Apple vs Samsung, court orders Samsung to show Apple 5 new phones

Castiel said:
Hmmm, a jury verdict when the court is a hands throw from Apple HQ and the Jury loaded with silicon valley Gentiles who worship the Lord God Jobs......

Was it ever going to go another way. Each are as bad each other, Apple steal from Sony et al, Samsung steal from Apple.....evolution at work. ;)
Click to expand...

The more I read on the case ypthe more I totaly disagree.

Apple holds the patents.
Do samsung need bounce back to make the phone work? Of course they don't.
Do they need pinch to zoom to make the phone work? No they don't, but it's the nicest solution.
Have apple licensed to other companies like Microsoft? yes they have.
Did apple offer a license to samsung? Yes they did.


Samsung should have licensed it.

Look what a surprise. But let's ignore facts and go its a CT the courts will always side with apple. Well they didn't, they sided with apple in about 50% of the judgment.


http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...tents-to-microsoft-in-anti-cloning-agreement/
Monday's testimony in the Apple v. Samsung trial has revealed more about the patent licensing deal Apple offered to Samsung in 2010—including the fact that Microsoft accepted a similar deal granting access to some of Apple's design patents.

Apple Patent Licensing Director Boris Teksler testified that design patents at stake in the Samsung trial were licensed to Microsoft, as reported by*Reuters. But Microsoft is not allowed to simply build iPhone or iPad clones—which is exactly what Apple accuses Samsung of doing with its various Android-based devices. "There was no right with respect to these design patents to build clones of any type," Teksler said, according to Reuters.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
By the same accounts, all car manufacturers have "copied" henry ford's original design. After all, all cars do have 4 wheels, and a round thingy to steer. Not to mention they all place the driver facing forward and in the sitting position.
 
robgmun said:
Which is correct...........
Click to expand...

ityRv.jpg
 
semi-pro waster said:
Not impressed with this, there's only so many different ways that you can make a touchscreen phone and allowing Apple to patent as they have effectively could give them an unchallenged monopoly. Some of the ideas patented seem a little bit too generic or obvious to merit the protection offered but then again the American patent system has allowed other dubious claims before.

It's made that bit odder by the fact that Samsung make the screens (and other components?) for Apple.
Click to expand...

Then you license it, like MS has. That's the world of patents. It's not even if smasung could argue it wasn't willingfull, which is why the damages are so high.

You don't need bounce back and new android versions don't.

As I've said in the other read.

Glaucus said:
The more I read on the case ypthe more I totaly disagree.

Apple holds the patents.
Do samsung need bounce back to make the phone work? Of course they don't.
Do they need pinch to zoom to make the phone work? No they don't, but it's the nicest solution.
Have apple licensed to other companies like Microsoft? yes they have.
Did apple offer a license to samsung? Yes they did.


Samsung should have licensed it.

Look what a surprise. But let's ignore facts and go its a CT the courts will always side with apple. Well they didn't, they sided with apple in about 50% of the judgment.

Monday's testimony in the Apple v. Samsung trial has revealed more about the patent licensing deal Apple offered to Samsung in 2010—including the fact that Microsoft accepted a similar deal granting access to some of Apple's design patents.

Apple Patent Licensing Director Boris Teksler testified that design patents at stake in the Samsung trial were licensed to Microsoft, as reported by*Reuters. But Microsoft is not allowed to simply build iPhone or iPad clones—which is exactly what Apple accuses Samsung of doing with its various Android-based devices. "There was no right with respect to these design patents to build clones of any type," Teksler said, according to Reuters.
Click to expand...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...tents-to-microsoft-in-anti-cloning-agreement/
Click to expand...


frosty03 said:
By the same accounts, all car manufacturers have "copied" henry ford's original design. After all, all cars do have 4 wheels, and a round thingy to steer. Not to mention they all place the driver facing forward and in the sitting position.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: would help if you had a clue about patents.
Apple have not won rights to be the only company to seek smart phones/tablets.
 
It's probably worth noting that Samsung won't pay a dime to Apple anytime soon. This will surely go to appeal and, imho, Apple don't care about winning money. The victory was a great symbol for them, but if Samsung *really* throw their toys out of the pram they could walk away as Apple's biggest trading partner.

Not that it would be logical to do so as both parties would take a big hit from this. But being in the position they are, I doubt Samsung will ever pay Apple anything like the damages awarded by this case.
 
This kind of fraud by Apple is most stifling for technology development, the absurdity of the patents makes the mind boggle. The way in which the inherently obvious can become a patent makes a mockery of the legal system. How anyone dare become a judge when the job has so little credibility one can only wonder.
 
Theophany said:
It's probably worth noting that Samsung won't pay a dime to Apple anytime soon. This will surely go to appeal and, imho, Apple don't care about winning money. The victory was a great symbol for them, but if Samsung *really* throw their toys out of the pram they could walk away as Apple's biggest trading partner.

Not that it would be logical to do so as both parties would take a big hit from this. But being in the position they are, I doubt Samsung will ever pay Apple anything like the damages awarded by this case.
Click to expand...

No they can't walk away.

Smasung make to much money of apple, they have signed co tracts. The trade will continue as normal and if they didn't renew contract at end of life, then apple can just go elsewhere.

Samsung will appeal and it'll take ages. But they will not throw there biggest customer out.
 
Plunk13 said:
From ENGADGET:
"Update: Both companies have released statements on the matter, with Apple stating via the New York Times the ruling sends a loud and clear message that "stealing isn't right"

Then..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

Then Steve jobs LOLing in his grave/hell.
Click to expand...

in another forum where i have posted this video, an apple fanboy replied that stealing is OK. I expect since jobs said this that all apple fanboys will accept stealing as an acceptable practice, whatever the lord says i guess...
 
Glaucus said:
Then you license it, like MS has. That's the world of patents. It's not even if smasung could argue it wasn't willingfull, which is why the damages are so high.

You don't need bounce back and new android versions don't.

As I've said in the other read.
Click to expand...

That doesn't address the point that the patents probably shouldn't have been granted in the first place. Yes, I appreciate Samsung could have licensed the "solution" from Apple but it seems rather a failing of the patent law in the first place if it is allowing obvious or generic solutions to be patented - they're supposed to be reserved for novel or original solutions that would not be obvious.

However as I've pointed out it's not the first time and doubtless won't be the last that the American patent system allows the patenting of somewhat dubious applications.
 
Iraklis F.C. said:
in another forum where i have posted this video, an apple fanboy replied that stealing is OK. I expect since jobs said this that all apple fanboys will accept stealing as an acceptable practice, whatever the lord says i guess...
Click to expand...

It needs to be taken into context.
Stealing in the context job says is ok. Otherwise we wouldn't have the android tablets, windows 8 tablets etc.

What you can't do is steal patented ideas. There's a massive difference and it's about time people actually listened to the whole video and see what is happening.
 
semi-pro waster said:
That doesn't address the point that the patents probably shouldn't have been granted in the first place. Yes, I appreciate Samsung could have licensed the "solution" from Apple but it seems rather a failing of the patent law in the first place if it is allowing obvious or generic solutions to be patented - they're supposed to be reserved for novel or original solutions that would not be obvious.

However as I've pointed out it's not the first time and doubtless won't be the last that the American patent system allows the patenting of somewhat dubious applications.
Click to expand...

I'll agree the patent laws is a mess, but then so are many laws. But while they are the law they are the law.

I can't see how any can defend Samsung once they actually get down to the nitty and gritty and read around. They were offered a license and refused, they are not essential licenses to make a smartphone or tablet, so Samsung if they wanted could have made them with out the license. It was also very much willingfully done.

Apple even praises Nokia and blackberry for making visually very different smartphones and hasn't gone after them. It's also true the lumia series looks nothing like the iPhones and is instantly recognizable as a unique design.

Also lots of experts don't think this is bad for consumers and some even thing the media attention will boost samsungs sales

Michael Gartenburg, research director at Gartner, told the BBC it could be a good thing for consumers in the long run because it would force Apple's competitors to innovate.


Apple won most of its claims but did not convince the jury its iPad design patent had been infringed
"Anyone who was even thinking about borrowing a technology or design from Apple will think twice about it now," he said.

Other analysts point out that Apple could be the overall loser because the court case has helped boost Samsung's profile.
Click to expand...

I sort of agree, but not totally, some ways are just inherently better than others. More diversity is good for consumers.
 
Last edited:
It was a given they were going to win in their own country really, we will just have to see how big the repercussions are.

One thing that strikes me though is that apple seem to have stopped innovating, i think they know this, they have nothing new up their sleeve whereas samsung are doing a really good job with things like smart stay (which i don't think i could live without now) and buddy photo share etc.

Most of the people i know buying iphones now are the usual people who join the bandwagon late, non-techies and middle aged women simply because they have seen other people having them the last few years, now a lot of people seem to be going for Android especially the S2/S3.

Jellybean must be a massive worry for apple, its so nice.

I love my macbook and think my ATV2 is pretty good (jailbroken) but Apple are becoming too arrogant.
 
I could have been the lawyer and still won for apple.

and here memebers of the jury...is an iphone 5..take a good look..whispers..btw we do not need those back after you have made your comparrison.

I dont even think they needed a lawyer in USA USA!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom