Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:18 pm

Looks like the jury has reached a verdict and will be delivering it shortly:

Quote:



A decision in the multi-billion dollar trial between Apple and Samsung has been reached, and will be announced shortly
.
Hanging in the balance are possible sales bans on phones and tablets on both sides, as well as a damages tally that ranges from millions to billions of dollars depending on how the jury comes down.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...t-in-apple-samsung-trial-imminent/

I'm a bit surprised at the speed of the verdict as this has been a complex case - even the Verdict Sheet for he Jury to fill in is complicated.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6014
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:26 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
I'm a bit surprised at the speed of the verdict as this has been a complex case - even the Verdict Sheet for he Jury to fill in is complicated.

I too am very surprised.
It is either a verdict all in favor of one side (or at most three bulk verdicts that cover each main point) or they answered each question in the Jury Document and that provided everything that was needed for the point by point verdict.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:37 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 1):
It is either a verdict all in favor of one side (or at most three bulk verdicts that cover each main point) or they answered each question in the Jury Document and that provided everything that was needed for the point by point verdict.

I saw the Jury Sheet on the internet and felt that it was going to be far easier to fill out if a general agreement was reached on the core issues.
 
racko
Posts: 4548
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 12:06 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:43 pm

Let's just hope that they'll at least strike a blow to software patents.
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:50 pm

The verdict so far sounds complicated.

http://live.cnet.com/Event/Apple_vs_Samsung_verdict
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6014
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:59 pm

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 4):
The verdict so far sounds complicated.

http://live.cnet.com/Event/Apple_vs_...rdict

A lot of "No'" so far. Not good for Apple so far....

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:01 pm

What is a "trade dress"?
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:12 pm

Apple winning so far:

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/...-verdict-apple-samsung-patent-tria

A blog there, scroll from the bottom of the blog window
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 4775
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:23 pm

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 6):
What is a "trade dress"?

Basically the packaging of a product/what it look likes. So the color, shapes, whatever that customers use to distinguish the product, not the actual functional parts that determine how the products works.
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:23 pm

It looks like Samsung pays Apple $1+ Billion and Apple pays Samsung zip all.

Considering that Apple is Samsung's biggest customer on the component side and has been taken to the cleaners by a jury it might be time for Samsung to start working out deals with Apple.
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:32 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
Considering that Apple is Samsung's biggest customer on the component side and has been taken to the cleaners by a jury it might be time for Samsung to start working out deals with Apple.

Why would Samsung do that?

"Apple is the dominant tablet maker and Samsung leads in smartphone sales"

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...sung-patent-dispute/1#.UDgOU6DFZpg

So, Samsung continues to sell/make more smartphones and Apple continues to make more tablets. They pay the fine and both companies continue to do what they do.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
BlueElephant
Posts: 1662
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:16 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:35 pm

How is it that, in 4 other countries Apple lost to Samsung and here's Samsung wins nothing.

I'm sorry something sits weirdly to me with that. A decision in hardly 3 weeks? and so one-sided?


As a man who encourages competition - this is really dumb (from both sides) - It seems that Tech companies have stopped inventing inventions, and started inventing patents. And then waste their time suing each other over it.

[Edited 2012-08-24 16:38:48]
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:55 pm

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 11):

How is it that, in 4 other countries Apple lost to Samsung and here's Samsung wins nothing.

I'm sorry something sits weirdly to me with that. A decision in hardly 3 weeks? and so one-sided?

Doesn't matter, really. This going to end in an appeals court and the Judge knew as much, not to mention her handling of the case didn't help matters at all.

Also, Apple now has to face Google backed by Motorola's patents who have a bit more meaning(and teeth) than mere rectangles with rounded corners and icons arranged in a grid.

[Edited 2012-08-24 16:56:32]
 
BlueElephant
Posts: 1662
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:16 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:58 pm

Quoting Acheron (Reply 12):
Doesn't matter, really. This going to end in an appeals court.

I know this - but it's all a bit silly really.

It's almost as if Boeing should sue Airbus because Airbus made a plane with 4 engines on it.
 
QFA380
Posts: 2013
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:38 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:09 am

This case was going to be appealed from the beginning. Samsung has been at a massive disadvantage the entire case, not sure who's fault it was but they certainly were going to do badly.

Patent laws particularly in regard to technology these days are ridiculous. How can anyone come up with an idea when there is a good chance that in the thousands that the giants have, one of them could be vague enough to include your idea and hence you're up the creek. They were originally intended to encourage and protect innovators and now they do the complete opposite.
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:14 am

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 13):
It's almost as if Boeing should sue Airbus because Airbus made a plane with 4 engines on it.

Blame the US Patent Office for granting them in the first place, completely ignoring prior art.
 
BlueElephant
Posts: 1662
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:16 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:20 am

Quoting Acheron (Reply 15):

Blame the US Patent Office for granting them in the first place, completely ignoring prior art.

Quick someone tell Burger King to stop making Hamburgers, McDonalds will sue.

P.S. before some Apple fanatics - start yelling at me for being a fanboy - I own both Apple and Samsung products, and I think this whole thing is really dumb for both companies.

[Edited 2012-08-24 17:28:54]
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:30 am

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 10):
Why would Samsung do that?

Apple buys billions from Samsung every year. Apple is not looking in other directions, especially in displays. It is not hard, however, to see Apple working with other companies, like Sharp, who want the component business and will not shaft Apple after they get it.

BTW, Apple has worked vigorously with their component suppliers. They have, in the past, pre-paid for $4 Billion in components. They have delivered financing for shared facilities.

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 11):
As a man who encourages competition - this is really dumb (from both sides) - It seems that Tech companies have stopped inventing inventions, and started inventing patents. And then waste their time suing each other over it.

If you like competition then look at Apple after Jobs came back. A company that was close to bankruptcy working to come back - and the iMac was the first product delivered. iMacs continue to be aggressive in the consumer market because the company invests in design. That is where the company competes

Same with other products. The iPad was not the first MP3 player but it was the most competitive because of the design.

Same with the iPhone.

Nothing I can think of in the industry represents a company competing more aggressively. ANd they do it on design, hardware and software.

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 13):
It's almost as if Boeing should sue Airbus because Airbus made a plane with 4 engines on it

Bit different in the mobile phone case. Look at the smart phones before the iPhone was released. There is nothing close on the market and the Blackberry was the leading designs.

Both Boeing and Airbus will have significant portfolios of patents, and they will use lawyers to defend those patents. There is an odd point about intellectual property - you defend it or you loose it.

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 14):
Samsung has been at a massive disadvantage the entire case

Samsung put themselves at a massive disadvantage by copying Apple's products as much as they could.

Now Samsung can go back in the labs and develop products without the Apple crutch.
 
BlueElephant
Posts: 1662
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:16 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:45 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Bit different in the mobile phone case. Look at the smart phones before the iPhone was released. There is nothing close on the market and the Blackberry was the leading designs.
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:48 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Samsung put themselves at a massive disadvantage by copying Apple's products as much as they could.

Too bad the claim falls flat on its face when some of the phones awarded most of the damages look nothing like an iPhone:

Samsung Prevail:


Samsung Infuse 4g


Samsung Mesmerize


Samsung Replenish


Samsung Transform


Silly to say the least

On top of that, the Judge refusal of allowing Samsung to use key evidence of prior art on their behalf. Like I said, the Judge gave a guaranteed appeal to Samsung so I doubt Apple will see a single dime from Samsung.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13828
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:31 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Samsung put themselves at a massive disadvantage by copying Apple's products as much as they could.

Yeah, damn those rounded corners!

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Now Samsung can go back in the labs and develop products without the Apple crutch.

Talk to us after the appeal.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 1:48 am

Also from TechDirt.com

Quote:
Minor update: After the rush, the judge came back to point out two problems with the verdict -- including the jury awarding damages in cases where it had not found infringement. While this will be corrected and won't change the results much, it certainly suggests that the jury rushed through this and may not have taken this particularly seriously. When you start talking about the numbers being thrown around in damages here, at some point, it must start to feel like play money. But it's a pretty big indictment of the jury itself that it would make a mistake like this. It raises significant questions about how careful they were in getting to a verdict vs. how quickly they wanted to be done in time for the weekend.

Round 2 is going to be more fun. Well, at least for Samsung.
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 3:13 am

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 18):

A WinTel "tablet" (computer without a keyboard) was supposed to be the cat's zzz. My wife was asked to complete a survey on one in her Oncologist's office. Worked, but not that well. It was better than my (10 minute) experience with Win 2.0, but not by much. At least it didn't crash after 10 minutes.

But it didn't have the impact on the target markets that the iPad has. It was not that great a product because it was a WinTel computer without a keyboard.

MS didn't steal anything from Apple on their "surface". They have paid app developers delivering on iOS to bring some apps to Surface, but it doesn't look like a winner to me. More like the HP tablet that had to be cleared out at $100.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 19):
On top of that, the Judge refusal of allowing Samsung to use key evidence of prior art on their behalf.

The Judge refused "evidence" from both sides. She also set 25 hours for each side - there was no way that she was going to allow this trial to go on for months. Both sides also had to trim down their claims.

The result was still a complex case, but one the jurist could decide on within a reasonably short period of time. Juries

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 18):
Like I said, the Judge gave a guaranteed appeal to Samsung so I doubt Apple will see a single dime from Samsung.

Both sides had appeal arguments developing as the trial progressed. The biggest issue Samsung faces is the ability to reverse the findings of the jury, as opposed to the dollar amount and potential import bans.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
Yeah, damn those rounded corners!

Samsung spent too much of their 25 hours on that. Sure paid off for them.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
Talk to us after the appeal.

Multiple appeals, without a doubt.

Two minor issues: does Samsung have to put up a bond with the appeal? I know other states (like Texas) demands a 10% deposit. And in some states the jury award generates a nice rate of interest. I think 10% was the Texas level. Both combines to motivate Texaco to pay up and forget a $10 Billion judgement some years back.

Samsung can afford that bond from the profits they earn from Apple's component business, but can they afford a product ban when they can negotiate with Apple?

Quoting Acheron (Reply 21):
Round 2 is going to be more fun. Well, at least for Samsung.

That depends on how long it takes to get the appeal reviewed and how much business they loose daily from any import bans they get hit with.

And any assumption of a "win" at that level needs to be compared with the Samsung lawyer's confidence going into this trial.

Samsung executives would be derelict if they didn't already have the design labs and programmers working overtime for replacement products.

There may be other trials, but the most important jury that Samsung will face has delivered their judgement. Fighting other battles while having bans in the US market is not in their long term interests. Time for Samsung's CEO to pick up the phone and talk to Apple's CEO. Both CEOs know what it will take to resolve all issues.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13828
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 3:36 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
A WinTel "tablet" (computer without a keyboard) was supposed to be the cat's zzz.

Whether it works at all or not has little impact on patent law, but you knew that...

A co-worker just got a patent on an idea that every part of our company including our own has refused to implement, because it was "not innovative"...

Keep towing that Apple barge, don't let us stop you....
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
Asturias
Posts: 1953
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 3:44 am

Wow it feels like the 90s again, Apple suing like crazy, everything going to appealed indefinitely and Apple looking stupid while doing so.

At least in the 90s one had slight sympathy for them, since MS wasn't even copying them well - but Samsung, HTC and Google Android have surpassed Apple's iOS in quality.

Either way, the person paying for this is: you.

The consumer.

Here's my Nostradamus predicion: Samsung will end up paying very little to nothing after appeal.
Tonight we fly
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 4:05 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
The Judge refused "evidence" from both sides

Not really. Judge Koh allowed last minute evidence from Apple but not from Samsung.

Not to mention the Magistrate Judge tried to screw Samsung over

Quote:
It all started when Apple decided to push for a sanction against Samsung for not preserving emails allegedly effectively enough from a particular point in time. I can't show you that motion, as it was filed under seal. Apple was successful in getting the magistrate to agree that the point in time Apple chose was correct and that although Samsung did start saving emails at that time, it could have done a better job and that it should be sanctioned. However, Apple itself had not started saving *any* emails at that date. It didn't start until almost a year later.

...
In the magistrate's order, he wrote that because Apple had filed a motion for the sanction, he was issuing the order against only Samsung as requested, but that Samsung had always been free to ask for a similar sanction against Apple, at the appropriate time.

When Samsung then filed for an equal adverse inference instruction against Apple the very next day, as the magistrate seemed to have indicated would be acceptable, yet he ruled that Apple should not be sanctioned because Samsung was filing its request too late.

One day later.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
The biggest issue Samsung faces is the ability to reverse the findings of the jury, as opposed to the dollar amount and potential import bans.

Should be easy by submitting the evidence Judge Koh didn't allow.

By the way, does this type of thing looks familiar?

Rounded corners, black frame, hmmmmm
Released in 2006 by the way.
Yes, it is a photo frame, but shows Samsung had a bit of a clue regarding design trends at the time.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
Samsung spent too much of their 25 hours on that. Sure paid off for them.

What else could they have done when their main argument against Apple wasn't allowed into the court?.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
Time for Samsung's CEO to pick up the phone and talk to Apple's CEO. Both CEOs know what it will take to resolve all issues.

I guess you missed the part were both parties refused to negotiate the both times the Judge recomended to do so during the trial.

Oddly enough, Apple lost the trial against Samsung in South Korea just today since the court decided that Samsung only violated the bounce-back patent, though both got ther products banned:
Apple: iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad and iPad 2. Samsung: Galaxy S, SII and Galaxy Tab 10.1

Quote:
A Samsung spokesperson told the BBC that the court had found the South Korean firm guilty of violating Apple's patent relating to the "bounce back" function.

The function lets users know that they have reached the end of a screen that they may be scrolling through on their devices.

Meanwhile, Apple has been found guilty of violating patents relating to telecom standards held by Samsung, including technology that makes the transfer and transmission of data between devices more efficient.

However, the court ruled against Apple's claims that Samsung had copied the designs of its products.

"There are lots of external design similarities between the iPhone and Galaxy S, such as rounded corners and large screens... but these similarities had been documented in previous products," a judge at the Seoul Central District Court was quoted as saying by the Reuters news agency.

"Given that it's very limited to make big design changes in touchscreen based mobile products in general... and the defendant [Samsung] differentiated its products with three buttons in the front and adopted different designs in camera and [on the] side, the two products have a different look," the judge said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875

And then you have a judge in the UK ruling that Samsung didn't infring on Apple either.


Anyway, as mentioned, this isn't over and considering the phone that is currently stealing the limelight from Apple has nothing to do with this lawsuit, and neither do the Google-anointed Nexus line, I doubt Samsung is too worried

On the other hand, Apple should be worried about the coming Google/Motorola lawsuit looking to ban imports of devices including the iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch and Macs, including the famed notification system.

But then again, Apple asked for it.
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3400
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 4:18 am

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 11):
I'm sorry something sits weirdly to me with that. A decision in hardly 3 weeks? and so one-sided?

Wasn't this tried in California??

It is where Apple is headquartered and there is not a lot to be done to sway the opinion of the jury regardless. I know this is simplistic but the original article was in San Jose.

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 11):
As a man who encourages competition - this is really dumb (from both sides) - It seems that Tech companies have stopped inventing inventions, and started inventing patents. And then waste their time suing each other over it.

This is why I like Mark Cuban and think tech related patents are a bunch of nonsense and discourage competition.

http://www.webpronews.com/mark-cuban...ested-in-patent-law-reform-2012-04

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 13):
It's almost as if Boeing should sue Airbus because Airbus made a plane with 4 engines on it.

I'll simplify it and its like Henry Ford suing GM, Toyota, Chrysler, BMW etc, because their cars all have 4 wheels.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Same with the iPhone.

Nothing I can think of in the industry represents a company competing more aggressively. ANd they do it on design, hardware and software.

No denying that Apple does good things but a lot of their patents are very suspect considering that blocking very basic things hurts then and the tech industry long term.

I don't know if Microsoft patented it but I don't remember any serious legal battles and I know DOS to illustrate my computer experience.

But say MS patented the _OX (O means a square) or the taskbar and reigned them in I do not think paying MS royalties would have progressed the tech industry to the point and it was very helpful.

Apple has a similar system and the natural touchscreen functions are pretty basic things but I think apple is pissed because Samsung created something cheaper that I will admit is harder to use but more people wanted it because of the money. Beta lost to VHS not because it was inferior but because VHS was cheaper.
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 1790
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 4:29 am

I find the verdict ridiculous, but whatever the end result, I'll vote with my wallet. I've given Apple a try, been unimpressed, and after this mess I've bought my last product from them. I now put them in the same boat as Wal-Mart. I avoid. I'll get more for less by buying a Samsung product or other brands. Win-win for me.
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4044
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 4:30 am

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
I'm a bit surprised at the speed of the verdict

This case was lost for Samsung even before it reached the Court. A jury trial in a case brought by Apple in the Bay Area? I have plenty of friends who live there, Apple is not a company in that part of the world, it is a religion. They can literally pose as police officers and do illegal searches in the homes of individuals and nothing happens to them.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
Samsung pays Apple $1+ Billion

Here's a conversation that never happened.

Client: I want to buy an iPhone, please.
AT&T store salesperson: Are you sure? Samsung has "bounceback" too (whatever the hell that is)
Client: Oh really? I will have the Galaxy then.

Now assuming Samsung makes a profit margin of $50 per phone (which I could probably check on public filings, but can't be arsed to do), at $1 billion, this conversation needs to not have happened 20 million times.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Apple buys billions from Samsung every year.

Not because they want to, just because Samsung has the technological lead (remember, unlike Apple they actually make technology) and Apple knows they could not find another supplier with similar technology for the same price and ability to deliver.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Look at the smart phones before the iPhone was released. There is nothing close on the market

I bought a Qtek in 2005 (was already not brand new by then) that ran Windows Mobile and allowed me to do 95% of what an iPhone does today...
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6014
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 4:38 am

Quoting Acheron (Reply 12):
Doesn't matter, really. This going to end in an appeals court and the Judge knew as much, not to mention her handling of the case didn't help matters at all.

Yes, this is really just the "setting the stage: " part of the process, the real part of the process won't occur until the appeals court rules. Then when that happens he parties may sit down and begin to discuss a mutual settlement. Each side has to determine where the real starting point, where each infringed or has a strong argument against the other.

The $1,000,000,000.00 is actually not that big a deal to either company so it really doesn't factor much.

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 14):
Patent laws particularly in regard to technology these days are ridiculous. How can anyone come up with an idea when there is a good chance that in the thousands that the giants have, one of them could be vague enough to include your idea and hence you're up the creek. They were originally intended to encourage and protect innovators and now they do the complete opposite.
Quoting Acheron (Reply 15):
Blame the US Patent Office for granting them in the first place, completely ignoring prior art.

Yes the USPO has been asleep at the switch and has not had the people capable of making sound calls on what is patentable and what should not be patentable. Of course the recent Congress's did them no favor by being lobbied and passing a completely big business friendly patent law that essentially said that if the USPO did not rule on something in a certain amount of time then it was granted and that if it was going to dispute anything it had to do so fully within that time frame. So starved of authority without recourse it became a patent approval factory.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Apple buys billions from Samsung every year.

The funny thing is that ultimately Apple will end up paying for its own settlement. And I am sure that Apple knows this. I mean everyone understands that ultimately the customer is the one who pays. And as Samsung is the leader in these technologies (why do you think they are the largest seller of cell phones in the world?) they will continue to be so for the foreseeable future and since Apple will need to continue to buy from them, they will have to bear the costs that Samsung has to bear. But of course there will be a settlement between both companies before anything is paid.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
Klaus
Posts: 20594
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 7:24 am

Quoting Acheron (Reply 12):
Also, Apple now has to face Google backed by Motorola's patents who have a bit more meaning(and teeth) than mere rectangles with rounded corners and icons arranged in a grid.

Motorola's patents are mostly worthless for litigation since they are predominantly part of official standards and thus subject to FRAND conditions.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
Apple buys billions from Samsung every year. Apple is not looking in other directions, especially in displays.

Yes, they are, particularly to LG and Sharp. They have also begun to steer other component purchasing away from Samsung.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 25):
Rounded corners, black frame, hmmmmm
Released in 2006 by the way.
Yes, it is a photo frame, but shows Samsung had a bit of a clue regarding design trends at the time.

It has neither touch operation nor is it a computer. Apple's design patents explicitly refer to both of these features.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
I don't know if Microsoft patented it but I don't remember any serious legal battles and I know DOS to illustrate my computer experience.

Google for DR DOS.
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 8:20 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 30):
Motorola's patents are mostly worthless for litigation since they are predominantly part of official standards and thus subject to FRAND conditions.

Sucks for Apple they aren't using FRAND patents this time around.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 30):
It has neither touch operation nor is it a computer. Apple's design patents explicitly refer to both of these features.

For not being a "computer" it can store pictures, movies and had an ethernet port. Plus it is a rectangle with rounded corners.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20594
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 8:49 am

Quoting Acheron (Reply 31):
Sucks for Apple they aren't using FRAND patents this time around.

What are you trying to say?

Apple does of course use FRAND patents since accessing inevitable standards by necessity involves FRAND patents – that is the whole point why FRAND rules even exist. Some of the FRAND patent holders have attempted to misuse those patents for litigation against a competitor, which FRAND explicitly forbids.

Apple, on the other hand, holds few FRAND patents, if any, but notably doesn't litigate about those.

Apple's litigation is exclusively about non-standard-relevant patents which can be avoided by using different designs ("design" involving the entirety of a product's technical construction, user interface and superficial appearance).

Quoting Acheron (Reply 31):
For not being a "computer" it can store pictures, movies and had an ethernet port. Plus it is a rectangle with rounded corners.

Irrelevant. Completely different product category, therefore not affected.
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4636
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:44 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):


Nothing I can think of in the industry represents a company competing more aggressively. ANd they do it on design, hardware and software.

There are two reasons why Apple has done so well:

1) Their marketing department is probably the best marketing department since Don Draper's. They know how to get people's attention

2) Proprietary/DRM restrictions, especially with iTunes. Until a couple of years ago, anything you purchased off an Apple product, can only be used with other Apple products. I have ~250 songs and TV shows I cannot put on any other device than an Apple product, due to DRM restrictions.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
Klaus
Posts: 20594
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 10:01 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):


Nothing I can think of in the industry represents a company competing more aggressively. ANd they do it on design, hardware and software.

There are two reasons why Apple has done so well:

1) Their marketing department is probably the best marketing department since Don Draper's. They know how to get people's attention

Their direct marketing is actually very subdued in comparison to their competitors.

>90% of their actual marketing is making the actual users of their actual products happy enough that they produce positive word of mouth.

Which actually means their success is earned through product quality (hardware and software, primarily the concrete usability of the finished product).

"Marketing" is open to anyone. Producing actually satisfying products is much, much harder than that, however.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
2) Proprietary/DRM restrictions, especially with iTunes. Until a couple of years ago, anything you purchased off an Apple product, can only be used with other Apple products. I have ~250 songs and TV shows I cannot put on any other device than an Apple product, due to DRM restrictions.

You're simply mistaken there. Apple has not a single DRM-encumbered track in their iTunes catalog today.

DRM has always been a requirement imposed by the record labels, not by Apple. Apple actually pushed for at the time extremely liberal DRM (including the option of burning DRM-free CDs from the purchased tracks, which you can do as well in any case!) and later on for entirely DRM-free music distribution.

You can upgrade all your old DRM tracks to much higher quality and at the same time make them DRM-free via iTunes.

The movie studios continue to require DRM, but all Apple products support DRM-free media from any sources, so the point is moot anyway.

DRM also has nothing to do with Apple's success, quite to the contrary. Music distribution has really taken off only after DRM was removed. And music distribution has never been a core business of Apple anyway – their download stores are running effectively at cost. They are making their profits almost exclusively by selling hardware. And DRM very obviously is not a benefit to hardware sales.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6014
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:01 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 30):
It has neither touch operation nor is it a computer. Apple's design patents explicitly refer to both of these features.

But neither of those can be considered to have been "non obvious".

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13828
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:13 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):
Their direct marketing is actually very subdued in comparison to their competitors.

>90% of their actual marketing is making the actual users of their actual products happy enough that they produce positive word of mouth.

I don't think that is any different for Apple's competitors.

We've had enough threads here to show that their competitors get a lot of word of mouth.

One thing Apple's lawsuit happy approach to their competitors does is shows the general public that they are concerned enough about Samsung to sue them all around the world.

Yes, some here will say it's just Apple being diligent, but that's just not the way the story is being portrayed in the mass media. The general public has lots of things with rounded corners in their homes and is unaware of the manufacturers suing each other over it, so the diligence angle just doesn't resonate.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20594
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:35 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 35):
But neither of those can be considered to have been "non obvious".

What are you trying to say?
 
Klaus
Posts: 20594
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:43 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 36):
I don't think that is any different for Apple's competitors.

We've had enough threads here to show that their competitors get a lot of word of mouth.

"A lot" is not a real quantitative metric. And actual user satisfaction ratings are substantially lower, which is reflected by much lower user retention at the other brands.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 36):
One thing Apple's lawsuit happy approach to their competitors does is shows the general public that they are concerned enough about Samsung to sue them all around the world.

Why would they not be concerned with a parts supplier of theirs trying to flood the market with cheap knockoffs of Apple's final product on which Apple had spent several years of intense development work, even before its first release?

Quoting Revelation (Reply 36):
Yes, some here will say it's just Apple being diligent, but that's just not the way the story is being portrayed in the mass media. The general public has lots of things with rounded corners in their homes and is unaware of the manufacturers suing each other over it, so the diligence angle just doesn't resonate.

The oft-quoted "round corners" are irrelevant to this verdict. This particular design patent was thrown out by the jury and it is based only on the functional patents Samsung has violated.
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 4:31 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 1):
Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
I'm a bit surprised at the speed of the verdict as this has been a complex case - even the Verdict Sheet for he Jury to fill in is complicated.

I too am very surprised.

Why? Juries don't ruminate on patent decisions for days and days. This came out as fast as expected.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 6):
What is a "trade dress"?

Basically, it's what a product looks like, when that look is known by the public to suggest it was made by a certain company.

Some good examples are the Coke "hourglass" bottle and the BMW front grille and headlights.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 10):
So, Samsung continues to sell/make more smartphones and Apple continues to make more tablets. They pay the fine and both companies continue to do what they do.

No, that's why this suit happened in the first place. Samsung can make smartphones, but they can't make smartphones that look like Apple's patent anymore.

Quoting BlueElephant (Reply 11):
How is it that, in 4 other countries Apple lost to Samsung and here's Samsung wins nothing.

Different patents.

(And Apple did win in Europe.)

Quoting Acheron (Reply 12):
Doesn't matter, really. This going to end in an appeals court and the Judge knew as much, not to mention her handling of the case didn't help matters at all.

Well, in the United States, a losing party has the *right* to appeal to the US Court of Appeals, and the US Court of Appeals has to take the case. In this case, since it is a patent case, it will go to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, located in Washington DC -- a court with which I am very familiar.

You want to win at the District Court. The reason is, the Courts of Appeals do not afford you the chance to relitigate the whole case, but rather, you write a 60 page brief, they right a 60 page response, and you write a 30 page reply presenting your arguments. These arguments are limited to "how the District Judge committed reversible error" not "why I was right and they were wrong." Jury verdicts seldom get overturned, because it is not "error" when the factfinder finds facts to be a certain way. It is error when the judge applies the wrong LAW, not when the jury finds the wrong facts.

Samsung is probably going to pay some $$$.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 15):
Blame the US Patent Office for granting them in the first place, completely ignoring prior art.

Have you analyzed the patents?

Quoting Acheron (Reply 25):

Should be easy by submitting the evidence Judge Koh didn't allow.

One of the most important rules about appeals is that in almost all cases, you do not get to submit new evidence.

Quoting tugger (Reply 35):
But neither of those can be considered to have been "non obvious".

In a DESIGN patent (as opposed to a utility patent), it's fairly hard to be obvious. A combination that hadn't already been made (touchscreen plus keyboard on touchscreen) could absolutely be non-obvious.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6014
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 5:09 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 37):
What are you trying to say?

A one element of a patent is that it is "non-obvious".

Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
In a DESIGN patent (as opposed to a utility patent), it's fairly hard to be obvious. A combination that hadn't already been made (touchscreen plus keyboard on touchscreen) could absolutely be non-obvious.

I know I may be lambasted for using this as an example but pretty much every sci-fi geek in the world was very familiar with a flat, touchscreen keyboard interface:

I know I have been expecting a device and a design like this since the 90's. I think most of us were (didn't everybody pretty much say or think "Finally..." when Apple's iPad was launched?).

And I also think everyone was expecting they would also be "wireless enabled". I think it was very obvious. Now the ability to do it was not easy but the design was expected and "obvious".

Tugg

[Edited 2012-08-25 10:12:13]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 5:22 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 40):
I know I may be lambasted for using this as an example but pretty much every sci-fi geek in the world was very familiar with a flat, touchscreen keyboard interface:

I'd never lambast you, tugger!

Star Trek was certainly one of the most innovative things in American history, in one way. But you know what else was? The Jetsons. Hell, Coyote and Roadrunner were pretty innovative in that their imaginations came up with ridiculously awesome ideas.

But an idea is not a patent.

You get a patent for an invention. An awesome idea (such as the tablet seen in TNG above) may inspire an invention, but until someone actually creates it, it is not an invention. It is just an idea.

The problem that people on this board (and elsewhere) are having is that they think an idea is patentable. But if you don't "have possession of the invention" as we say in patent law, you can't have a patent. Sure you may have thought of a great idea, but if you can't implement it, and importantly, teach others how to implement it you may not get a patent on it, and in most cases, your idea does not render someone else's patent obvious.
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 6:32 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 23):
A co-worker just got a patent on an idea that every part of our company including our own has refused to implement

BFD. I applied for a provisional patent (it costs $100 and is automatic) some years back. I didn't follow through with it when my wife got a Dx of ALL (and I had a neck cancer at the same time), but it was interesting at the time to work on a unique idea and consider what to do with it. It was in the medical field so I told the cpap maker I use to have at it when it was obvious the ALL was going to take up my time for 18 months of treatment.

Reality is that a patent is going to perform (or you are going to allocate the time and money for it) or it dies.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 23):
Keep towing that Apple barge, don't let us stop you....

I was actually a Dell customer for years - then they moved customer support to a 3red party company in India. One week of misery from poor support and I looked up the top computer maker on the CS side. That was, and has continued to be Apple.

There are reasons why consumers buy Apple products. When I had my little company Customer Support world wide was the key for me. Apple beat the hell out of Dell and continues to do so on con super CS.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 24):
At least in the 90s one had slight sympathy for them, since MS wasn't even copying them well

It's amazing that Apple was given "slight sympathy" in the 90's, but when Jobs came back and actually started growing the company it turns to hate.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 25):
Should be easy

I believe that this Judge might be more intelligent than you want her to be, and may well have a reputation in the higher courts than you would like.

Turning over the Jury decisions might be far more difficult than you think. It is not going to be as easy as flipping on a light switch.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 25):
I guess you missed the part were both parties refused to negotiate the both times the Judge recomended to do so during the trial.

That was before Samsung lost their case BIG time.

Samsung has now lost and they really need to get all this behind them.

If the Judge approves a bad on infringed products then the pressure to settle will be greater.

Especially with the Holiday Season sales starting very soon.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 25):
Oddly enough, Apple lost the trial against Samsung in South Korea just today since the court decided that Samsung only violated the bounce-back patent, though both got ther products banned:
Apple: iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad and iPad 2. Samsung: Galaxy S, SII and Galaxy Tab 10.1

No matter how odd the Korean decision was in terms of timing, the Korean market is somewhat smaller than the US market.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 24):
But then again, Apple asked for it.

Why? By not staying 3 months from bankruptcy year after year?

By spending more on design and consumer oriented software than MS fans would like to have seen?

I can remember Mike Dell talking about liquidating Apple and sending the money to the shareholders.

Now Apple is worth 31 times the market cap of Dell because of their intense focus on consumers.

And it is one of the most valuable companies in the world because of their intense focus on consumers.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
Wasn't this tried in California??

Big deal. California is filled with both conservatives and liberals and everything in between. Reagan was Governor of California before he was President.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
No denying that Apple does good things but a lot of their patents are very suspect considering that blocking very basic things hurts then and the tech industry long term.

Every company in that industry invests in R&D and patents are one result of that investments. Some of those patents become RAND patents, which is a good thing for consumers. Some are kept for use only within the company and some are open to general licensing,

If the company invests the time and manpower and money into an area that results in patents then they have the right to use those patents to their advantage. That is why they invest in R&D.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
I'll simplify it and its like Henry Ford suing GM, Toyota, Chrysler, BMW etc, because their cars all have 4 wheels.

It's not the wheels that counted in this trial. The wheels issue was settled a long time ago and any patents are dead of old age,

All the companies you mentioned, however, have their own R&D efforts and their own patents, MB, in fact, advertises their thousands of patents held - over 80,000. Saw the ad on TV - probably during the Olympics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yc6CejduPP0&feature=plcp

Note, MB used to have a policy (and probably still does, of giving away their patents that relate to safety.

I think it is fair to say that, if MB has over 80,000 patents, the car companies you mentioned will also have a nice stack of patents.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
lot of their patents are very suspect considering that blocking very basic things hurts then and the tech industry long term.

An interesting effort wold be to go back to blogs when the iPhone was introduced. You'll find a lot of Apple Haters who talked about what a dud it would be. "No keyboard? No stylus? Ya gotta be kidding!"

All the cars then had 4 wheels and no one was going to move from BB or any other of the leaders.

What we consider "basic" today was pretty foreign until Apple took it to market.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
I do not think paying MS royalties would have progressed the tech industry to the point and it was very helpful.

MS was convicted in Federal Court for being an abusive monopoly. You couldn't have picked a worse example of an abusive company. In those days MS destroyed anything that looked like competition.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
the natural touchscreen functions are pretty basic things

Really? That's why the market used keyboards and stylus systems before the iPhone?

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
Beta lost to VHS not because it was inferior but because VHS was cheaper.

IIRC, porn had a lot to do with that strength of VHS. You'd have to go back to the 80's publications writing about it, but it was a pretty important factor.  Wow!
Quoting tugger (Reply 29):
Yes the USPO has been asleep at the switch and has not had the people capable of making sound calls on what is patentable and what should not be patentable.

With all the calls for "cutting spending" why would a bright graduate look to work at the USPO? If you want to grow the performance of the USPO (or any similar government department) then you need to recruit good people, pay them well (competitive with private employers) and get the politicians to shut up about shrinking the government.

Quoting tugger (Reply 29):
(why do you think they are the largest seller of cell phones in the world?)

The can product products cheaply in Korea, especially when US taxpayers are funding a significant part of their national defense costs.

Why do you believe Nokia has shut down all their domestic production? Same reason.
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4044
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 6:42 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 42):
It's amazing that Apple was given "slight sympathy" in the 90's, but when Jobs came back and actually started growing the company it turns to hate.

Maybe it has to do with their market practices that make Monsanto look like nuns?
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 7:42 pm

Quoting Acheron (Reply 25):
I guess you missed the part were both parties refused to negotiate the both times the Judge recomended to do so during the trial.

This is probably a problem with the mainstream press writing about legal proceedings, but in ALL cases, the judges suggest that the parties negotiate.

(And what you don't see is that in the vast majority of the cases, probably greater than 80%, the parties ARE negotiating. They just don't do it in public.)

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26):
I'll simplify it and its like Henry Ford suing GM, Toyota, Chrysler, BMW etc, because their cars all have 4 wheels.

Actually, Ford very famously got into a patent tussle with Selden. Same with Daimler and Benz, who owned many patents on the early "car." Ransom Olds (father of Oldsmobile) patented the assembly line, and harassed other carmakers with it. So yes, your analogy is absolutely accurate, but not for the reason you think.

People, just because something is ubiquitous now does not mean it was not an invention once upon a time. You all are bending over backwards to argue that Apple doesn't have anything inventive in the i-devices, but why isn't it clear to you that before i-devices, this industry barely even existed?

A central tenet of patent law is that you cannot use your current view of the world to decide what is obvious. You have to place yourself in the viewpoint of the time when the invention was invented (look at the date of filing on the patents) and determine what the state of the art looked like at the time.
 
Asturias
Posts: 1953
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 7:50 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 42):
It's amazing that Apple was given "slight sympathy" in the 90's, but when Jobs came back and actually started growing the company it turns to hate.

No, not really. In the 90s MS was copying Apple's OS, no question. To add insult to injury, MS did a really botched job at it too.

Which meant the majority of users (including myself) had to suffer some third rate feature copying from MS, thus giving Apple some sympathy.

Now that MS and Android and Samsung and HTC and so many others are making way better products than Apple - yeah one doesn't have much sympathy for them.

However, it's just loony to claim that it is 'hate' or any such feeling - just indifference towards Apple and no sympathy.
Tonight we fly
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:18 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 32):
What are you trying to say?

That Google are using non-essential patents to sue Apple. Patents which include the notification system Apple copied.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 32):
Irrelevant. Completely different product category, therefore not affected.

That didn't stop Cisco from suing Apple over the "iPhone" term, and forced them to settle.

Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
(And Apple did win in Europe.)

Oddly enough, they won in Germany yet lost in the UK for a similar case.

I guess it depends on how gullible a judge is.

Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
Samsung can make smartphones, but they can't make smartphones that look like Apple's patent anymore.

Because they look like iPhones...lol
Like I said, the latest batch of Samsung phones along with all the Google phones and Motorola phones look nothing like an iPhone, yet they keep selling so I doubt they are too worried.

Specially if the latest versions of Android keep surpassing iOS on a consistent basis.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 42):
I believe that this Judge might be more intelligent than you want her to be, and may well have a reputation in the higher courts than you would like.

Does that make her decisions infallible or not prone to mistakes?.

Her handling of the case was less than stellar.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 42):
Why? By not staying 3 months from bankruptcy year after year?

By spending more on design and consumer oriented software than MS fans would like to have seen?

By going "thermonuclear" on the competition. MS tried that once, and didn't go well for them.

Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
Have you analyzed the patents?

I've read some of them and they shouldn't have been granted in the first place, particularly the ones who don't meet the non-obviousness criteria nor the ones who tons of prior art to them, starting by multi-touch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac0E6deG4AU

Then there is the latest batch of Apple patent stupidity, with them attempting to patent the wedge-shape for laptops. It is obvious they are going to try to sue other ultrabook manufacturers out of the market.
 
Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:42 pm

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
1) Their marketing department is probably the best marketing department since Don Draper's. They know how to get people's attention

Their design department is the best in the industry. It is the entire department, not just Jonathan Ive.

The hardware engineers are also outstanding, especially important as they work very closely with the designers.

Software is also impressive, especially considering that Apple is delivering on two platforms (OS X & iOS) while moving forward on the design and engineering areas.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
2) Proprietary/DRM restrictions, especially with iTunes.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 33):
I have ~250 songs

Make playlists and burn the songs to a CD. Easy enough for an old (68 last week) man to do so you should have no problem.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):
They are making their profits almost exclusively by selling hardware.

I believe the software side is improving, especially with the shift to an App Store approach. My bet is that Mountain Lion has already broken even. iLife would probably also be in the black. Maybe a new iWork would bring in more revenues.

Quoting tugger (Reply 35):
But neither of those can be considered to have been "non obvious".

All you have to do is look at the reactions from the public at the time the iPhone was announced.

Or watch a video of Steve Jobs introducing the iPhone at MacWorld. It's considered the mother of all product introductions, but the interesting part is the audience responding to the features demonstration. Stuff that we now consider "obvious", like scrolling.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 36):
The general public has lots of things with rounded corners in their homes and is unaware of the manufacturers suing each other over it,

That "round corners" argument took up far too much time at the trial - especially with only 25 hours available to each side.

Maybe if the lawyers had focused on other arguments they would have done better. A really bad call by Samsung's lawyers.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 43):
Maybe it has to do with their market practices that make Monsanto look like nuns?

Like those wild color iPod ads you could see around the world and understand it, regardless of the local language?

Or "Here's to the crazy ones" ad that Jobs had made when he returned to Apple?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rwsuXHA7RA

Or the famous 1984 Super Bowl Commercial?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhsWzJo2sN4

Or maybe it is the Apple Stores you don't like? Been to one to see how far the company is from a hard sell approach?

Quoting Asturias (Reply 45):
To add insult to injury, MS did a really botched job at it too.

I actually ran Win 2.0 for about 10 minutes before it crashed. 3.1 was far better. Then MS sorta caught up with 95. Ten years after Apple delivered the Mac OX.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 45):
Now that MS and Android and Samsung and HTC and so many others are making way better products than Apple -

Making "Better Apple Like" products?

Just recently computer makers have started delivering a MacBook Air Like light weight Ultra Notebook. Check 'em out and compare them them to the MacBook Air.

You can claim others have better phones, but the Android market is getting like the Windows market - different OEMs making tweaks and tossing in "stuff" to appear better to the consumer. My bet is that we are moving to a point where developers writing for Android will have to "accommodate" multiple products that are significantly different.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7681
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:51 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 47):
Their design department is the best in the industry. It is the entire department, not just Jonathan Ive.

This is probably true. However, the world is full of good creative design people.

Executives and finance departments often do not appreciate value or understand the profits that good design can bring. Apple had a huge opportunity with so much minimum-bidder quality and landfill-esque designs out there. Their products stood out for a cost of... ten more dollars per unit?

Every designer knows this stuff. Most designers are not empowered by executives to actually put the good stuff into production... hence Dell products (my desk right now has a Dell laptop vs. an equivalent Apple machine and some monitors).

[Edited 2012-08-25 14:58:58]
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Apple - Samsung Verdict Reached

Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:58 pm

Quoting Acheron (Reply 46):
I guess it depends on how gullible a judge is.

Interesting theory. In your practice, is it common to find gullible judges?

Quoting Acheron (Reply 46):
the latest batch of Samsung phones along with all the Google phones and Motorola phones look nothing like an iPhone

And now you're just not being objective.

You can spot differences, sure. But to say that they look nothing alike makes one look unobjective.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 46):
Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
Have you analyzed the patents?

I've read some of them

I didn't ask if you had read them, but rather had you _analyzed_ them. I have no idea what your background is, but in my line of work, it is _analysis_ that carries the day. What about the patents makes them invalid? (And why is it that you think the high powered firm of Quinn Emmanuel was unable to convince a Federal Court that they are invalid?)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google Adsense [Bot], seb146 and 14 guests