$1 BILLION VERDICT: SAMSUNG RIPPED OFF APPLE!

[twospirits]

The verdict of Korea based Samsung corp having to pay over a billion dollars to US based Apple is nothing since Samsung is a 18+ billion dollar company. It was ruled as them copying and so be it, i can live with that even though I really feel that it wasn't.

 

But the part that really pisses me off is the short amount of time the verdict came and the reasons as per the jurys own words for the verdict. With over 700 questions and numerous devices to go through, 21 hours was not enough time unless they wanted to cast down a vote without deliberating properly.

 

This article says it best and I tend to agree with it. Between the jury having to come back to fix their mistakes on the amount of the judgement for awarding money to phones that were not in violation to coming to a decision that Samsung was wrong on day one thus possibly invaliding any further testimony makes me feel that the verdict was totally wrong.

 

Now knowing the courts, such things would not amount to anything in an appeal especially since the damage has been done to Samsungs reputation. They are now labeled as copiers/stealers.

 

That to me is the worst thing to have over your head, worse than paying any huge amount.

 

Case in point, another Korean company, Hyundai, is still fighting the reputation they received from the 80's Excel fiasco. Even though today, they make excellent cars and are quite durable, there are quite a few folks that refuse to buy one due to that past reputation. Reputation that are tarnished is very hard to get over.

 

i just hope Samsung comes out of this stronger and not repeat the mistakes and comes out with killer products. Personally i wish Google would just gather all these manufacturers up and sit them down and tell them to incorporate many of their designs into one killer product to compete directly against the iphone / ipad.

 

TS

[xenadu]

By the precedence set forth from this trial, if Henry Ford had patented a chassis that has four rounded wheels then we would drive no other brand of car. As far as Samsung's icons looking similar... the doors on my Chevy look similar to the doors on my friends Nissan. The steering wheel was also an amazingly successful feature that started on one car. Point is we are getting very vague with what we are calling copying. The simple truth is that a Galaxy S and iPhone function as two completely different phones.

 

Honestly though Apple fanboys should be thrilled about Android. If Android hadn't hit the market then Apple probably never would've made all the improvements that went into the iPhone 4. Competition fuels innovation.

 

First of all, patents are for a limited period of time... 20 years. Now I happen to agree that 20 years is too long in the software world but your example is horrible in two ways: all of Ford's original patents would have long expired and secondly people did patent automobile concepts and Ford fought a long legal battle over it (and largely lost), thus early car makers *did* pay royalties to the patent holders.

 

I think this lawsuit is a good result. We all know the history - Google switched Android from being a BlackBerry clone to an iOS clone and copied iOS after they saw its success. Samsung went further and ripped off the iPhone hardware and design. Google told them flat out that they were going to get burned but they went ahead anyway. That isn't the only way to make a smartphone - Windows Phone proves you can do something totally unique. WebOS is another one, as is the new BlackBerry 10.

 

All patents look obvious in hindsight and that's a question the courts have wrestled with for many, many years... Precisely because every jackass with an opinion goes "duh that's so simple it shouldn't be patentable". Almost all of the summaries are vast over-simplifications or gross misunderstandings. For example the "double tap" patent is actually a patented way of having the user make a gesture (double tap, triple tap, or whatever), examining an HTML document, understanding the meaning of the document, determining the user's most likely target, zooming to that target, then reflowing the rest of the document to make it readable while still preserving the document structure (eg: two column-layout stays correctly formatted as two columns). That's a hell of a lot more complicated than saying "hurrrrr apple is trying to patent double taps!!!!!!!".

 

If Samsung (or anyone else) were going to make something as good or better than the iPhone anyway then why did they wait so long? Simple... They were complacent in their cozy carrier relationships. Consumers were not the customer, carriers were. Apple was the first one to break out of that awful structure. Apple invented a whole new multitouch UI paradigm. Were there inklings or traces of some of those ideas already out there? Sure... But Edison wasn't the first person to tackle the incandescent light bulb, nor was Ford the first to tackle the automobile. Almost no invention is truly 100% independently invented and if that's the standard then no one can ever profit from their inventions. Even taking all existing concepts and combining them in a new and interesting way is a valid invention that deserves to be rewarded.

 

I would also point out that the jury rejected all the tablet-related claims precisely because they felt that it had too much prior art out there like StarTrek PADDs and the like.

 

Samsung is a horrible company that copies ideas from many companies in many industries and relies on their huge size and massive reach into many industries to protect them from consequences. If this case were a small company vs Samsung people would be more rational about it, but the name Apple automatically triggers insanity and seems to force people to mash the POST button without thought. I'm glad they lost and I hope the judge sticks it to them hardcore. That is how you will see innovation flourish... By having companies come up with entirely new ways of doing touch UI on phones, not having them clone iOS.

[xenadu]

The verdict of Korea based Samsung corp having to pay over a billion dollars to US based Apple is nothing since Samsung is a 18+ billion dollar company. It was ruled as them copying and so be it, i can live with that even though I really feel that it wasn't.

 

But the part that really pisses me off is the short amount of time the verdict came and the reasons as per the jurys own words for the verdict. With over 700 questions and numerous devices to go through, 21 hours was not enough time unless they wanted to cast down a vote without deliberating properly.

 

I find your signature to be an ironic confirmation that Apple both deserves to win this case and should sue the rest of the Android handset makers (though they won't). What happens in 2007? Hmmm... Good question. Gee... Why do all of the 2007 & after phones all look completely different from the ones before?

 

But hey... Apple never innovates. They never changed the cell phone game. If the iPhone never existed I'm sure Android would have magically switched gears from being a BlackBerry clone for no reason whatsoever. Surely the carriers would have stopped shipping phones crippled with features disabled and stopped having veto power over apps (Sprint never did respond to my 2004 request about writing mobile Java apps for their phones). I mean duh, screw Apple! They are hurting consumers!

[pyroscott]

Is it time for HP to come in and slap apple with their Palm?

 

It's possible that Android OEMs "copied" the Jesusphone, but it is more likely that the Jesusphone copied the work and design of Palm and Microsoft, then made it successful enough for Android to copy.

[bigsnake49]

The fact that Google warned them that their (Samsung) designs were too close to Apple's really strengthened Apple's case.

[ChadBroChillz]

Unlike Samsung. Microsoft was willing to cross license. So apple and Microsoft can't sue each other for patent infringement.

 

HP would have sued if it could, so I doubt they could. They could have recoup some of their losses from WebOS. They probably do not have any patents that could stick. PalmOS and iOS have little in common.

[bigsnake49]

Unlike Samsung. Microsoft was willing to cross license. So apple and Microsoft can't sue each other for patent infringement.

 

HP would have sued if it could, so I doubt they could. They could have recoup some of their losses from WebOS. They probably do not have any patents that could stick. PalmOS and iOS have little in common.

 

The best thing for HP to do is to approach Apple and license WebOS to them to use as they see fit. There are a few things in there that Apple can use. In exchange HP can start making OSX Server boxes.

[twospirits]

I find your signature to be an ironic confirmation that Apple both deserves to win this case and should sue the rest of the Android handset makers (though they won't). What happens in 2007? Hmmm... Good question. Gee... Why do all of the 2007 & after phones all look completely different from the ones before? But hey... Apple never innovates. They never changed the cell phone game. If the iPhone never existed I'm sure Android would have magically switched gears from being a BlackBerry clone for no reason whatsoever. Surely the carriers would have stopped shipping phones crippled with features disabled and stopped having veto power over apps (Sprint never did respond to my 2004 request about writing mobile Java apps for their phones). I mean duh, screw Apple! They are hurting consumers!

I find it interesting that you are using my signature of my phones as a basis for your point of view.

 

Now,lets take it a bit further.

In this image

 

here you can see some other phones that existed before 2007 and its only the natural evolution of design that is taken place.

 

TS

[pyroscott]

I find it interesting that you are using my signature of my phones as a basis for your point of view.

 

Now' date='lets take it a bit further.

In this image

 

here you can see some other phones that existed before 2007 and its only the natural evolution of design that is taken place.

 

TS

 

That htc wizard obviously ripped off the iPhone... blatantly

[bigsnake49]

That htc wizard obviously ripped off the iPhone... blatantly

 

Yep with the frequently malfunctioning slide mechanism for the QUERTY keyboard and Windows Phone OS, it certainly did. Pinch? Yes, the only way you could close the slide sometimes:you had to pinch just the right spot to close it.

[2fastkuztoms]

A great article on gizmodo

 

http://m.gizmodo.com/5938219/why-the-apple-v-samsung-ruling-may-not-hold-up

[SpenceSouth]

You know when Apple blatantly ripped off Android's notification and OTA system in iOS 5 I can't seem to remember any fanboys crying foul. Always a second standard when your the biggest company on the block.

[twospirits]

A great article on gizmodo

 

http://m.gizmodo.com...may-not-hold-up

Love the picture they selected.

 

TS

[pyroscott]

OK, the problem I have, is that there are blatant copies out there like this http://www.amazon.com/Capacitive-Android-Unlocked-T-mobile-Networks/dp/B007AXLFOA/ref=pd_rhf_dp_s_cp_1 or this http://www.amazon.com/Wifi-Sciphone-Dual-Unlocked-Phone/dp/B005A7L5WK/ref=as_li_tf_mfw?&linkCode=wey&tag=slioflif0c-20 Those are in violation of the patent. But this

Vaguely resembles the iPhone at best.

 

If a patent for a rectangle with rounded corners was going to be awarded, it should have been a FRAND patent anyway. Cell phones were trending that way already. Apple wasn't first to market, but they were the most successful rectangular phone with rounded corners.

 

Everyone poo-poo's Samsung's patents because they are FRAND and they should license them instead of trying to ban imports, but Apple can go ahead and bring competitors to court because they have a slab phone...

 

As far as the internal memos, and how they "show that Samsung copied Apple" Maybe Sprint should patent having unlimited data, so they can be the only carrier to offer it. Maybe Verizon should patent offering VoLTE on an American carrier. Competitors always analyze their competition, identify where the competitor outperforms them, and compensate. Copying is copying, if the below image was a Samsung, I would say that Apple has a strong case.

It is not, and I do not think Apple has a case. That is just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions...

[bigsnake49]

This victory is nothing. Apple has not really dragged out the touch gestures patents yet. Those will shut down the whole ecosystem. Samsung should just license the patents at $30/phone and give Apple major discounts on components. They might want to start producing a lot more WP8 phones.