Seriously. Apple is dead to me

[annomander]

To be fair, there are a lot of views that only Apple is exploiting the system and that companies like Samsung and Motorola haven't done anything wrong and are the "victims" of corporate bullying by Apple. To these vocal few, and we all know who they are, Apple can never be right. Apple will always be wrong.


On Topic.

I disagree with the ruling. There's no question of Samsung having copied Apple. Only those who are naive or being blind on purpose can claim otherwise.

That doesn't mean the "trade dress" arguments are strong enough to warrant a ban on the Samsung products. I also don't think the Siri patent, after considering prior art, is strong enough to warrant a ban as well.

I agree with your comments, pretty sensible. I don't know, but there should
be some type of penalty for just duplicating someone elses work, trade dress or patents, but a large fine would be good enough

 

[MrX8503]

You're blind if you don't see Samsung's copy machines working in full force. This is the Asian culture, they copy everything. I'm Asian myself, and I know that's how Asian companies roll.

Just like how the previous poster saying they send employees for espionage work.

 

[Phokus]

You're blind if you don't see Samsung's copy machines working in full force. This is the Asian culture, they copy everything. I'm Asian myself, and I know that's how Asian companies roll.

Just like how the previous poster saying they send employees for espionage work.

Uh, the case in question is not really about Samsung but about the software on it (which is entirely Google's).

Edit: And the Samsung Galaxy Nexus doesn't even look anywhere near any of Apple's products.

Not to mention Apple is stealing prior art to patent their own 'designs' ... see this article/video http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-29/tech/31253113_1_galaxy-tab-ipad-knight-ridder

And Samsung actually MAKES new technology (which actually deserves patents) like their Amoled/Super Amoled displays.

 

[zod96]

This is the reason I can not stand apple. They think they invented everything related to a cell phone or tablet and I mean everything. I would use a cheap ass flip phone before I would ever touch an apple product....

 

[akugami]

This is the reason I can not stand apple. They think they invented everything related to a cell phone or tablet and I mean everything. I would use a cheap ass flip phone before I would ever touch an apple product....

But you have no problems using Samsung products. A company who steals IP, whose executives leak confidential info, and whose CEO is a convicted criminal who has so much power he got a presidential pardon and the company's board lets him go back to work without a peep.

For the record, I have multiple Samsung products as well as Apple. So this is not a crusade by me against Samsung. Just pointing out that if we want to crucify any corporation for bad behavior and boycott them, we'd be reduced to the stone age. Even Google who has a relatively spotless record has stuff that they'd rather keep under the rug (and which gets overlooked).

 

[Phokus]

But you have no problems using Samsung products. A company who steals IP, whose executives leak confidential info, and whose CEO is a convicted criminal who has so much power he got a presidential pardon and the company's board lets him go back to work without a peep.

For the record, I have multiple Samsung products as well as Apple. So this is not a crusade by me against Samsung. Just pointing out that if we want to crucify any corporation for bad behavior and boycott them, we'd be reduced to the stone age. Even Google who has a relatively spotless record has stuff that they'd rather keep under the rug (and which gets overlooked).

In terms of who harms consumers more, Apple wins that hands down. That's all i care about.

 

[Tom]

Apple doesn't do licensing. Everything they create they keep.

Companies are allowed to do this and if the patents are being granted there isn't a reason for Apple to stop. If the patent office allows it, why stop?

http://www.t3.com/news/apple-licenses-patented-technology-to-nokia-and-ibm

 

[Tom]

In terms of who harms consumers more, Apple wins that hands down. That's all i care about.

Nobody has to buy an Apple product, its not like Archer-Daniels-Midland or Exxon or JP Morgan/Chase, companies that its almost impossible to not do business with..

and yet they are extremely successful and popular with consumers, becasue they deliver products consumers want.

In other words, your comment is ludicrous.

 

[MrX8503]

In terms of who harms consumers more, Apple wins that hands down. That's all i care about.

Because of Apple, I've got no food or water and our pet's heads are falling off!

 

[Mopetar]

Uh, the case in question is not really about Samsung but about the software on it (which is entirely Google's).

Samsung ships the hardware with that software on it, which is why they're being targeted with the lawsuit. It's also easier to show monetary damages this way as it's pretty easy to demonstrate how much Samsung makes from a sale of a phone. It's a lot more complicated to determine how much money Google makes from each copy of Android.

Edit: And the Samsung Galaxy Nexus doesn't even look anywhere near any of Apple's products.

I don't think that Apple has claimed it does. The devices that they filed suit against over claims that they violated Apple design patents were previous devices such as the Galaxy Tab and the Galaxy SII, which have a much closer resemblance.

And Samsung actually MAKES new technology (which actually deserves patents) like their Amoled/Super Amoled displays.

No one said they didn't. If Apple were using SAMOLED displays without licensing the technology from Samsung you can bet that they'd be getting sued. Just because Samsung makes something patent worthy does not excuse them from infringing on the patents of others.

 

[Phokus]

Samsung ships the hardware with that software on it, which is why they're being targeted with the lawsuit. It's also easier to show monetary damages this way as it's pretty easy to demonstrate how much Samsung makes from a sale of a phone. It's a lot more complicated to determine how much money Google makes from each copy of Android.



I don't think that Apple has claimed it does. The devices that they filed suit against over claims that they violated Apple design patents were previous devices such as the Galaxy Tab and the Galaxy SII, which have a much closer resemblance.



No one said they didn't. If Apple were using SAMOLED displays without licensing the technology from Samsung you can bet that they'd be getting sued. Just because Samsung makes something patent worthy does not excuse them from infringing on the patents of others.

SAMOLED is something that deserves a patent. Apple's 'look and feel' is bullshit on several levels

For one thing, shit like 'rounded corners' shouldn't get a patent. Another thing, Apple stole that shit from the ASIAN manufacturers:

http://mobile.businessweek.com/articles/2012-03-29/apple-s-war-on-android#p1

Several Asian manufacturers were noodling around with similar-looking rectangular smartphones before the iPhone came to market. Tipping its hat to a fellow Korean manufacturer, Samsung notes that in 2006, nearly a year before the iPhone appeared, LG Electronics announced the round-cornered LG Chocolate, with “virtually all of the [design] features Apple claims” to have patented. In December 2006, before Apple released images of the iPhone, Samsung itself filed a design patent in Korea for a similar rectangular phone called the F700. Smartphone and tablet-computer design was “naturally evolving” in the direction Apple claims it has exclusive rights to use, according to Samsung. If true, that matters because basic patent law states that if an idea is “obvious” to an “ordinary observer” at the time of its invention, it doesn’t deserve patent protection. By attacking Samsung, Apple has inadvertently put its own patents into play.

Only apple fanboys think Apple has any originality to their designs.

edit: and also they ripped off japanese patents:

Turning to the concept of “obviousness,” Koh showed sympathy for Samsung’s argument that Apple’s claims of “earthshaking” innovation may be a tad exaggerated. She analyzed a Japanese patent issued to the Japanese company Sharp on June 6, 2005, well before Apple obtained its relevant patents. Foreign patents can be cited as “prior art” to undercut U.S. patents. Illustrating her opinion with sketches from U.S. Patent Office records, Koh said the Sharp patent, like Apple’s D’087, has “rounded corners, a bezel, a similarly shaped speaker, and similar proportions of screen and border.” The Sharp patent “discloses an overall simple, minimalistic design.” She added: “An ordinary observer would likely consider [Apple’s] D’087 to be substantially the same” as Sharp’s patent.

 

[Bateluer]

Nobody has to buy an Apple product, its not like Archer-Daniels-Midland or Exxon or JP Morgan/Chase, companies that its almost impossible to not do business with..

and yet they are extremely successful and popular with consumers, becasue they deliver products consumers want.

In other words, your comment is ludicrous.

Uh, nope. Since when do consumers realize they're being harmed in the market place?

 

[KLin]

Uh, nope. Since when do consumers realize they're being harmed in the market place?

Since when do consumers care as long as they're not getting e.coli?

 

[Fingolfin269]

One of these days I want someone to do a mash up of all of the Apple vs. The World hate threads just to see how interchangeable all of the posts are. I'm sure it would be hilarious.

 

[Mopetar]

Apple's 'look and feel' is bullshit on several levels

Nope. It qualifies for a design patent, which have been around for a long time. Try not to confuse your opinion with patent law. Just because you don't like something doesn't invalidate it or make it cease to exist.

For one thing, shit like 'rounded corners' shouldn't get a patent.

You can't get a patent on rounded corners. A design patent covers the entire ornamental design of a product. Simply having one or two things in common is unlikely sufficient for a competing product to be considered in violation of another's design patent. It's only when there's a significant overlap that there are any problems.

http://mobile.businessweek.com/articles/2012-03-29/apple-s-war-on-android#p1

edit: and also they ripped off japanese patents:

Guess Samsung shouldn't have any problems proving their case then. That they haven't succeeded even in light of such evidence would suggest that it might not be as good as you would have us believe.

From the court's ruling:

"While not dispositive, the commentary at the time of the introduction of the iPhone certainly suggests that the D’677 patent, even though only the front view of the cell phone is claimed, was not obvious.
After considering all the evidence and the arguments of the two parties, the Court finds that Samsung has not raised “substantial questions” regarding the validity of the D’677 patent."

Essentially Samsung failed to overturn Apple's design patent and the court held it to be valid. Although Apple failed to get their preliminary injunction, it wasn't due to the patent being found invalid.

 

[akugami]

In terms of who harms consumers more, Apple wins that hands down. That's all i care about.

It can be argued Samsung's proven actions like tax evasion harm the general populace more than Apple's. Samsung's actions are guaranteed to put a higher burden on taxpayers. This especially hurts the poor who can't afford it. Then there is the case of leaking confidential information which can harm investors.

Apple's actions on the other hand harms consumers only if you believe that Apple's patents are invalid. If they're valid, and currently in the eyes of the law they are, then it doesn't matter what Apple does.

Let's assume the Apple patents are invalid? What's going to happen? More likely than not, it is the removal or modification of certain features such as slide to unlock, voice search, and probably some cosmetic changes to the hardware. Does it limit consumer choice? To a degree it does but I'm sure that much like the Galaxy Tab 10, Samsung and Google can come up with some work arounds. And keep in mind these are on commodity items. Not necessities.

So it can be legitimately argued that Samsung's actions (which are on record) harms consumers and the general populace more than Apple's and harms those who can least afford it. Now where does that leave us?

 

[dagamer34]

I think we are getting a bit off topic here. The patents in this case are not hardware, but software, which means it has nothing to do with Samsung, and everything to do with Google. And even then, Google had complete control over the design of this device, making it a further indictment of Google.

Apple is attacking Google by proxy of their partners (Samsung, Motorola, HTC, etc...) which is rather dubious.

 

[zerocool84]

I think we are getting a bit off topic here. The patents in this case are not hardware, but software, which means it has nothing to do with Samsung, and everything to do with Google. And even then, Google had complete control over the design of this device, making it a further indictment of Google.

Apple is attacking Google by proxy of their partners (Samsung, Motorola, HTC, etc...) which is rather dubious.

They go after the easier targets. Everyone knows Apple is scared and mad at Google at the same time.Apple is going to spend its last cent to get rid of Android because it's the biggest threat out there for them.

 

[akugami]

I think we are getting a bit off topic here. The patents in this case are not hardware, but software, which means it has nothing to do with Samsung, and everything to do with Google. And even then, Google had complete control over the design of this device, making it a further indictment of Google.

Apple is attacking Google by proxy of their partners (Samsung, Motorola, HTC, etc...) which is rather dubious.

Google has done the same thing using HTC (and possibly Motorola) as a proxy rather than confront Apple directly.

 

[Oyeve]

Nobody has to buy an Apple product, its not like Archer-Daniels-Midland or Exxon or JP Morgan/Chase, companies that its almost impossible to not do business with..

and yet they are extremely successful and popular with consumers, becasue they deliver products consumers want.

In other words, your comment is ludicrous.

It just means there are a shitload of tools in the world.

 

[Mopetar]

I think we are getting a bit off topic here. The patents in this case are not hardware, but software, which means it has nothing to do with Samsung, and everything to do with Google. And even then, Google had complete control over the design of this device, making it a further indictment of Google.

Apple is attacking Google by proxy of their partners (Samsung, Motorola, HTC, etc...) which is rather dubious.

It's probably because Google doesn't charge for Android. Therefore it's really difficult to establish damages or to show how Google is profiting from any infringement. On the other hand, it's quite easy to show how Samsung, HTC, et al. would be profiting as there are clear sales numbers for devices. They're also shipping the software on their devices so they're still liable as far as the law is concerned. If Google wanted to protect the manufacturers, they could include an indemnification clause for their official version of Android.

 

[georgec84]

In the end the consumers will lose.

 

[zsdersw]

We get it. You hate Apple. They can do nothing right in your eyes.

My preference for Android devices pales in comparison to your love of and constant defense of Apple and everything it does. I've criticized Android in general and specific Android devices in particular. You, on the other hand, have never said anything critical of Apple even when it's blatantly obvious they're committing actions that should be criticized.

 

[PowerYoga]

Apple, the new patent troll. This directly would create a monopoly, stifle innovation and create a market that doesn't benefit consumers at all. But seeing how the nexus is google's flagship phone as well, hopefully their lawyers step in and make everything right.

 

[cheezy321]

My preference for Android devices pales in comparison to your love of and constant defense of Apple and everything it does. I've criticized Android in general and specific Android devices in particular. You, on the other hand, have never said anything critical of Apple even when it's blatantly obvious they're committing actions that should be criticized.

Somehow you think you are less extreme 🙄. This is the exact problem with the android faction. They are just as fanatical in their words but for some insane reason they don't think they are as bad as the apple users. Not. Even. Close. To. Accurate.