Jump to content
xnatex

Samsung ordered to pay Apple 1 billion in patent case

Recommended Posts

So the slide to unlock and "bounce back" patent that apple scored has won them a court order, this could possibily mean a ban on samsung devices in America

 

"But with the verdict now given, Samsung, the biggest maker of Android phones, now faces an outright ban of its key products here in the States. Device manufacturers that use the Android operating system may also face additional legal challenges from Apple. Analysts and legal experts predict that phone makers will now make greater efforts to steer clear of features and designs that resemble Apple products."

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Samsung-A...ment,17182.html

 

Its a sad day for the tech world, hopefully we can distance ourself from the corrupt American patent system, but some how i doubt it

Edited by xnatex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was reading somewhere how it's going to push the price of everything up, what with extra licences to pay for and billion dollar fines and what not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apple are acting like Elephants in a Glass ware store. Apple seem to be acting above the law in many case thinking they will always be right. The US has only allowed as they are a high ranking company on their soil. I will never buy an Apple product over there arrogance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think they should get your average joe of the street to do jury for this thing, what do they know about anything other then they own an apple phone themself? the panel should be full of industry experts and people who understand what a verdict like this means.

 

I will never buy anything Apple, there constant legislation against even their main component supplier is a cancer on the tech industry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard some 'expert' come out and say this would drive innovation... Drive innovation how exactly? By potentially creating a monopoly?

 

The technology for other UI input just isn't there yet and using a finger for mobile devices is the best thing we've got. Things like the pinch and the swipe, are basic movements, there just simply isn't an alternative without making things harder.

 

I was going to wait for a 4G version to come out, but I think I'm going to lay my hands on an S3 asap now. If this really is a landmark case internationally, it could be one of the last good non-Apple smartphones to surface, at least for a while, (could you blame anyone else for not investing time and money in to development in that field now?!)

 

While a part of me says I shouldn't, (two wrongs and all that), I really hope Google sinks Apple with the Motorola patents.

Edited by Periander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The technology for other UI input just isn't there yet and using a finger for mobile devices is the best thing we've got. Things like the pinch and the swipe, are basic movements, there just simply isn't an alternative without making things harder.

It blows my mind how a hand gesture is under patent , its like putting a patent on the hand gesture required to press alt+ctrl+del on a keyboard.

 

Everywhere i read about this the response is the same, how has that broken patent system not been fixed? fukn America

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to start a class action lawsuit against Apple for infringing on our hand gestures. I've used my fingers to point, pinch and swipe for decades before Apple stole those gestures to use on their overpriced monopolized POS devices. I would like to be compensated to a sum no less than USD $200 billion for all those involved in the suit.

 

 

Oh and I would also like to piss on Steve Job's grave and have Apple shove their own dicks up their arses.

Edited by Oracle X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This weekend I have been looking at buying a tablet (or something similar). Probably wouldn't have settled on an iPad in any case, but will certainly steer clear of Apple stuff from on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every dollar people give to Apple is a dollar they use to shut down competing companies and stop new products from entering the market.

 

I remember how much everyone hated Microsoft at a certain point, but where they as bad as this? I cant remember

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my Samsung products, but their wholesale copying is far more damaging to innovation and worse for consumers than Apple's practices. It's good to see something's finally being done about it.

 

I dont think they should get your average joe of the street to do jury for this thing, what do they know about anything other then they own an apple phone themself? the panel should be full of industry experts and people who understand what a verdict like this means.

The jury had engineering and legal experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't a loss for Android, this is a loss for Samsung's Touchwiz UI.

 

While I think $1.05B is a ridiculous figure, I don't think Apple was the bad guy in this situation. Samsung wasn't even attempting to innovate, their Touchwiz skin was an obvious and poorly concealed rip off of iOS, and the documents that emerged during the trial demonstrated that this was a calculated decision on their behalf. This behaviour is not good for consumers or innovation, and it's not necessary for a company to succeed.

 

In general, I think the patent system is fundamentally flawed in its current state. However, there has to be some protection of innovation, otherwise small players will have no way of receiving rewards for their hard word. While I think Apple's patents on pinch and double tap to zoom are particularly dubious, their patents for elastic scrolling, the look of the iOS homescreen and slide to unlock, in my opinion, are valid. These are problems that have multiple solutions, and Apple was the first to claim their ideas on it. You can copy what Apple has done, and enter a licensing agreement (which HTC and Microsoft have done), or you can innovate and come up with a new solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my Samsung products, but their wholesale copying is far more damaging to innovation and worse for consumers than Apple's practices. It's good to see something's finally being done about it.

 

I dont think they should get your average joe of the street to do jury for this thing, what do they know about anything other then they own an apple phone themself? the panel should be full of industry experts and people who understand what a verdict like this means.

The jury had engineering and legal experience.

 

IANAL (Yet).

 

If anything, that was a problem. The jury let itself be led by the 'experience' of the foreman (a patent holder himself), and used that experience to streamline their decision, including apparently ignoring the question of prior art! Source: Groklaw quoting CNET.

 

This case will be decided on appeal. Samsung has stated that they will be filing a s50(b), and appealing if that is denied (whereas Apple will appeal if it is allowed :P). This would be a good case to take to the Supreme Court; a proper look at design patents (with more than 24 hours per side for the whole case) would help to elucidate the law in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my Samsung products, but their wholesale copying is far more damaging to innovation and worse for consumers than Apple's practices. It's good to see something's finally being done about it.

 

I dont think they should get your average joe of the street to do jury for this thing, what do they know about anything other then they own an apple phone themself? the panel should be full of industry experts and people who understand what a verdict like this means.

The jury had engineering and legal experience.

 

 

Bullshit. If all Samsung did was copy Apple then nobody would buy their product over Apple's.

 

Did Samsung incorporate some of Apple's design's into their own product? Sure. But you name me one company that didn't one in way or another replicate aspects from another company's predecessor, Apple included.

 

True innovation comes from competition and without the likes of Samsung giving them a run of their money, they won't work 1/2 as hard to come up with the next big thing. This is a case of Apple's inability do just that. They'd rather sue their competitors out of existence then using their monopoly to make the customer buy everything through them for a fat profit every year when they push out a marginally better version of essentially the same shit. Pretty much the music industry's model when faced with the threat of online music delivery.

 

And as you can see from the popularity of Samsung's devices, and the fact they've put out Galaxy 3 before Apple could muster up iPhone 5, the table has turned on Apple already. They're now playing catch up. You can be your arse there's now a bunch of engineers in Cupentino dissecting the Galaxy 3 for ideas to incorporate into iPhone 5.

 

 

So fuck Apple and the horse they rode in on. I hope they go the way of RIM in the next decade.

Edited by Oracle X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The jury simply didn't do their job properly. They were influenced by Apple's easy to understand case (see: cognitive load), and the fact that the foreman had a vested interest in the patent system.

 

"He had experience. He owned patents himself. In the beginning the debate was heated, but it was still civil. Hogan holds patents, so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier."

 

Ideally, Apple should have had their patents invalidated. They're too general, and serve no purpose other than giving them competitive advantage through litigation. Samsung demonstrated reasonable prior art, but it would seem that the foreman wasn't too fond of the prospect of revoking patents.

 

There's also the fact that one of the jurors works for Intel (a major competitor of Samsung's in the mobile SoC market), and AT&T (who invested heavily on selling the iPhone, and the only US carrier not to sell flagship Android devices). But let's assume that had no affect on the outcome, for simplicities sake.

 

Samsung deserved to be stung for the trade dress claims (it's not hard to see iOS influence in earlier versions of their products), but the patents should have been thrown out.

 

What also annoys me is that there was no consistency in the ruling. The Galaxy Tab 10.1, despite having an injunction against it going into the case, came out unscathed. Seriously, what? Also the fact that Apple was not found to infringe on Samsung's 3G patents, which are part of the 3G specification, and thus makes it impossible for Apple to not infringe on. The argument that Apple doesn't need to pay because they use Intel chips (and Intel holds the licence) is something I feel wasn't considered well enough. The licence is for Intel to produce and use the technology in their own devices, and as far as I can tell, has no stipulation for transferring the licence to those who purchase the chips. It seems odd that they managed to come to a decision so fast.

 

Overall, it's not the $1bn that annoys me, that's nothing for Samsung. What shits me is that these stupid patents live another day, and the next company in the firing line is Motorola/Google. Apple 'borrow' a lot of patented ideas for their products, I don't see why they can't just focus on their own shit and stop with the patent lawsuits. Trade dress, fine. Patents, fuck off. And with that, I'll leave a pretty picture.

 

Posted Image

 

That's Google's patent for drop down notifications, the ones that have been in Android since it's inception. Yet iOS now does the same. Why can't everyone just play nice?

Edited by .:Cyb3rGlitch:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IANAL (Yet).

 

As a side note, a lot of the patents in this case were not the traditional patents, but rather design patents (which are pretty much a cross between patents, trademarks, and designs) and trade dress (a more vague cross between trademarks and designs, which don't need to be registered). Essentially, Apple patented and has trade dress protection of the idea of a square icon with rounded corners, a dock of four such icons, or anything that looks like an iPad. That is somewhat of an exaggeration, but not as much as you'd think. There's a decent, if basic, primer on the criteria for design patents and trade dress here.

Edited by DaCraw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope everyone in the smart phone business is taking note. This is the kind of tactic they can expect from Apple if it's left unchecked. Google, HTC, Samsung and even Nokiea/MS/Rim should team up and crush Apple with patent infringement suits. At the very least it will tie up the courts for so long, it will put Apple on the defensive for the next 5 years. And hopefully with every company engaged in all out legal war, they would have no choice but to resolve the patent mess.

Edited by Oracle X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope everyone in the smart phone business is taking note. This is the kind of tactic they can expect from Apple if it's left unchecked. Google, HTC, Samsung and even Nokiea/MS/Rim should team up and crush Apple with patent infringement suits. At the very least it will tie up the courts for so long, it will put Apple on the defensive for the next 5 years. And hopefully with every company engaged in all out legal war, they would have no choice but to resolve the patent mess.

Google has a better idea. Patent reform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope everyone in the smart phone business is taking note. This is the kind of tactic they can expect from Apple if it's left unchecked. Google, HTC, Samsung and even Nokiea/MS/Rim should team up and crush Apple with patent infringement suits. At the very least it will tie up the courts for so long, it will put Apple on the defensive for the next 5 years. And hopefully with every company engaged in all out legal war, they would have no choice but to resolve the patent mess.

Google has a better idea. Patent reform.

 

 

Google is naive. Nobody will reform if there's a buck to be made from no reforming it. The only way to make it happen is to make it impossible to make a buck without reform. And nothing says "party pooper" than never-ending lawsuits and injunctions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alexander Graham Bell's estate should sue absolutely everyone for making phones.

 

It annoys me that I have an iPod Touch and that it is very good. There's simply no alternative that offers the same functionality for the same dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope everyone in the smart phone business is taking note. This is the kind of tactic they can expect from Apple if it's left unchecked. Google, HTC, Samsung and even Nokiea/MS/Rim should team up and crush Apple with patent infringement suits. At the very least it will tie up the courts for so long, it will put Apple on the defensive for the next 5 years. And hopefully with every company engaged in all out legal war, they would have no choice but to resolve the patent mess.

Google has a better idea. Patent reform.

 

 

Google is naive. Nobody will reform if there's a buck to be made from no reforming it. The only way to make it happen is to make it impossible to make a buck without reform. And nothing says "party pooper" than never-ending lawsuits and injunctions.

 

Maybe, maybe not. But a great many consumers are getting pissed off with this system. I've personally been manipulating my friends and family into buying android devices instead of apple ones for a while now because I don't like the way apple does business. How many people in this thread so far have said that because of this decision they won't be buying apple products? And how many people who don't understand what is going on will walk away with the idea that samsung phones are basically the same as iphones but are cheaper?

 

There may be hope for reform if enough people start buying devices from decent companies.

 

-X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×