The Apple Lawsuit Thread

A place for all tech stuff that doesn't really belong anywhere else.
Anakha56
Forum Administrator
Posts: 22136
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 02:00
Processor: Ryzen 1700K
Motherboard: Asus X370
Graphics card: Asus 1060 Strix
Memory: 16GB RAM
Location: Where Google says

The Apple Lawsuit Thread

Post by Anakha56 »

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012 ... v-samsung/
Apple v. Samsung verdict is in: $1 billion loss for Samsung
Verdict comes quicker than expected.

A jury of seven men and two women has just read the Apple v. Samsung verdict to a packed courtroom—and it was all bad news for Samsung. The Korean electronics giant has been found to infringe all of Apple's utility patents and all but one of the four design patents asserted, and was ordered to pay more than $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.
That's less than the $2.75 billion Apple asked for, but still a huge sum. If it holds up on appeal, it will stand as the largest patent verdict of all time. More importantly, it gives Apple a huge leg-up in the corporate patent wars, and immeasurably strengthens the company's negotiating position with regard to the Android phones it is struggling against.
Samsung has been the number one seller of smartphones in the U.S. in the past few years, and this verdict could alter the balance of power. Apple's ultimate target is Google, which created the Android operating system that runs on Samsung smartphones. Steve Jobs thought Android was a rip-off of Apple products, and vowed to declare "thermonuclear war" on the competing OS, according to his biography.
Follow the link for further reading.

Expect Google to get a love letter from Apple regarding multi-touch and tap to zoom. This is going to get ugly... :(
JUSTICE, n A commodity which is a more or less adulterated condition the State sells to the citizen as a reward for his allegiance, taxes and personal service.
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

I think your link over at SS expresses it best:
Useful, new and non-obvious -- that's what a patentable invention has to be, according to the USPTO. But that office started brushing aside its own criteria around the internet's early days, and brought the system to its current, twisted state -- with the Apple v. Samsung decision being exhibit 'A'. Cupertino deserved to win. It was clear to me that Samsung was infringing on items like bounce-back (7,864,163), but that patent, for one, should never have been awarded in the first place. And the whole problem started a couple of decades ago, with the granting of a spate of eye-opening digital clunkers.

The first time I saw an absurd technology patent was in the early '90s. It was awarded, in part, for the electronic process of "storyboarding" still images, or arranging them in the same sequence they'd appear in a film or video. "That can't possibly be patentable," I thought. "Where's the novel process? How is that non-obvious?" Companies like Avid had to ante up to use that so-called technology for their video editing software, which increased the price of their products, shaking down them and their buyers. With precedent like that, the USPTO opened the floodgates to similar dubious products which aped existing methods but were now "digital." For instance, Hollywood has been doing storyboards for a hundred years on paper and celluloid, so why is transferring that process to a computer new and non-obvious?

That turned out to be the tip of the iceberg, as inventions like that led to all manner of ludicrous patents, bounce-back included -- which is merely an animation to indicate the bottom or side of a page. Does that mean that any smartphone effect that mimics an object falling and landing hard, like flying sparks (off the top of my head) -- is patentable? I know US patent law is liberal, but that's ridiculously thin. It seems that every half-baked idea that pops into a designer's head is thrown into the patent bin, and a big chunk of those are actually approved. Not only does that stifle budding inventors and companies, it makes a mockery of what an invention actually is.
Did Apple deserve to win based on patents protected by existing laws? Yes.

Are those existing laws stupid? Absolutely!

Is Apple itself guilty of copying from other sources? No doubt.

Disclaimer: I say this as a hardcore iOS fanboi. I have an iPhone, an iPad and a Samsung Galaxy Note. I hate Android, and I hate Samsung Mobile even more.
Image
ryanrich
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8465
Joined: 07 Jun 2003, 02:00
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by ryanrich »

Agree 100% Stu.
KALSTER
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5439
Joined: 12 Oct 2008, 02:08

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by KALSTER »

Are these worldwide patents or US patents? If US only, let the US stew in their litigation heavy hell hole and let us have the freedom.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

US only in this instance.
Image
User avatar
Tribble
Registered User
Posts: 88465
Joined: 08 Feb 2007, 02:00
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K CPU@3.50GHz
Motherboard: ACPI x64-based PC
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 780 Ti
Memory: 16GB
Location: Not here
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Tribble »

Thank goodness - I am an Adroid fan
Image
Cyrax
Registered User
Posts: 28
Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 08:11
Location: Death Star
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Cyrax »

They can keep on prodding.
In the long run people will see how full of ****** they are.

Android is raping them... and they are looking for a way to excuse that.
But lets be honest.

The i-phone is a ripp off of the LG Prada "way ahead of apple" and they need to remember that, because they may find them self's atoning for over 20 years of ripping off of other products and then slamming a nice apple logo on the back.
And Microsoft did it to them.. so lets say apple learned from the best.
Image
Spoiler (show)
AMD Phenom 2 X6 T1100 @ 3.8Ghz "pelter cooled"
16GB 1800 kingston ram
Asus board "forgot chipset"
AMD 6890 2GB
Geforce 9800GT 512MB "physix re-enabled"
2x 80GB SDD in raid "for speed"
1.2KW PSU
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

Have you owned an iPhone, Cyrax?
Image
Cyrax
Registered User
Posts: 28
Joined: 16 Aug 2012, 08:11
Location: Death Star
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Cyrax »

Stuart wrote:Have you owned an iPhone, Cyrax?
Yes.. and as soon as apple banned custom roms and made a huge fuss about it, I gave up caring about them.
My i-phone is now in the apies river surrounded by feces.

The i-phoney is nothing more than a status symbol anyway "status symbol meaning money overpowers thought"
Where as android devices mostly embraced what I wanted.
Image
Spoiler (show)
AMD Phenom 2 X6 T1100 @ 3.8Ghz "pelter cooled"
16GB 1800 kingston ram
Asus board "forgot chipset"
AMD 6890 2GB
Geforce 9800GT 512MB "physix re-enabled"
2x 80GB SDD in raid "for speed"
1.2KW PSU
ryanrich
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8465
Joined: 07 Jun 2003, 02:00
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by ryanrich »

iPhone custom roms? Well it's clear you know what you're talking about... :lol:
Anakha56
Forum Administrator
Posts: 22136
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 02:00
Processor: Ryzen 1700K
Motherboard: Asus X370
Graphics card: Asus 1060 Strix
Memory: 16GB RAM
Location: Where Google says

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Anakha56 »

ryanrich wrote:iPhone custom roms? Well it's clear you know what you're talking about... :lol:
+1 ... :?

Apple deserved to win the trade dress part of the case (in this case for the SGS 1) however the software patent part of it can get lost because that will end up hurting the consumer more than anything else.

Side note has Apple started paying Google yet for the notification drop down? Doubt it and I doubt they will ever pay for that use.

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?stor ... 2510525390

Jury was a farce and this verdict will be appealed and have a strong case to be overturned.
JUSTICE, n A commodity which is a more or less adulterated condition the State sells to the citizen as a reward for his allegiance, taxes and personal service.
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

Apple used to allow "custom ROMs"?
Image
User avatar
rustypup
Registered User
Posts: 8872
Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
Location: nullus pixius demonica
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by rustypup »

groklaw post on the joke...

@Cyrax: iFanbois are hardly going to willingly recant or admit that they purchase apple's garbage because of the perceived intelligence/status boost they offer. it's why religion remains so embedded in society. nobody voluntarily admits they've been had for a sucker, especially to him/herself.
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

How Apple's victory over Samsung will affect you: The good and the bad

. . .

A future where no one tries to mimic Apple could be a lot better. I’d love to see innovation start where these lawsuits stop.

Read more
Image
ryanrich
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8465
Joined: 07 Jun 2003, 02:00
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by ryanrich »

A future where no one tries to mimic Apple could be a lot better. I’d love to see innovation start where these lawsuits stop.
This.

One of the things I like about Windows Phone and the new Nokia Lumia phones is how different they are to the iPhone compared to Samsung, HTC etc.
Anakha56
Forum Administrator
Posts: 22136
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 02:00
Processor: Ryzen 1700K
Motherboard: Asus X370
Graphics card: Asus 1060 Strix
Memory: 16GB RAM
Location: Where Google says

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Anakha56 »

I dont get it... :?

Since the first cellphone until the iPhone everyone had the same design just about and no-one went crying to mommy because they had the same dress. Now it happens to Apple and everyone starts crying foul, what gives? My oven looks the same as everyone else's as does my kettle, iron, fridge, tv, PC, speakers and a whole lot of other gadgets and tools. So should the first fridge manufacturer now sue everyone else for copying their design? This world is getting crazier by the second... :?

Android is now unique and stands on its own. It can do things Apple could only dream of and I bet you right now with the new iPhone it will have widgets support as well so who is copying who? :P
JUSTICE, n A commodity which is a more or less adulterated condition the State sells to the citizen as a reward for his allegiance, taxes and personal service.
User avatar
rustypup
Registered User
Posts: 8872
Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
Location: nullus pixius demonica
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by rustypup »

the problem isn't so much the stupidity inherent in the enforcement of IP as a revenue stream... it's with the nutjobs at the patent office clearing this tripe...

also.. lawyers...
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
KALSTER
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5439
Joined: 12 Oct 2008, 02:08

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by KALSTER »

ryanrich wrote: One of the things I like about Windows Phone and the new Nokia Lumia phones is how different they are to the iPhone compared to Samsung, HTC etc.
And the move to Windows Phone and its Apple'esque restrictions by Nokia means I will probably never buy one of their phones again and I have always been a Nokia fanboy. Had they continued with Meego, it would have been another story.

This whole patent business is totally out of control. You can patent any idea, no matter if it actually works (or even could in theory) or not. They patent genetic sequences for goodness' sake! America sucks on so many levels.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
americantsm1
Queen of the Damned
Posts: 25092
Joined: 10 Sep 2007, 02:00

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by americantsm1 »

I am not surprised at all to be honest ... when more and more phones started to look like my i-pod (before the i-phone was launched) I was wondering how long it would take. Then more and more phones started looking like my i-pod and later the i-phone I was not sure why Apple had not taken any action. I suppose from a business point of view they waited until it would be more profitable for them to do something about it
Image
There comes a time for every vampire when the idea of eternity becomes momentarily unbearable. Living in the shadows, feeding in the darkness with only your own company to keep, rots into a solitary, hollow existence.
User avatar
rustypup
Registered User
Posts: 8872
Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
Location: nullus pixius demonica
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by rustypup »

americantsm1 wrote:Then more and more phones started looking like my i-pod and later the i-phone I was not sure why Apple had not taken any action.
because the iPhone was a direct rip-off of one of sony's units?

this nonsense has even started rewriting history now?

apple has never produced an original design. they're a marketing company selling over priced knock-offs to mouth-breathers while suing all and sundry over IP they've purloined via the yanks imminently dysfunctional patent system, (hardly a unique business approach.. mickeysoft ahs been playing that game for far longer)...
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
americantsm1
Queen of the Damned
Posts: 25092
Joined: 10 Sep 2007, 02:00

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by americantsm1 »

everyone rips-off everyone else if you want to get down to the fundamentals ... my point is I do not see why everyone is so surprised by it. And my point was it did not start with the i-phone launch ... the i-pods looked like the i-phone before the i-phone existed. I am not rewriting history. If I had that power I would not be sitting here that is for sure!
Image
There comes a time for every vampire when the idea of eternity becomes momentarily unbearable. Living in the shadows, feeding in the darkness with only your own company to keep, rots into a solitary, hollow existence.
User avatar
hamin_aus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18363
Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
Processor: Intel i7 3770K
Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by hamin_aus »

americantsm1 wrote:the i-pods looked like the i-phone before the i-phone existed.
Apple™ logi©.
Image
User avatar
rustypup
Registered User
Posts: 8872
Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
Location: nullus pixius demonica
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by rustypup »

americantsm1 wrote:everyone rips-off everyone else if you want to get down to the fundamentals
nope.. apple copies from everyone else, then secures the patent, then sues.

that's their business model in a nutshell. ipod was stolen from creative who dragged heel and saw apple kick their behinds in court.

iphone was ripped off from sony who simply couldn't be bothered, (at that point), to endure a similar cash sink in court. given that the concept was untested and the market was so small this is understandable, (up to a point).

ipad was ripped off from mitsubishi, (also called touch or something similar).

apple is a patent troll which is very successful at plugging its ill gotten gains to mindless technophiles with less sense than a potato and an inferiority complex you could drive a boeing 747 through... sideways...
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
americantsm1
Queen of the Damned
Posts: 25092
Joined: 10 Sep 2007, 02:00

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by americantsm1 »

@ Jamin it does make sense though lol

added: It (i-pod touch) was released in 2007 or 2008 I think (the first software update was 2008 I think not sure of the first release date for the touch though) which is identical to what the i-phone looks like
Image
There comes a time for every vampire when the idea of eternity becomes momentarily unbearable. Living in the shadows, feeding in the darkness with only your own company to keep, rots into a solitary, hollow existence.
User avatar
hamin_aus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18363
Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
Processor: Intel i7 3770K
Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by hamin_aus »

americantsm1 wrote:@ Jamin it does make sense though lol
:lol:
It actually does!!!
I'm now eagerly waiting for Apple to realise that the i-pod infringed on the i-phones copyright and to file a lawsuit against itself.
One which will hopefully bankrupt the company and thus put the course of consumer electronics back on track so that innovation rather than branding and shiny sparkly packaging is the driving force behind sales
Image
Post Reply