It's official -- Note2 infringes says Apple

[Tom]

Just a little followup to senttoschool's comment about the early patent for the automobile...


A lawyer by the name of George B. Selden filed a patent for an automobile and created a company to manage the patent. He never made any cars and used his patent to blackmail others to pay him. Henry Ford did not pay him and was originally denied the right to make cars. Eventually, however, the patent troll was sent packing and Ford, and many others, stepped in to build the auto industry we know today. An industry that has an economic impact of trillions of dollars every single year.

It is important to remember that the patent Selden, and his blackmail team called ALAM, was an impediment to innovation. Stop for a minute and think about that ... no, really think about it...

Apple is not in the exact position that Selden and ALAM were in a hundred plus years ago in that Selden never made any cars while Apple clearly does make things, good things, but there anti-competitive abuse of the patent system IS STIFLING COMPETITION AND INNOVATION and it must come to an end.

Getting back to my earlier point, the fact that both iOS and most Android phones have an array of icons of very similar size and position is hardly to be surprised and does NOT constitute cheating or copying but is the functional requirement given the small real estate available. A car might have 3 wheels, or 6 wheels or 20 wheels but 4 just works best and they need to be pretty much at the corners of the car. Form does follow function.

If Apple had been arround at the dawn of the auto industry they'd have copied the four wheel design that went back long before the internal combustion engine then they'd have applied for patents to prevent anyone else from selling cars with four wheels. I can just hear the Apple lawyers saying "look at Hyndai, they slavishly copied our design by using four wheels and putting those wheels exactly the same way we did." It would not matter to Apple that the four wheel layout predated them, now that they're in the game they want ownership of it...


Brian

You have it backwards. Allowing the theft of intellectual property stifles innovation and real competition.

Apple's patents are nothing like patenting a car with four wheels. If they were their suit would have been dismissed.

We have a system of laws. According to that system Samsung violated Apple's rights.

I don't see that as a problem. If Samsung works within our system of laws and gets a reversal, I have no problem with that either.

If anyone has a problem with our system of laws and wants to discuss a change, I'd like to hear it.

But attacking Apple for defending its rights is weak imo.

 

[PowerYoga]

Apple's patents are nothing like patenting a car with four wheels. If they were their suit would have been dismissed

Yeah, rounded corners are innovative and groundbreaking. Before apple created a patent for rounded corners all the phones were designed sharp hard corners that would cut people's hands and fingers. There was blood everywhere until the glorious Apple came and invented the rounded corner, and all the filthy thieves started stealing this great idea, so the Apple god stopped innovating so he can protect himself from the unwashed masses.

Get a grip.

 

[cheezy321]

Yeah, rounded corners are innovative and groundbreaking. Before apple created a patent for rounded corners all the phones were designed sharp hard corners that would cut people's hands and fingers. There was blood everywhere until the glorious Apple came and invented the rounded corner, and all the filthy thieves started stealing this great idea, so the Apple god stopped innovating so he can protect himself from the unwashed masses.

Get a grip.

If this was just about rounded corners, you might be right. But its not, and you know it. Educate yourself, fool.

 

[Brian Stirling]

You have it backwards. Allowing the theft of intellectual property stifles innovation and real competition.

Apple's patents are nothing like patenting a car with four wheels. If they were their suit would have been dismissed.

We have a system of laws. According to that system Samsung violated Apple's rights.

I don't see that as a problem. If Samsung works within our system of laws and gets a reversal, I have no problem with that either.

If anyone has a problem with our system of laws and wants to discuss a change, I'd like to hear it.

But attacking Apple for defending its rights is weak imo.

I am attacking Apple for gaming the system and for stifling innovation in the process. Many of there patents that were granted to Apple for obvious things like rounded corners were actually rejected by the patent office, sometime as many a 8 and 9 times before the patent office was beaten into submission.

Apple has a ton of money and have been using that to hire the best lawyers around and there lawyers have been earning there millions by pushing the envelope beyond what virtually everyone else has. And, among the many wrongs with this is the precedent this sets for other trollish companies and lawyers in industries far and wide.

When Apple came out with the iPhone every company in the phone business took notice and many realized they needed to be players in the same game. This is not a new thing and when a new car type comes out, like the SUV, you can rest assured that every single car company in the world took notice and said to there engineers and designers to get in the game. Apple was fortunate that they were able to get emails from Samsung detailing this very process and they played that out as copying.

Apple is not an island onto themselves and they should play by the same rules as everyone else. Samsung, HTC and everyone else were playing by the standing rules but Apple, gods that they are, have determined that they deserve special rules and that no one else can play in the sandbox -- a sandbox they advanced but did not invent!


Brian

 

[Tom]

I am attacking Apple for gaming the system and for stifling innovation in the process. Many of there patents that were granted to Apple for obvious things like rounded corners were actually rejected by the patent office, sometime as many a 8 and 9 times before the patent office was beaten into submission.

Apple has a ton of money and have been using that to hire the best lawyers around and there lawyers have been earning there millions by pushing the envelope beyond what virtually everyone else has. And, among the many wrongs with this is the precedent this sets for other trollish companies and lawyers in industries far and wide.

When Apple came out with the iPhone every company in the phone business took notice and many realized they needed to be players in the same game. This is not a new thing and when a new car type comes out, like the SUV, you can rest assured that every single car company in the world took notice and said to there engineers and designers to get in the game. Apple was fortunate that they were able to get emails from Samsung detailing this very process and they played that out as copying.

Apple is not an island onto themselves and they should play by the same rules as everyone else. Samsung, HTC and everyone else were playing by the standing rules but Apple, gods that they are, have determined that they deserve special rules and that no one else can play in the sandbox -- a sandbox they advanced but did not invent!


Brian

Poor poor Samsung, Apple must have them on death's doorstep.

Apple does play by the same rules as everyone else. According to our legal system, Samsung didn't.

The emails you mention show that Samsung wasn't trying to make a smartphone. They were making an iphone with their name on it.

That isn't comparable to making an suv. That's Kia making an ML320 with a different grille.

 

[PowerYoga]

If this was just about rounded corners, you might be right. But its not, and you know it. Educate yourself, fool.

It's just an example of Apple's absurd patents, they have a treasure trove of them. But any educated person can see that without me listing everything right?

 

[TerryMathews]

Poor poor Samsung, Apple must have them on death's doorstep.

Apple does play by the same rules as everyone else. According to our legal system, Samsung didn't.

The emails you mention show that Samsung wasn't trying to make a smartphone. They were making an iphone with their name on it.

That isn't comparable to making an suv. That's Kia making an ML320 with a different grille.

You've never addressed the larger point that there are vast differences between the 5 and various Samsung models. Let's use the Note as an example.

Are you suggesting that the Note is a clone of the iphone?

 

[s44]

Nobody mentions the pull down menu iOS ripped off android which, honestly is one of androids best features that it does does much better than iOS

That's because while Google filed for the patent on this years ago, it hasn't been approved yet.

When it is, hilarity will ensue.

 

[Kenmitch]

Would be funny if the judge decided in favor of both Apple and Samsung as far as injunctions go....Would be funny to see the lawyers faces go from smile to frown and visa versa as both sides realize they have no products to sell.

The HTC deal shows Apple is somewhat open to cross-licensing deals....Only advantage HTC has over Samsung is they were no competition to Apple anyways! Guess maybe the LTE patents they hold played a part in the deal?

 

[openwheel]

hey my desk has rounded corners....maybe Apple should sue.

 

[Tom]

You've never addressed the larger point that there are vast differences between the 5 and various Samsung models. Let's use the Note as an example.

Are you suggesting that the Note is a clone of the iphone?

I don't know enough about it to have an opinion.

My point is I don't think there's a problem with Apple trying to protect its designs or patents in court, and I don't think there's a problem if they're successful.

I think its kind of puzzling for anyone to be an Apple hater. Even as successful as they are, they're not even close to a monopoly in any of the arenas where they compete.

Companies with monopoly power seem to me to be a better target for consumer wrath, if they act in certain ways.

Microsoft, Google, even Samsung, have power in some areas that are much closer to monopolies than Apple is.

 

[Red Storm]

I don't know enough about it to have an opinion.

My point is I don't think there's a problem with Apple trying to protect its designs or patents in court, and I don't think there's a problem if they're successful.

I think its kind of puzzling for anyone to be an Apple hater. Even as successful as they are, they're not even close to a monopoly in any of the arenas where they compete.

Companies with monopoly power seem to me to be a better target for consumer wrath, if they act in certain ways.

Microsoft, Google, even Samsung, have power in some areas that are much closer to monopolies than Apple is.

Might have to do with the fact that with some of their products they act and price things as if they did have a monopoly. Now imagine if they actually did...

They aren't alone in this behavior, they just happen to be the most successful at it so naturally they draw more attention.

That's my theory.

 

[Shlong]

I don't know enough about it to have an opinion.

My point is I don't think there's a problem with Apple trying to protect its designs or patents in court, and I don't think there's a problem if they're successful.

I think its kind of puzzling for anyone to be an Apple hater. Even as successful as they are, they're not even close to a monopoly in any of the arenas where they compete.

Companies with monopoly power seem to me to be a better target for consumer wrath, if they act in certain ways.

Microsoft, Google, even Samsung, have power in some areas that are much closer to monopolies than Apple is.

They're trying to be a monopoly through the courts. If rival products are banned they essentially won't have competition.

 

[cheezy321]

They're trying to be a monopoly through the courts. If rival products are banned they essentially won't have competition.

This seems to be repeated ad nauseum by the anti apple crowd. You have literally zero proof of this drivel. Apple has never sued a multitude of smartphone makers. They are in absolutely no way on a mission to create a monopoly in the smartphone market.

 

[cheezy321]

Might have to do with the fact that with some of their products they act and price things as if they did have a monopoly. Now imagine if they actually did...

They aren't alone in this behavior, they just happen to be the most successful at it so naturally they draw more attention.

That's my theory.

This is pure gold. They 'price things as if they did have a monopoly'. What does that even mean? Apple prices products at a cost the market can bear. It has made them the most valuable company in the world.

Google actually does have a monopoly. They use that monopoly to favor their own products in their search engine over far better alternatives. They steal and scrape content from content providers all the time. They use their search monopoly to strong arm their way into other industries. The FTC is about to lay the smack down on google for it.

They are even going after google for the way they use their smartphone patents to bully competitors. 'Do no evil' indeed.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

This seems to be repeated ad nauseum by the anti apple crowd. You have literally zero proof of this drivel. Apple has never sued a multitude of smartphone makers. They are in absolutely no way on a mission to create a monopoly in the smartphone market.

The top three Android Manufacturers are

Samsung
HTC
Motorola

Apple has coincidentally sued

Samsung
HTC
Motorola

Suing every major competitor in the smartphone market makes it look like they are trying to create a monopoly to me.

 

[Chiropteran]

Google actually does have a monopoly. They use that monopoly to favor their own products in their search engine over far better alternatives. They steal and scrape content from content providers all the time. They use their search monopoly to strong arm their way into other industries.

This is hilarious. I guess in your mind bing and duckduckgo don't exist?

 

[ponyo]

Why hasn't Apple sued LG? I would think Apple would want to ban Nexus 4 and Jellybean. Or is Apple scared LG will cut them off.

 

[cheezy321]

This is hilarious. I guess in your mind bing and duckduckgo don't exist?

Google has a natural monopoly. its a fact. They use their natural monopoly to strongarm and abuse competitors in other industries.

Are you going to tell me that Microsoft didnt have an OS monopoly because Linux existed?

Edit: The European Union and the FTC aren't going after google because they 'do no evil'.

Edit2: Oh hey, your duckduckgo example agrees with me!

 

[midwestfisherman]

I'm beginning to hate, first Apple and Samsung for both acting like a couple of little butches. I could care less if they sue each other into oblivion!

 

[cliftonite]

This seems to be repeated ad nauseum by the anti apple crowd. You have literally zero proof of this drivel. Apple has never sued a multitude of smartphone makers. They are in absolutely no way on a mission to create a monopoly in the smartphone market.

HTC, Motorola, and Samsung aren't a multitude of smartphone makers? Who else is left?

 

[grkM3]

HTC, Motorola, and Samsung aren't a multitude of smartphone makers? Who else is left?

LG but apple is using lg to make there parts so they cant sue them just yet!!!

 

[Kenmitch]

LG but apple is using lg to make there parts so they cant sue them just yet!!!

Didn't stop them from going after Samsung....Maybe LG's gonna design the iPhone 6 as clearly Apple has lost it's vision.

 

[Zink]

Glass phones from LG seems like a copy of what Apple has already moved away from. Apple would just be chasing their own tail using LG designs.

 

[mikegg]

Google has a natural monopoly. its a fact. They use their natural monopoly to strongarm and abuse competitors in other industries.

Are you going to tell me that Microsoft didnt have an OS monopoly because Linux existed?

Edit: The European Union and the FTC aren't going after google because they 'do no evil'.

Edit2: Oh hey, your duckduckgo example agrees with me!

Google has used its search engine to force Google+. Studies have shown that Facebook profiles usually rank lower than LinkedIn/Twitter profiles. Google has used its search engine to try to knock out Yelp.com by forcing people to use Zagat.