apple-is-a-patent-troll-now/

&

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-12-21/apple-claims-samsung-tablet-phone-cases-infringe-patents.html


Weeeee.

[Copper Bezel]

Well, sure. But patent law is not about success. The market, where this fight should be happening, is about success, and iPad is winning, for good reason. You can't patent commercial success!

[evilsoup]

Well, sure. But patent law is not about success. The market, where this fight should be happening, is about success, and iPad is winning, for good reason. You can't patent commercial success!

Apple seem to be trying :V

[CarpKing]

Well, sure. But patent law is not about success. The market, where this fight should be happening, is about success, and iPad is winning, for good reason. You can't patent commercial success!

I'm sure that the iPhone's mind-share helped them a great deal in this case: "That thing that I haven't heard of looks like an iPhone! I'll take Apple's word that the other company is in the wrong." There's no question that Apple has made products that appeal to lots of people, but it would be nice if they'd be satisfied with their commercial success and not insist on stomping all present and future competition into the ground with absurd patents. The same goes for much of the tech industry, really, but Apple and Microsoft seem to be the worst offenders at present.

Given how courts have been handling this, I think only legislative action can save us from endless patent wars, with innovation as collateral damage.

[c@ssie]

I'm sure that the iPhone's mind-share helped them a great deal in this case: "That thing that I haven't heard of looks like an iPhone! I'll take Apple's word that the other company is in the wrong." There's no question that Apple has made products that appeal to lots of people, but it would be nice if they'd be satisfied with their commercial success and not insist on stomping all present and future competition into the ground with absurd patents. The same goes for much of the tech industry, really, but Apple and Microsoft seem to be the worst offenders at present.

Given how courts have been handling this, I think only legislative action can save us from endless patent wars, with innovation as collateral damage.
Everyone here is ignoring the real issue. Apple isn't trying to insist on stomping all present and future competition, they are trying to leverage there patents as a bargaining chip in negotians. Samsung manufactures many critical components used it the iPhone and iPad, so it would be suicide for Apple to try and harm Samsung.
Read this article:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-08-24/apple-gets-1-billion-from-samsung-dot-and-nothing-changes

It is not a struggle, however, in which any one company is going to get destroyed or put out of business in court. Competitors are using the courts to figure out the terms of cooperation—whose intellectual property is worth what. Eventually they will get back to ordinary competition in the marketplace. Indeed, Samsung is one of Apple’s main component suppliers for mobile devices; these companies are quietly collaborating, even as their lawyers bash one another’s brains out.

[alexfish]

MM@ MM!

history is amazing in picture format
http://www.sciuridae.co.uk/technology/psion_images/group_psion_shot.jpg

http://jkontherun.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/psixpda.jpg


Forgot to , something to do with
"Clamshell"

[KiwiNZ]

You can't patent commercial success!

Apple thinks you can, that is why they will go after the Galaxy S3 and will go after Nexus 7 when their iPad seven comes out

[Dry Lips]

http://imgur.com/gallery/O585V

http://imgur.com/gallery/kHLka

[synaptix]

http://imgur.com/gallery/O585V

http://imgur.com/gallery/kHLka

LOL.

Oh wait, that triangle still has rounded corners! Apple sues Samsung again claiming rounded corner patent infringement!

[JDShu]

There seems to be an argument floating around that since Apple is claiming that Samsung copied them, the average consumer now considers them to be of equal quality, which is possibly a net win for Samsung.

[Copper Bezel]

I just ran into that on another board. I don't buy it, though. Doesn't the decision just reinforce the perception, already present, that Samsung's products are the cheap knockoff? And isn't the problem really about generic Android gadgets, and not Samsung specifically? So it's small consolation even if Samsung ultimately benefits.

KiwiNZ, I'd love to see the case on the Nexus 7 on how it infringed on an unreleased product. (To be fair, Google and Asus seem to have been careful - the static screen orientation, lack of hardware buttons on the faceplate, etc. seem to distinguish the Nexus a bit from iPad in any case.)

[KiwiNZ]

I just ran into that on another board. I don't buy it, though. Doesn't the decision just reinforce the perception, already present, that Samsung's products are the cheap knockoff? And isn't the problem really about generic Android gadgets, and not Samsung specifically? So it's small consolation even if Samsung ultimately benefits.

KiwiNZ, I'd love to see the case on the Nexus 7 on how it infringed on an unreleased product. (To be fair, Google and Asus seem to have been careful - the static screen orientation, lack of hardware buttons on the faceplate, etc. seem to distinguish the Nexus a bit from iPad in any case.)

Apple will sue ASUS, Google, HTC...............

[Bigtime_Scrub]

Just proves how terrible and inept the judiciary branch is...

[Copper Bezel]

Oh - they're apparently already working on it. (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/tech-biz/Jury+reaches+verdict+Apple+Samsung+trial+court/7142033/story.html)

In a separate but related case, Apple has won a pre-trial injunction against the Google Nexus tablet.

[MikeCyber]

Apparently it was not only design but:

Apple won a claim with respect to each of its technical patents 7469381, 7844915 and 7864163, which among other things describe the rotation and enlarge objects by touch screen gestures, and a programming interface for scrolling. Even with design patents D593087, D618677 and D604305, it convinced the jury of a violation by a number of Samsung smartphones.

Now that's Android stuff as well...so we shall see Apple vs Google soon.

But anyway that's nauseating.- Only about protecting US industry and about patents. Such would not be possible in Europe. This is going insane...we need different, new global patent laws. If Apple would have invented the wheel we all would pay them...hmm maybe 4'000.- per car? (1000 per wheel)
Yes, it's that insane!-

[alexfish]

LOL.

Oh wait, that triangle still has rounded corners! Apple sues Samsung again claiming rounded corner patent infringement!

tut - tut
in a round-about way
Angled corners, not square corners,

pixel, draw them where you like,

Exceptions to the rule, do not mention , round , or anything to do with PI, or sine , or tan , or co-sine , or in fact anything you learnt at school,;)

It is now be forbidden to apply Knowledge,:p

[neu5eeCh]

Apple will sue ASUS, Google, HTC...............

And they are, and will, sue Apple.

Hard to see how this will end. Apple has more money than God, at this point. They could sue the world and the interest from the bank would outstrip their legal expenditures.

You've probably read that a number of MS higher ups are cocka-doodling about the lawsuit. They seem to think manufacturers will abandon the "legal-minefield-that-is-Android" in favor of Windows Mobile.

I like that Google is suing to ban all of Apple's mobile products from the United States. Oh yeah -- thermonuclear.

Edit:
PCWorld on why the jurors thought Samsung was guilty. (http://www.pcworld.com/article/261458/applesamsung_jurors_say_video_testimony_emails_wer e_persuasive.html#tk.hp_new)

[MikeCyber]

Yea truly insane...that hobbyist jury made a quick decision without even reading the facts.-

Anyway what about the upcoming GnomeOS smartphone, or what is it called?

[Paqman]

Hard to see how this will end. Apple has more money than God, at this point. They could sue the world and the interest from the bank would outstrip their legal expenditures.
[/URL]

Urgh. A war of corporate attrition, where the last man standing is the one who has the most gold to keep their lawyers tying up the competition in meat-grinder lawsuits. Lets hope Apple has a bit more vision than that, but they're so big now that they could continue to be dominant without actually innovating (see also: Microsoft).

This kind of thing is absolutely not what the patent system is for. It's supposed to allow little guys with good ideas to compete, not allow big guys to wipe out the competition without having any new ideas.

[mastablasta]

This kind of thing is absolutely not what the patent system is for. It's supposed to allow little guys with good ideas to compete, not allow big guys to wipe out the competition without having any new ideas.

apple is presenting themselves as little guys. in fact their whole case was pure marketing to the jury.

Samsujng did a poor job it seems. i mean a video testimony? seriously? and witnesses through translator? if they planned this then they shoud include Koreans in jury. i was easy for patriots to try justify "Samsung guilty" to themselves.

if i was Samsung i would increase supply price of their parts to Apple. and use the difference to pay for the damages :-P

[Paqman]

if i was Samsung i would increase supply price of their parts to Apple. and use the difference to pay for the damages :-P

Lol.

[vexorian]

In this, Samsung hints that they will go after a higher court and use the argument that the verdict is protectionist as their main argument. http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2012/08/133_118242.html

Let them test how free the market in the US really is.

[kurt18947]

Yea truly insane...that hobbyist jury made a quick decision without even reading the facts.-

Anyway what about the upcoming GnomeOS smartphone, or what is it called?

Wouldn't it be something if Mozilla and their Firefox OS were the winners in this mess? :cool: . Of course they still need apps.......

[vexorian]

I'd like to see Apple vs. Google Nexus. The problem with Apple vs. Samsung's jury was that they were dummies that probably didn't know well about Samsung and focused on their own perception of Apple and Samsung in the verdict.

With google, it is a different topic, everyone knows what Google is and that they innovate. Also it is a huge US company, so Apple would not have the local advantage anymore. Google lawyers have proven to be very good as well. It will be much harder for Apple to sell that Google are bootleg makers.


But anyway that's nauseating.- Only about protecting US industry and about patents. Such would not be possible in Europe. This is going insane...we need different, new global patent laws. If Apple would have invented the wheel we all would pay them...hmm maybe 4'000.- per car? (1000 per wheel)
Yes, it's that insane!-
Just so you know, the first Samsung tablet ban happened in Germany.


------
Anyway, just because you popularized something it does not mean you own it. Apple cannot (and didn't) sue over icon mosaics. Because the icon mosaics are provenly an invention as old as the mouse.

[MikeCyber]

Yes, but it has been removed after Samsung changed the logo size or alike.

Such hobbyist jurors should be forced at least to read through the facts.

[neu5eeCh]

OSNews just put up an interesting post (http://www.osnews.com/story/26310/Google_most_Apple_patents_don_t_relate_to_core_And roid). They point out that most of the Apple patents don't relate to core Android, but to Samsung's additions. This undercuts every pundit who has claimed the ruling will hurt Android, include smug Microsoft execs.

[Blackmag+c]

It seems to me that Apple has become this money saturated obese blot on the landscape that pretty soon everyone will end up disliking (much like the hatred of microsoft I saw when I first joined these forums). The thirst to 'win' isn't the cool and slick image I associated with the company when I was in high school. At the moment I would go as far to say that the brand is now synonymous with a sinister, capitalist and playground bully style of working. This is not good my friends, not good.

I own a macbook pro and of late I have been uneasy about owning another apple product EVER AGAIN. It is actually part of the reason why I have returned to the forums, to try and replace mac OS with something.


I bet the jury all had iphones...and ipads and ipods and imacs. But I guess infringement is infringement?


The out and out war on android will only end in a lot of people being turned off the apple brand.

I found a rumour earlier about samsung sending 30 trucks of 5 cent coins to the doors of Apple HQ, as the judge hadn't specified the method of paying the settlement. I couldn't help but think of piratebay and the way they got their users to flood the legal office with small payments so that they themselves incurred a charge some time ago.

[eddier]

Did Apple "invent" the Mobile Phone(Cellphone) = NO!

Did Apple "invent" the oblong = NO!

Did Apple "invent" Rounded corners = NO!

Did Apple "invent" the touchscreen = NO!

Did Apple "invent" Icons = NO!

The Samsung is not a "copy" it has different dimensions,a different name a different OS and its name doesnt hijack the letter i.;)

Just like fashion and style Samsung simply followed the "trend".

I do accept the iphone like most Apple products look superb.

Beats me.

eddie

[Copper Bezel]

I'm losing all of my outrage for this decision. The system is a mess, and things could get bad, but the case superficially resembles a reasonable outcome. Samsung did blatantly copy Apple's look and feel in the hardware and the iPhone-knockoff Touchwiz interface, which should have been covered under © or trade dress. The case was not presented that way. The jurors then made their decision based on "it looks like an iPhone." So the right decision, with the right motivation, based on a horrifically wrong legal precedent. If that precedent only means that folks can't make awful generic-looking Apple clone hardware (and software, for that matter,) it's a net gain. It only becomes a loss when Apple uses the actual precedent set to ban everything, or when it causes handset makers to start taking Windows Phone seriously. = P

[smellyman]

worth posting again.

"I mean Picasso had a saying he said good artists copy great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas" -Steve Jobs 1996

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs said, "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."

[neu5eeCh]

worth posting again.

"I mean Picasso had a saying he said good artists copy great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas" -Steve Jobs 1996

It wasn't Picasso. It was T.S. Eliot who said this. Was this really Jobs' quote?

[Mikeb85]

It wasn't Picasso. It was T.S. Eliot who said this. Was this really Jobs' quote?

Yup. It's fairly well known, you can actually watch the excerpts of the video interview on YouTube. Jobs does attribute it to Picasso though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=CW0DUg63lqU

[Mikeb85]

After reading through the verdict and whatnot, a few things jump out at me. First, the Galaxy S3 isn't affected by the lawsuit. Second, it's mostly older phones that infringe on Apple's 'patents', the Galaxy S2 only infringes in a few areas.

And if Samsung does take this to the Supreme Court, they will be able to reduce the damages down to nothing, and likely reverse the ruling. There were so many problems with the trial odds are they can have the ruling tossed completely.

For instance, the judge presiding over this trial was the same judge that granted Apple a preliminary injunction over the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Galaxy Nexus (in a separate case), and her conduct in this trial was suspect, for instance disallowing several pieces of evidence that Samsung could have used to defend itself...

Also, the head juror is a tech guy who happens to own a dubious software patent, and other jurors cited his opinions as being highly influential.

At first this seemed like a huge victory for Apple, but odds are it will be appealed down to nothing...

[KiwiNZ]

After reading through the verdict and whatnot, a few things jump out at me. First, the Galaxy S3 isn't affected by the lawsuit. Second, it's mostly older phones that infringe on Apple's 'patents', the Galaxy S2 only infringes in a few areas.

And if Samsung does take this to the Supreme Court, they will be able to reduce the damages down to nothing, and likely reverse the ruling. There were so many problems with the trial odds are they can have the ruling tossed completely.

For instance, the judge presiding over this trial was the same judge that granted Apple a preliminary injunction over the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Galaxy Nexus (in a separate case), and her conduct in this trial was suspect, for instance disallowing several pieces of evidence that Samsung could have used to defend itself...

Also, the head juror is a tech guy who happens to own a dubious software patent, and other jurors cited his opinions as being highly influential.

At first this seemed like a huge victory for Apple, but odds are it will be appealed down to nothing...

Try not to add logic to this, a lot of what you say is correct however the system does not follow logic.There is many reason why Samsung is not allowed to prevail. The COC prevents me from saying more.

[Mikeb85]

Try not to add logic to this, a lot of what you say is correct however the system does not follow logic.There is many reason why Samsung is not allowed to prevail. The COC prevents me from saying more.

This is true. We'll see what happens with Apple vs Google/Motorola.

[cfg83]

forrestcupp -


...

Nevertheless, Apple didn't invent the idea of having a computer in tablet form, by any means. All they did was take the idea and make it functional. The only reason people think it was their idea is that the old tablet PCs were so dismal that nobody outside the tech world knew they existed. I actually used to want one before the iPad came out.

What I heard was that the iPad was the first internal proposed design, but Steve Jobs said, no, let's use this in a phone instead. Once the iPhone became a monster hit, the infrastructure and consumers were in place to make the iPad into a hit.

Maybe you could say the iPhone was a micro-tablet that could double as a phone. Soooooooo, even if you didn't buy any or many apps, the iPhone was still useful in it's primary function. But because the iPhone was a smartphone that leapfrogged it's predecessor Blackberry (right?!?!?!?) in terms of technology, it succeeded in it's disruption. From an interaction POV, the iPad is a step above an iPhone. It's like going from a 15" CRT to a 20" LCD.

Carlos

[rg4w]

The fruits of their labor:

Samsung's image doing just fine after Apple verdict, poll finds
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57509883-37/samsungs-image-doing-just-fine-after-apple-verdict-poll-finds/

Here's How Apple's Reputation Dived After the Samsung Verdict
http://www.forbes.com/sites/haydnshaughnessy/2012/09/06/heres-how-apples-reputation-dived-after-the-samsung-verdict/

[alexan]

I think this news is pretty much related to the "sphere of influence " Apple can rely for the battle against Samsung:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/10/uk-usa-apple-gdp-idUKBRE8891E620120910
It's matter of money, I guess.