Comments on news posted 2012-08-28 08:42:33: Samsung has come out on the losing end of their patent battle against Apple, a jury awarding Apple a $1 billion settlement after Apple insisted that a lot of features used by Samsung (like rounded edges) are proprietary Apple innovations. ..
really? the iPhone is pretty distinctive and I've only seen similarities with it on knockoff Chinese backalley brands. Samsung's devices always look significantly different IMO. I can always tell the difference.
The slides Samsung released to the press include mock-ups by Apple designer Shin Nishobori, images that we first saw last week in publicly available court documents. But as noted Apple fanboy John Gruber points out, Samsung’s argument is a bit bogus since the design Nishobori created wasn’t an actual Sony phone — instead it was how Apple envisioned a potential Sony phone.
The slides also show a Samsung “IReen” design that was created before the iPhone was released. Samsung would likely be better off trying to prove that it’s been developing an iPhone-like smartphone for some time, rather than trying to prove Apple’s Sony inspiration.
Except that they probably weren't, especially given how the iPhone caused a "design crisis" at Samsung when it was released. Sheer act of desperation on the part of Samsung.
So those are phones which were still "in development" and were not released as actual products nor were there public information about them.
What does that imply?
1) Apple cannot possibly have copied something which do not exist nor something which is not known to the public.
2) Although those designs appear to be touch screen phones with rectangular shape and rounded corner, they look ugly when compared to both iPhone and Galaxy phones.
On the other hand, Samsung Galaxy S look eerily similar to an iPhone 3GS. (Yup. Not all phones with rectangle with rounded corners look the same. You can still have good looking design like iPhone and Galaxy and also ugly design like Samsung "Bowl").
So why didn't Samsung stick to one of their own designs "in development" but released something that looked similar to iPhone?
I imagine if Samsung phones all look more like Samsung "Bowl" design, the jury would not have ruled in favor of Apple.
3) Unless there were public information about those phones before iPhone was announced, we can only take Samsung's word that they had those phones "in development". Or perhaps one of their lawyers did a quick photoshop image and presented bunch of ugly looking touchscreen phones as something Samsung had "in development"?
Seriously. Those phones "in development" are ugly. Once again, why none of the Galaxy phones look more like them?
Finally, even if those phones were "in development" before Apple announced the iPhone, it is still a problem because IMO only actual products count.
(Just like if you want to invalidate a patent with a prior art claim, the information concerning the prior art must have already been made available to the public before the application of the patent in question. You cannot claim something you have "in developed secretly" as a prior art).
I don't know why many phandroids don't think some of the Galaxy phones look like iPhone or it is okay for Samsung to copy iPhone's tradedress.
If I remembered correctly, the popularity of Samsung Galaxy phones exploded after Samsung released Galaxy S.
Can anyone here look at iPhone 3GS and Samsung Galaxy S and tell me they do not look alike?
Many reviews of Galaxy S mentioned the similar look between Galaxy S and iPhone 3GS.
They are basically twins. Yes, there is a big Samsung word/logo on Galaxy S so customers would not confuse Galaxy S for an iPhone but the exterior design of Galaxy S is basically a iPhone 3GS clone.
That means Samsung got a *free ride* in terms of effort spent in design the exterior style of Galaxy S. There was a blue print (aka iPhone 3GS) ready for them to "copy".
Why do I think Samsung Galaxy S copied iPhone 3GS?
Two reasons: 1) iPhone 3GS was released in 2009 and Galaxy S was released in 2010. 2) It was revealed during the trial that Samusng has done design comparisons between their phone and iPhone. And their internal documents have many recommendations to make their phone look more like iPhone. This suggest Samsung has the tendency to copy iPhone instead of spending millions to research and design their own tradedress.
Do you think Galaxy would be as popular today if they look more like Motorola Droids?
Bottom line: 1) Samsung Galaxy S got a free-ride in terms of of exterior design and copied iPhone 3GS. 2) The popular of Galaxy S exploded and helped Samsung established Galaxy as a well known high-end phone. 3) Once the Galaxy brand is estbalished, there is less need to copy iPhone and all Galayx phones after Galaxy S look slightly different from iPhone.
If you are Apple, are you be pissed or happy that Samsung copied your iPhone 3GS design and helped themsevle to estbalish Galaxy brand?
I consider my opinion pretty neutral because I own neither Apple nor Android smartphones. In fact, I have no plan to get a smartphone. So I'm pretty much observing from outside of your iSheeps vs Phandroids war.
I don't know what's wrong with my Firefox, and why it now is crashing constantly, but until I can get it fixed I just can't really write good posts here.
I will summarize very briefly. All your points are inaccurate, and easily countered. Samsung didn't copy Apple, and the trial was a farce.
All your points are inaccurate, and easily countered. Samsung didn't copy Apple, and the trial was a farce.
Please do.. I would love to hear your counter points..
Samsung did not copy Apple?
Are you saying earlier models of Galaxy phones such as Galaxy S don't look like iPhone 3GS?
Or it just so happened that Samsung Galaxy S turned out to be a iPhone 3GS look alike after Samsung designers spent much time and effort (and possibly under influence of some "bowl of water") working on the exterior design of Galaxy S but they did not look at or copy the exterior design of iPhone 3GS even though it was revealed that Samsung did several design comparisons against iPhone and recommended that their designers to design phones to look more like iPhone ?
Sure... It just so happened and they did not willfully infringe on the tradedress of iPhone 3GS.
I don't see any Motoroal Droids copy iPhone's exterior design the way Galaxy S did.
Have you ever heard or read anyone say the exterior design of Motorola Droids look like iPhone ? No..
If you want to argue that competitors should be able copy Apple design to some extend for the sake of competition, future innovation and whatnot, that is fine.
But to outright saying Galaxy S does not look like iPhone 3GS or Galaxy S did not copy the look of iPhone 3GS means you are a an phandroid.
Several friends of mine have iPhone/iPad or Android phone/tablets and they are all passionate about their own gadgets. I have witnessed how they became either iSheeps or Phandroids. But as someone who only use a dumb phone and have no plan to get a smartphone and tablet, i can claim that my opinion is relatively unbiased.
Yes.. I agree Apple cannot have patent on a simple rectangular and rounded corner but they can certainly protect the trade dress of their iPhone designs. Trade dress is more than rectangular and rounded corner.
Just look at Galaxy S and iPhone 3GS. I can understand why Apple is pissed when Samsung released those early Galaxy phones. They were basically iPhone look alike.
Even though Galaxy phone has Samsung logo and not Apple logo, Samsung basically got a free ride from the trade dress of iPhone.
On the other hand, Motorola Doroids do not look similar to iPhones. Motorola has proved that not all rectangular plus rounded corners are the same.
As long as you don't wholesale ripoff iPhone exterior design, I don't think Apple have a case...
You mean like how the ipad looks like this samsung digital frame from 2006?
Owned apple fanboys, you can take a seat now.
My iPad looks nothing like that. It seems to be missing a home button and camera, there's lettering across the side and the bezel is huge. Unless you mean it's rectangular in shape in which case then it does look like my iPad, but then so does this:
All of that is irrelevant though since the iPad's tradedress was not shown to be diluted by Samsung.
Oh really? The white on black, the curved edges, the ipad looks exactly alike!
You are either blind or such a huge ifanboy that you can't see real life.
If you ifanboys are gonna argue about adding a few buttons and a screen difference makes a complete copy of an apple product for samsung, then how is this not a complete copy?
All of that is irrelevant though since the iPad's tradedress was not shown to be diluted by Samsung.
Wasn't Apple presenting tablet images that had been stretched so that the device would appear to be shaped just like the iPad? And then claimed that they didn't know they did that?
All of that is irrelevant though since the iPad's tradedress was not shown to be diluted by Samsung.
Wasn't Apple presenting tablet images that had been stretched so that the device would appear to be shaped just like the iPad? And then claimed that they didn't know they did that?
Why don't you post pictures of Galaxy S vs iPhone 3GS?
Is there any reason you posted picture of a Samsung digital frame with large black bezel but you won't post pictures of Galaxy S vs iPhone 3GS?
You want to argue that Apple copied this Samusng digital frame in their iPad design?
Go ahead. I am not disputing whether Apple copied Samsung digital frame or not. Yes, iPad and the digital frame look similar so it could very well be true the Apple copied the digital frame but at least Apple's iPad does not look that ugly.
The level of similarity betwen iPad and that digital frame is at best 70%. On the other hand, Galaxy S is like a 95% copy of iPhone 3GS except it's slightly larger.
When I and my friends first saw an early model of Galaxy phone on display at a local Best Buy, our first reaction was "OMG. It looks just like a iPhone 3GS!". No doubt that sort of reaction has helped Samsung selling those early Galaxy phones.
You don't get that kind of reaction from any Motorola or HTC android phones. And don't forget that Samsung internal document recommending their designer to design phone to look more like iPhone. So there is Samsung's *intent* to *willfully* copy Apple's design.
Again, why don't you as a phandroid post pictures of Galaxy S vs iPhone 3GS?
Once again, I own neither Android nor Apple gadgets and have no plans to purchase any and I'm not attached to either iOS or Android platforms so I can remain neutral. (Windows 8 phone may change my mind).
So why do I even post message here?
It's because this trial has become a hot topic and I kept reading some illogical things said by phandroid side. iSheeps are not much better but the simple fact that many phandroids refused to acknowlege early Galaxy phones are virtually a iPhone look alike or many phandroids say it is okay for Samsung to copy the trade dress of iPhone ticks me off. Come on. Not even Motorola or HTC did that with their phones.
So if you don't want to be called a phandroid, just admit that Samsung was a copycat with their earlier Galaxy phones looking similar to iPhones.
At least my friends who owns Galaxy S acknowledged that it looks like an iPhone 3GS.
Don't even bother to call me Apple fanboy since I have no loyalty to them.
There are two things that made me feeling less sympathetic toward Samsung:
1) Galaxy S was an obvious and blatant copy of iPhone 3GS beautiful exterior design from which they got a free ride to establish their Galaxy brand.
(Yes, iPhone's exterior design is beautiful. You don't need to be a fanboy to acknowledge that).
If Samsung was able to establish their Galaxy brand without wholesale ripoff iPhone 3GS exterior design in their early Galaxy phones, I would have supported them.
But by wholesale ripoff iPhone 3GS exterior design, Samsung has forever left the impression that they are a copycat.
2) Phandroids do not admit Galaxy S violdate (e.g. wholesale ripoff) the trade dress of iPhone 3GS.
Come on. Go to a local Best buy and compare those two phiones yourself. They are basically 95% look alike except slight difference in size.
Fandroid huh? And something that looks EXACTLY like an ipad 1 is only ripping off up to 70%, and that phone though is 95%? And you aren't an apple fanboy?
I also enjoy your illogal response of something looking just like an ipad, but the ipad isn't 'that ugly'. Adding a few buttons can change a design from ugly to beautiful? Is that what Steve Jobs told you?
And btw... look at the attachment ifanboy.
If you are gonna spew your opinions as facts at least have some clue of what you speak.
Okay.. This thread has now contain some emotional responses and some how I feel the need to post a message here.
To be fair, jx2000 said he thinks ipad looks similar to the samsung digital frame and apple probably copied the design. He assigned percentages (70%, 95% etc or whatever) to represent different similarity of various devices but that can be subjective though.
Nevertheless i think the point jx2000 was trying to make is that samsung galaxy s looks like a near duplicate of iphone 3gs.
And I agree with him.
Does that mean i am a apple fanboy too?
If so, by whatever logic you have in your head, anyone who even remotely thinks or feels that galaxy s looke like a 3gs is an apple fanboy.
I don't agree with many of the claims apple has against samsung in their lawsuit which is what this thread was about originally but galaxy s represents an example that cannot be ignored (now that jx2000 has brought it up). The thing simply looks too much like a 3gs and is probably one of few things I think apple as valid claim against.
Btw.. I'm not sure what is the purpose of the picture you posted but if you think posting a picture that shows yourself typing a your forum message on an imac(?) would clear you of any fanboism, you are wrong.
Your response to jx2000 is full of emotions and evidence of fanboism. It seems like jx2000's posting in this thread has pinched a nerve in you. That type of emotional response is what we have seen coming from fanatics all sides (android, apple, microsoft). You even brought up steve jobs name!! Lol & facepalm... really?
You sounded more like a imac user who is having buyers remorse and decided to become a fandroid bent on having revenge against apple.
Why not dump your imac and get a PC if you are not happy? Build one yourself to avoid apple tax and you can get a mac pro like pc for 1/2 the cost or less.
Oh wait. You have already spent money on that imac so you might as well use it until "it just doesn't work". (okay. bad joke)
"Is that what Steve Jobs told you?"
Yup. An emotional response typed on an imac. You are obviously a victim of apple's reality distortion field but that does not mean you should ignore the fact that galaxy s looks like a 3gs.
If you want to reply to jx2000 properly, you need to address the similarity of galaxy s vs 3gs because that was the subject of his posts.
Buyers remorse? I got the thing because I am a ios developer, not because I blindly believe everything Steve Jobs tells me. Go bark up somebody else's tree.
And are you really that blind that you cant see the similarity of that Digital Frame to the ipad? if you think it's 70% too then there is nothing further to discuss as you are obviously blind as hell.
And you get emotions from words. You are funny.
See, this is the emotion I feel reading your vomit that you call your post:
You say I'm full of emotions, you are full of mindless assumptions and are apparantly too stupid to understand that some people are just jackasses and can insult without feelings. Go cry to mommy, maybe she has some emotions boy.
And look at that! I just called myself a jackass! Obviously due to emotion right? I mean dirty word! Obviously if you curse it's due to emotion!
There ya go, some more assumptions for you to make with your next vomit of a post.
In this politically correct climate, some people think that saying what's on your mind is called 'emotion'. I call it 'telling the truth', and I DON'T care what you think.
I mean really! Calling me an emotional fanboy is an insult! If you are going to act like you know me, or insult me, at least call me what I am, a neutral sarcastic jackass.
In this politically correct climate, some people think that saying what's on your mind is called 'emotion'. I call it 'telling the truth', and I DON'T care what you think.
I mean really! Calling me an emotional fanboy is an insult! If you are going to act like you know me, or insult me, at least call me what I am, a neutral sarcastic jackass.
Now do go run after the mods.
Ah... It seems like you are showing a little sense of guilt there. Well, I will admit that I was guilty too.
So my apology again..
You must be very good at posting sarcastic messages because I have not posted any message or reply to anyone on this web site for a long time until I read yours...
Bombed? If I did I wouldn't care. I am a body builder, and a martial artist. I used to get picked on as a kid, and I overcame all obstacles. Very few things actually get on my nerves, although you were starting on the road of one (Assuming things about me is a pet peeve of mine).
I literally have a very deep gritty voice. I can tell you horrible things and laugh about it. Sorry..
As for the similarities, why should I have mentioned them when the other guy brushed off the similarities so easily? Not only did he brush them off, but he said that the ipad wasn't as ugly. How can such a difference happen when the devices are so similar?
I'll answer you though. I'd say the ipad to frame is 98% percent similar, and the 3gs to galaxy s is around 80-90%. I did own the 3g and my bro owned the 3gs.
Bombed? If I did I wouldn't care. I am a body builder, and a martial artist. I used to get picked on as a kid, and I overcame all obstacles. Very few things actually get on my nerves, although you were starting on the road of one (Assuming things about me is a pet peeve of mine).
I literally have a very deep gritty voice. I can tell you horrible things and laugh about it. Sorry..
Sorry to hear that. It sounds like you have a very tough life as a child.. Hopefully whoever bullied before you got their negative karma already.
I'll answer you though. I'd say the ipad to frame is 98% percent similar, and the 3gs to galaxy s is around 80-90%. I did own the 3g and my bro owned the 3gs.
Although I don't own any smartphones but many of my friends have iPhones or high end Android phones so I have had plenty of opportunity to play with them in the last few years.
I still think that the "exterior design" of Galaxy S and iPhone 3GS is very similar. Perhaps saying 95% similarity is too much but definitely 90%.
The exterior similarity is almost as much as the similarity between a Toyota FT-86 and a Subaru BRZ but Toyota and Subaru collaborated on the design of their cars together.
Like automobiles which are basically metal chasis with four wheels, phones with rectangular and rounded corner shape can have many different and unique exterior designs. So "trade dress" if what we are talking about here.
If Lexus creates a near duplicate of any BMW car and slaps on a Lexus logo, I'm sure that BMW would sue them. I mean if you are the CEO of BMW, you would want to sue them. Right?
But in reality no Lexus looks like BMWs. And certainly no Toyota Tercel or Echo look like BMWs. Yet, they are all metal chasis with four wheels.
My point was that close similiarty between Galaxy S and iPhone 3GS has left an impression that Samsung is copycat even though their other Android phones have shown less similarity to iPhone. The Galaxy brand became popular after sales of Galaxy S exploded. There is no reason to think that sales of Galaxy S phones were not fueled by its "iPhone 3GS" like exterior design. There were Android phones from HTC and Motorola with similar spec but they did not have sales volume anywhere close to Samsung. Indeed, Galaxy S was a very popular Android phone when it was released. Few of my friends bought Galaxy S over other Android phones because they like its design. In fact they all acknowledged Galaxy S looks like iPhone 3GS and they were happy to see that because the don't want to be locked in to the iPhone platform.
Of course, that is just my opinion so you may disagree.
Buyers remorse? I got the thing because I am a ios developer, not because I blindly believe everything Steve Jobs tells me. Go bark up somebody else's tree.
But you were the one who started with emotional response and attached a dumb picture but failed to address the issue mentioned by the previous poster.
And are you really that blind that you cant see the similarity of that Digital Frame to the ipad? if you think it's 70% too then there is nothing further to discuss as you are obviously blind as hell.
Did I assign that 70% similarity value? No Did I say ipad does not look like samsung digital frame? No
You say I'm full of emotions, you are full of mindless assumptions and are apparantly too stupid to understand that some people are just jackasses and can insult without feelings. Go cry to mommy, maybe she has some emotions boy.
And look at that! I just called myself a jackass! Obviously due to emotion right? I mean dirty word! Obviously if you curse it's due to emotion!
There ya go, some more assumptions for you to make with your next vomit of a post.
This is getting childish.. (How old are you anyway? Your profile says you are 30 years old but ..... Okay. I will stop there.).
Okay. I apologize for making fun of you using imac.
Now read carefully.
The main reason i posted a reply to you was because you failed to address the galaxy s issue jx2000 brought up (and also because your reply to him was rather rude).
(Normally i don't like to get involved with these discussion threads involving android and apple users precisely because of the type of replies both you and I have seen from each other, but seeing you posted that "fandroid huh" picture as part of your sarcastic reply was just too much to resist).
If you disagree with what jx2000 posted regarding galaxy s and iphone 3gs, please post a proper reply and address issue without cursing or name calling.
If you disagree with anyone at all concerning any issues, layout your thoughts logically without any cursing or name calling.
Can you post a proper reply to jx2000 and address the similarity between galaxy s and iphone 3gs ?
It seems like jx2000's posting in this thread has pinched a nerve in you.
LOL... I don't know why he responded in such way. It's as if I made a personal attack against him.
He disagreed with my opinion on iPad and Samsung's Digital Frame and I am OK with that but in the next paragraph he went BANG ! "You illogical moron... blah blah blah ... Did Steve Jobs tell you that? "
Fandroid huh? And something that looks EXACTLY like an ipad 1 is only ripping off up to 70%, and that phone though is 95%? And you aren't an apple fanboy?
I also enjoy your illogal response of something looking just like an ipad, but the ipad isn't 'that ugly'. Adding a few buttons can change a design from ugly to beautiful? Is that what Steve Jobs told you?
First of all, you need to chill.
I don't know what is wrong with you showing this burst of anger. Did I attack you on a personal level? Is this how you normally talk to people is real life? WTH?
The reason I feel iPad is only 70% similar to that Samsung Digital Frame is because of that large black bezel on the Digtal Frame. Put pictures of iPad and the Samsung Frame side by side and Samsung would look "relatively" ugly (not that it is ugly per se). If the large bezel is reduced, then I would say iPad is a 95% duplicate of the digital frame.
Since beauty is in the eye of the beholder, you may very well feel Samsung's Digital Frame looks as good if not better than the iPad. That would be your opinion and that is fine with me
I typed up a long post with point by point rebuttals and examples, but then Firefox crashed. I gave it up. Sorry.
I'll summarize the main point: Some Samsung models were similar to the iPhone, yes, but Samsung had been developing those models before the iPhone, so the argument that the iPhone came out and was widely successful so Samsung cloned it is false.
really? the iPhone is pretty distinctive and I've only seen similarities with it on knockoff Chinese backalley brands. Samsung's devices always look significantly different IMO. I can always tell the difference.
I was referring to the fact that everyone criticized Apple for not having a keyboard, now the iPhone like design with a virtual keyboard instead of a physical one is "obvious."
really? the iPhone is pretty distinctive and I've only seen similarities with it on knockoff Chinese backalley brands. Samsung's devices always look significantly different IMO. I can always tell the difference.
Really, it is the basic shape and coloring of the dell axim pda. The only difference between the iphone and stuff that came before it, is that technology shrunk, so the outer case became sleeker. That is a symptom of improvements in technology, that is not a patentable design.
Before the iPhone, every phone looked different. I owned a few pre iPhone smartphones.
After the iPhone, every phone looked like the iPhone.
Who copied who?
That's like saying that everybody who came out with an e-reader copied the Kindle. It's a silly assertion. There are only so many ways to design a device that is supposed to function as a phone and a data device, purely using soft keys. So, what features of the iPhone would not make sense for somebody else to incorporate? Making the device as trim as possible? Rounded corners? Some method to lock the screen so stuff wouldn't accidentally be butt-activated? Icons arranged in a grid-like pattern on the screen? Colourful icons? The list is endless.
Unless you, and Apple, are going to insist that competing manufacturers deliberately design unfriendly, hard-to-use products, merely to satisfy Steve Jobs' whackiness, I don't see how one could possibly avoid some degree of similarity. It's like saying "because so-and-so was the first company to come out with a round above-ground pool, nobody else can build round, above-ground pools," when round is the ideal shape, structurally, for a free-standing, above-ground pool.
Before the iPhone there were three main designs: clam-shell, candy bar, and slider. While these three are extremely different, inside each style the phones were very similar. It's safe to assume that if Apple had release a phone pre-2005 it would have looked a lot like one of these phones. Apple just happened to release their phone when the current "smart phone" technology was possible.
Over 10 years ago Nokia demonstrated fully working prototypes of a rectangular screen color smartphone that was controlled by a single main button with almost the exact same form factor of the iPhone.... and they also had a tablet.....
You are much more limited with a touch screen. Are you going to make it round? It can only be rectangular. Now with the variety of models the iPhone looks quite outdated.
This has been beat to death on other forums. If you read the jury foreman's statement in a vacuum, then it does sound pretty damning that the jury didn't do their job. If you read it though in it's entire context, then it's not as bad. With regards specifically to ignoring prior art, they skipped that part of the decision making and went on to the other several hundred points that they had to decide, then coming back to it. It wasn't that they completely ignored it all together in all their deliberations.
I think their comments about "sending a message" and the various inconsistencies/errors that were made on the verdict form (e.g. monetary awards for non-infringing devices) are better grounds during the appeals process, as well as just getting the patents overturned completely.
Meanwhile, Motorola Mobility is suing Apple for real patent infringement: Google’s Motorola Files New Patent Case Against Apple, rather than "round corners on things" and patents that should be invalid due to prior art or failing the obviousness test.
Meanwhile, Motorola Mobility is suing Apple for real patent infringement: Google’s Motorola Files New Patent Case Against Apple, rather than "round corners on things" and patents that should be invalid due to prior art or failing the obviousness test.
Next Apple will be suing the entire lumber industry for having rectangular-shaped blocks with 'eased' (rounded) corners on them ie. 2x4's, instead of having sharp square edges on them.
The entire staircase railing industry will follow as Apple's target.......
If devices were forced to not have rounded edges via the flawed decision in this case, the FTC and consumer protection laws of some sort would probably force the manufacturers to round the edges for consumer safety.
android and iphones appeared on the market almost simultaneously.. before than feature phones were mostly non-touch screen devices.. but I'm sure there were a few touch screen "non-smart" phones on the market prior to 2008 (not many).
even before the smartphone wave, voice interface, voice dialing and voice assistane were on handsets.. rectangle designs were already part of the ecosystem, non-external antenna designs, non-upgradable batteries, thin form factors, bottom center primary key functions on phones were available too..
when you have a cult of popularity, billions of market cap, investment banking firm legal & other departments (working to promote a company's rampant stock market price speculation).. you can brainwash people into believing a Ham sandwich is a newly patentable design; and furthermore anybody else who makes a Ham sandwich must make it this way [because it is the ONLY way] and pay a royalty to the Ham sandwich king monarchy.
What Apple got was a patent on the specific design of the iPhone. Rectangular phone, small oval for the speaker, 1 visible button on the front. They didn't get a patent on a rectangular phone or any other nonsense that is spewed on the Internet. Samsung's early phones do look strikingly like this design. Other phones do not. My Droid X didn't, the HTC phones don't, etc.
It's the same thing that I can't sell a pair of shoes that look just like a Nike Air Max 2012 with a check instead of a swoosh, called Noke and get away with it. The design is patented.
They also got a patent for designs and methods of doing things. Before the iPhone there was no pinch to zoom (one of the things they got a patent for). I know as I had a Treo 650. There are also patents for the bounce when you hit the top and a few others that were not present prior to the iPhone.
And when you have Samsung blatantly using 99% similar icons to the iPhone when everyone else uses different ones (my DX had way different icons) you have a case for copying.
Perhaps the most damning is Google warning Samsung that they were copying Apple. That's pretty damning right there.
In the end it's good for consumers as companies will have to actually invent new things rather than depend on someone to come up with it and then blatantly rip them off.
This ruling was nothing more than a travesty of justice. We all need to go out and buy a Samsung device to make up for this travesty. I'm an iPhone owner and even see this as a terrible ruling.
I think this is a sad for consumers and for technology advancement as a whole. This means less choices for consumers and a big monopoly for Apple on a design that's been around for ages. Apple is not a innovator, they just copy from others and claim it as there own. I would pick Samsung over Apple any day.
Just remember iPhone fans.. lets say you got your way and Apple was able to prevent Android from existing. That means your $600 iPhone will now cost about $1200 because they have no reason to be cheaper.
I don't care who won or who was involved, software either needs a re-hauled e-patent system, or not have patents at all. Time and time again it has been proven that software patents are just used by trolls.
Are you honestly that ignorant? What the devil makes you think Android will be "prevented from existing"? And what about WP8, for which MSFT actually has extensive cross-licensing agreements with Apple?
The carriers love Android because they can completely control it, unlike iOS and webOS back in the day. They'll keep pushing it until it's utterly obsolete.
'lets say' = hypothetical. I never said it would happen. Just pointing out to all the "Yay Apple!" fans that this isn't really what they want.
Instead of suing the competition, Apple should just make their product better. Then I remembered it is the 21st century and nothing matters besides money to companies.
Edit: As for Microsoft, isn't that a bit unfair? Didn't Microsoft save Apple's company back in the day? So of course they get a deal for licensing.
Karl... maybe you should do some of your own research before posting this nonsense. The jury didn't "ignore prior art"- they skipped the first couple of questions that dealt with prior art because they couldn't agree on the answer and then came back to it. Nor did Apple's trade dress have anything to do with "rounded edges".
I don't understand why such a huge percentage of bloggers and journalists are willing to make fools of themselves over this trial. It's pathetic.
Yeah this has got to be the most misquoted quote I've seen. The jury never said they ignored prior art, they simply said they put it aside temporary and came back to it later to prevent holding up the results for all the other patents.
It's like skipping question #1 on a ten question test because it's too hard, answering the other 9 and then coming back to #1.
The vast majority of the bloggers simply read "we skipped that one" with anti-Apple blinders and assume it means the jury completely ignored prior art. That or they simply are copying from other bloggers who mis-interpreted the interview, such as the Techdirt article author.
But I guess it has to be true, otherwise it couldn't be posted on the Internet.
said by sonicmerlin The jury didn't "ignore prior art"- they skipped the first couple of questions that dealt with prior art because they couldn't agree on the answer and then came back to it. [/BQUOTE :
Do you have a link showing where they said they came back to it?
Even in the 15 minute interview with the jury foreman he doesn't contradict the idea that they skipped the prior art evidence and never returned to it.
When asked directly about prior art he answers instead:
"In the case of the design patent it was the look and feel of it, and how the device presented itself, and when you compared them side-by-side against the statements in the patent it was clear to every one of us that not only was the patent valid but that the Samsung products that were accused were legitimately a problem."
It's not a comparison between the accused devices and the iPhone against the patent that determines whether the design patent was valid, it's a weighing of the prior art.
The prior art was key to whether there was a valid trade dress patent for Samsung to infringe, and it is still appears that this jury foreman missed that point.
Take a look at Groklaw.net Its crazy the jury foreman had a patent. So he was like... oh I would not want others to infringe on my patent. And the rest went along with it. Lemmings... I say.
The Samsung legal team made a mistake, and the Judge blocked them with a technicality. My understanding is that Samsung legal team was caught flat footed and never actually presented the bulk of their case, and clear evidence of prior art that would invalidate several of the patents in question were refused admittance due to the time restriction.
Those who lack the definition of "invention" will forever be in denial of what has been invented.
To improve upon and already exciting product is an invention by definition.
Did Apple invent the iPhone? The obvious answer is yes. Their phone was very unique and clearly in many ways copied.
In my opinion though, Apple is focusing on what is not important. They are known for great and unique products that capture an audience and bring a fan customer base. They need to leave their competitors to being followers. Stop treating them like they actually pose a threat. Once Apple focuses more resources back to who they are and what they do.
Let's face it, LG, Sony, Apple are all leaders in industry. They have each made their own unique mark in the history of products. Yet a company like Samsung sadly has never brought anything new to the table. They have copied LG in appliances, LG on tv's and Apple on phone style even down to colors Apple picked (white & black), copied Case on construction equipment and the list goes on. I Look forward to the day Samsung actually steps upto the plate in design. Hopfully they can make their own design that defines who they are.
However, I think all of us are getting so picky at who inveterate what and who copied who. That it can come down to everyone stole everyone else's ideas and take lets take a step way back from that and say well the first person who learned to make fire invented it ALL and everyone else copied their inventions from that starting point of fire.
·
