It's official -- Note2 infringes says Apple

[zsdersw]

I have not defended apple once in this thread. I am just stating lawsuit / patent threads are useless in this forum. Do you agree?

I find very little useful information in MD&G. Lawsuit/patent threads are no more or less significant than all the other useless BS.

...and thanks for confirming everything I post about 'ultra aggressive apple haters'

Thanks for confirming your Apple fanaticism.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I have not defended apple once in this thread. I am just stating lawsuit / patent threads are useless in this forum. Do you agree?

...and thanks for confirming everything I post about 'ultra aggressive apple haters'

Hey, this is simple, when you see a thread title that involves patents or lawsuits just ignore them -- done!

Of course then you would have less opportunity to spread your fud...


Brian

 

[cheezy321]

I find very little useful information in MD&G. Lawsuit/patent threads are no more or less significant than all the other useless BS.



Thanks for confirming your Apple fanaticism.

Then why do you come to this forum? To stir the pot?

 

[cheezy321]

Hey, this is simple, when you see a thread title that involves patents or lawsuits just ignore them -- done!

Of course then you would have less opportunity to spread your fud...


Brian

Says the guy who posts crap like this:

Listen people, what you don't understand is that Apple is NOT just any other company and the rules everyone else must live by simply doesn't apply to Apple.

You see, you can't describe an Apple product with a phrase like 'design language' as that is just not pretentious enough. No, please remember to refer to this in the future as Apple Design Poetry or Apple Design Haiku.

You insult the gods of Apple when you fail to properly bow to there magnificence...



Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

1. You obviously have no clue what a patent troll is. If anything, google with its purchase of motorola is closer to the definition of a patent troll.

I hate the hive mind mentality that apple haters have taken on. Just look at reddit. This forum is quickly becoming like reddit. Its pathetic. Group think cult like mentality is exactly why you hate apple fanboys isnt it? The hypocrisy is staring you straight in the face.

Why limit this to reddit and AT ... a quick check of MANY other sites, including news sites like CNN, show many MANY folks are tired with Apples games. Maybe that fact should have some effect but I think the coolaid has too deeply effected you...


Brian

 

[TerryMathews]

I don't have access to the full patent documentation but I assume the engraved circle and engraved mic stand are a couple.

I don't think I look at Apple any differently than any other company. If Samsung had won instead of Apple I'd accept that decision, no problem.

Hey look prior art! http://www.otrr.org/4img/details.php?image_id=4262 check the publication date.

 

[cheezy321]

Why limit this to reddit and AT ... a quick check of MANY other sites, including news sites like CNN, show many MANY folks are tired with Apples games. Maybe that fact should have some effect but I think the coolaid has too deeply effected you...


Brian

No it just further confirms that most apple haters are basement dwelling trolls with not much of a real life. If you think the comments section of any website is indicative of reality then you spend too much time behind your monitor.

I have never once in real life met someone with such a strong opinion against apple. I've met people that don't like apple, but none of them speak with the vitriol that is spewed online

 

[zsdersw]

No it just further confirms that most apple haters are basement dwelling trolls with not much of a real life. If you think the comments section of any website is indicative of reality then you spend too much time behind your monitor.

I have never once in real life met someone with such a strong opinion against apple. I've met people that don't like apple, but none of them speak with the vitriol that is spewed online

You must be new to the Internet.

 

[Chiropteran]

. Group think cult like mentality is exactly why you hate apple fanboys isnt it? The hypocrisy is staring you straight in the face.

I guess the difference is rather subtle, so I'll explain it to you.

The Apple fans are obsessed with Apple. The non-Apple fans are obsessed with the best product to fit their needs.

I have a Samsung Note 2, an Asus built Nexus 7, an Amazon Kindle Fire HD, a computer including parts from AMD, Intel, Asus, etc. I guess it is rather hypocritical of myself to use the product with the features I want, instead of just laying down and taking whatever Apple feeds me.

This thread is about Apples baseless lawsuits. If you want to start a new thread about Google's "patent trolling" by buying up Motorola, feel free. I'm sure you will have some supports agreeing with you.

 

[TerryMathews]

No it just further confirms that most apple haters are basement dwelling trolls with not much of a real life. If you think the comments section of any website is indicative of reality then you spend too much time behind your monitor.

I have never once in real life met someone with such a strong opinion against apple. I've met people that don't like apple, but none of them speak with the vitriol that is spewed online

And in my experience, most people who talk about Apple only have a familiarity with the last 5-10 years and dont really have a strong understanding of Apple's modus operandi.

Here's a clue. Woz wanted to advance the state of the art and bring computers to everyone. Jobs wanted to dominate the market, any market, and get filthy rich.

This (Jobs) is a man who cheated his best friend. He is not a role model. Apple is as bad as Microsoft ever were; in reality they're worse. Microsoft always believed they should be the biggest. They never believed they should be the only.

Anyone who loathes Apple today probably does so because they know all of Apple's history and what they are trying to do which is stifle innovation and competition.

 

[Mopetar]

Like what?

First, it's necessary to understand what their patent protects. After reading the patent, it protects precisely their icon and nothing more. Now let's look at how it's different from other examples presented.

Looks pretty different to me.

Anyone else, it wouldn't be a big deal. With Apple? Please. Stop pretending Apple doesn't have a history of suing everyone over trivial things.

So does every other company. The internet and world in general just doesn't have some unhealthy obsession with them so we don't keep getting stories like this posted all the time.

And as for being granted that design patent, my problem with it, is it's a universal symbol that's been around like I said as long as the microphone itself. They didn't design anything except putting a universal symbol inside a friggen circle. (And even that has probably been done many times). But how long until they sue everyone else for having an obvious microphone icon, even if it existed prior to theirs? It would fit right in with their pattern.

Considering that the patent is for the icon, as is, it's pretty unlikely that they'll be able to sue anyone unless someone basically starts using the exact same icon. Also, there are several other companies that also have design patents for Microphone icons, as referenced as prior art in Apple's patent application.

Samsung has some. As does Microsoft. There are a lot of other companies I've never heard of that have design patents for Microphone icons as well. There are probably loads more that aren't listed as prior art.

Apple isn't the first company to do this, and they won't be the last. Why should they be singled for what's a fairly common practice?

 

[cheezy321]

I guess the difference is rather subtle, so I'll explain it to you.

The Apple fans are obsessed with Apple. The non-Apple fans are obsessed with the best product to fit their needs.

I have a Samsung Note 2, an Asus built Nexus 7, an Amazon Kindle Fire HD, a computer including parts from AMD, Intel, Asus, etc. I guess it is rather hypocritical of myself to use the product with the features I want, instead of just laying down and taking whatever Apple feeds me.

This thread is about Apples baseless lawsuits. If you want to start a new thread about Google's "patent trolling" by buying up Motorola, feel free. I'm sure you will have some supports agreeing with you.

This is your view of the world. It does not correlate with how the world actually operates. Do you really think that I do not own any non-apple products? Do you really think that I will 'take whatever apple feeds me'? You are probably the same person who thinks people buy apple because of their 'great marketing'. As if the product does not deliver at all.

You are viewing the world through a stained lens. You let your irrational bias and hate towards an inanimate object shape your opinion. Your opinion is wrong.

 

[zsdersw]

Looks pretty different to me.

Yup, just like the Note 2 and various other devices look pretty different (totally different, actually) from Apple devices, yet Apple is suing about them.

Why should we come to any conclusion other than "Apple is abusing the system"?

 

[cheezy321]

And in my experience, most people who talk about Apple only have a familiarity with the last 5-10 years and dont really have a strong understanding of Apple's modus operandi.

Here's a clue. Woz wanted to advance the state of the art and bring computers to everyone. Jobs wanted to dominate the market, any market, and get filthy rich.

This (Jobs) is a man who cheated his best friend. He is not a role model. Apple is as bad as Microsoft ever were; in reality they're worse. Microsoft always believed they should be the biggest. They never believed they should be the only.

Anyone who loathes Apple today probably does so because they know all of Apple's history and what they are trying to do which is stifle innovation and competition.

Whatever you want to think. You are demonizing one person and exulting another as some sort of god. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. Woz would not be anywhere without jobs. That is a fact. Steve Jobs have never once said they think they should be the only smartphone maker. Again you are trying to revise history to suit your personal viewpoint.

 

[Mopetar]

Yup, just like the Note 2 and various other devices look pretty different from Apple devices, yet Apple is suing about it.

Why should we come to any conclusion other than "Apple is abusing the system"?

I looked at the original article, but it does not list what patents are involved in the suit. I'll have to do some digging to determine which patents are in play, but it's possible that the lawsuit has nothing to do with the "look" of the device as the involved patents aren't necessarily design patents.

If you're already aware of which patents are included in the suit, please post them so we can actually have a discussion rather than just making wild accusations and broad sweeping statements that might not have any basis for being made.

Edit: Also, what does your response have to do with whether or not Apple's icon design is different from others?

 

[Tom]

I guess the difference is rather subtle, so I'll explain it to you.

The Apple fans are obsessed with Apple. The non-Apple fans are obsessed with the best product to fit their needs.

I have a Samsung Note 2, an Asus built Nexus 7, an Amazon Kindle Fire HD, a computer including parts from AMD, Intel, Asus, etc. I guess it is rather hypocritical of myself to use the product with the features I want, instead of just laying down and taking whatever Apple feeds me.

This thread is about Apples baseless lawsuits. If you want to start a new thread about Google's "patent trolling" by buying up Motorola, feel free. I'm sure you will have some supports agreeing with you.

I also buy what I think is the best product for me. In the 50 years I've bought stuff I've only owned one Apple product, an ipod Touch.

Her'es the thing..this thread is about Apple's baseless lawsuits ? Then its perfectly proper to post that I don't think they're baseless at all.

If they were, they would never win.

 

[pm]

I'm looking specifically at Cheezy and zsdersw, but this applies to anyone else that I missed: please discuss the lawsuit and not each other. I do not want to read any more insults, or even implied insults about each other. If you don't like what someone else has to say either find the words to rebut their point, or leave it alone, or add them to your ignore list (either mentally, or the forum-based one under "User CP").

Cheezy's proposal to ban lawsuit threads has been discussed by the moderators in the past and was rejected. As long as threads are on-topic (and the lawsuit threads are) and don't violate forum rules, they stay. If there's too many, we'll merge them.

But please be civil and respectful of each other.

Thanks
Moderator PM

 

[TerryMathews]

You must be joking.

UI layout & large icons: Nokia 7710, LG Prada
On screen keyboard: Microsoft, dates back to Palm-sized PC
Silent switch: Palm Treo
Native apps: the entire industry minus Apple.
App store: Handspring nee Palm
Slide to unlock: NeoNode N1
One app running, save state: Palm

Apple innovated a ton... At Newton. The iPhone is a combination of many other design elements. Apple deserves credit for making smartphones successful. Not for designing the whole thing ground up.

You don't recognize any Android innovation? Then you're a fool. You're losing sight of the forest for the trees.

I know it's too much to expect you to read the whole thread. So I
brought my post addressing your concerns forward. Please review and comment.

Samsung and Google need to man up and create a brand new OS that doesn't copy the UI and apps-centric iOS. Even I can see that Apple came out with a phone and smart phone system that had never been done before and Google just copied it down to the bones.

I respect Microsoft for trying something new with Windows 8 instead of just copying.

Apple is pissed at the Android because it copied nearly every revolutionary thing it did with the original iPhone. Apple doesn't care about rounded edges. They are only using that to sue. Apple thought it was 10 years ahead of the competition. But since Android basically copied everything iOS did well, they only had about 2-3 years lead.

I'm owner of a Samsung Galaxy Nexus and Windows 7 PC.

 

[TerryMathews]

I also buy what I think is the best product for me. In the 50 years I've bought stuff I've only owned one Apple product, an ipod Touch.

Her'es the thing..this thread is about Apple's baseless lawsuits ? Then its perfectly proper to post that I don't think they're baseless at all.

If they were, they would never win.

Im confused. Are you saying that court decisions are fully validating? If so my counter point to you would be Plessy v Ferguson.

 

[Tom]

Yup, just like the Note 2 and various other devices look pretty different (totally different, actually) from Apple devices, yet Apple is suing about them.

Why should we come to any conclusion other than "Apple is abusing the system"?

For starters there's the conclusions reached by various judges and juries that in some cases Apple's patents have been violated.

So, if Apple's position is vindicated, how are they abusing the system ? Even if they lost, I don't see how that would be "abuse" since they wouldn't gain anything.

What is Apple doing wrong here ?

1. you think they should not try to patent their designs ?
2. or, its ok to patent them but its not ok to defend their patents ?

What about Samsung ?

1. they should be allowed to copy Apple any way they want ?
2. or, you don't think they are copying them ?

If its 2, you don't think they are copying them, who do you think should decide that ? You personally ? Samsung ? You don't believe in our justice system deciding it ?

What exactly is the problem you see ?

 

[zsdersw]

For starters there's the conclusions reached by various judges and juries that in some cases Apple's patents have been violated.

So, if Apple's position is vindicated, how are they abusing the system ? Even if they lost, I don't see how that would be "abuse" since they wouldn't gain anything.

What is Apple doing wrong here ?

1. you think they should not try to patent their designs ?
2. or, its ok to patent them but its not ok to defend their patents ?

They're patenting things for which patents shouldn't be issued... and suing when those patents are "violated" in their biased opinion.

What about Samsung ?

1. they should be allowed to copy Apple any way they want ?
2. or, you don't think they are copying them ?

If its 2, you don't think they are copying them, who do you think should decide that ? You personally ? Samsung ? You don't believe in our justice system deciding it ?

What exactly is the problem you see ?

No and No.

 

[Tom]

Im confused. Are you saying that court decisions are fully validating? If so my counter point to you would be Plessy v Ferguson.

Which was overturned.

I'm not saying a person can't disagree with a court case. I am trying to get some clarity about what the people who object to Apple and patents and lawsuits are actually bothered by.

There's a lot of blame Apple..but if the real issue is patents, Apple didn't create patents. If the real issue is civil courts and juries, Apple didn't create that either.

 

[TerryMathews]

Which was overturned.

I'm not saying a person can't disagree with a court case. I am trying to get some clarity about what the people who object to Apple and patents and lawsuits are actually bothered by.

There's a lot of blame Apple..but if the real issue is patents, Apple didn't create patents. If the real issue is civil courts and juries, Apple didn't create that either.

So then you do agree that a verdict in a court case isn't the final indicator of justice.

As could be the case in Apple v Samsung. Samsung's appeals aren't exhausted nor has this initial verdict even been confirmed; there are serious allegations regarding the Foreman that appear to have some merit.

The "anti-Apple cult" are stating reasons why they feel this verdict is not legitimate and might not stand on appeal. That's not rabid fanaticism; it's arguing for your POV, one that many other people share.

 

[TerryMathews]

For starters there's the conclusions reached by various judges and juries that in some cases Apple's patents have been violated.

So, if Apple's position is vindicated, how are they abusing the system ? Even if they lost, I don't see how that would be "abuse" since they wouldn't gain anything.

What is Apple doing wrong here ?

1. you think they should not try to patent their designs ?
2. or, its ok to patent them but its not ok to defend their patents ?

What about Samsung ?

1. they should be allowed to copy Apple any way they want ?
2. or, you don't think they are copying them ?

If its 2, you don't think they are copying them, who do you think should decide that ? You personally ? Samsung ? You don't believe in our justice system deciding it ?

What exactly is the problem you see ?

To your first point, legitimate design innovations should be patentable. "Snow White", for example. Legitimate innovations should be patentable. Rosetta, for example.

Obvious developments in the field should not be patentable, nor combinations of existing art. Who's at fault? Apple for filing in bad faith and the Patent Office for issuing bad patents.

To your second point, none of Samsung's phones are what I would call a copy. They have a different look and feel, different features, and different functions.

No one would pick up a Galaxy and mistake it for an iPhone. I would entertain specific innovations of Apple's you feel Samsung is infringing, please refer to my list of prior art.

 

[cheezy321]

To your first point, legitimate design innovations should be patentable. "Snow White", for example. Legitimate innovations should be patentable. Rosetta, for example.

Obvious developments in the field should not be patentable, nor combinations of existing art. Who's at fault? Apple for filing in bad faith and the Patent Office for issuing bad patents.

To your second point, none of Samsung's phones are what I would call a copy. They have a different look and feel, different features, and different functions.

No one would pick up a Galaxy and mistake it for an iPhone. I would entertain specific innovations of Apple's you feel Samsung is infringing, please refer to my list of prior art.

Here's the problem with that. Samsung didn't create any documents trying to replicate the prior art you mention. They have a 250+ page document stating all the ways they should copy Apple. Not one mention of your prior art. Its clear what look and feel they were trying to copy, and it has nothing to do with the prior art you talked about.