Apple's patent claims vs. Samsung.

Kevin said:
Yes. ;)
The funny part about Apple's suit against Samsung is that as part of Apple's defense against Samsung in their countersuit Apple is claiming the patent is for an industry standard. Do as they say, not as they do.
Click to expand...

:LOL: It's funny because it was that post that reminded me of the shelley owns refrigerator vs apple lawsuit. :ROFLMAO:

Did i mention about the uk commercial? big headphones? thin ipad? Might have been the other "Apple" related thread. *ponders* #extrememadness #thinipadchunkyheadphones
 
Kevin said:
Yes. ;)
The funny part about Apple's suit against Samsung is that as part of Apple's defense against Samsung in their countersuit Apple is claiming the patent is for an industry standard. Do as they say, not as they do.
Click to expand...

The patents that Motorola and Samsung using are an industry standard, and are licensed under FRAND terms. The thing is, Apple never licensed these patents, and have sold millions of devices that infringe the patents both companies hold. Neither Motorola or Samsung made issue until after April starting being a patent ******* (Different from a patent troll).

What I also find funny is, most of the innovations (Like adding a proximity sensor to the phone) were done back in the late 90's by Japanese cell phone companies. The only innovation (And it is stretching it to call it that) is that they put things from a lot of different devices and technologies together, but nothing was actually originally done by them.

Shelley said:
:LOL: It's funny because it was that post that reminded me of the shelley owns refrigerator vs apple lawsuit. :ROFLMAO:

Did i mention about the uk commercial? big headphones? thin ipad? Might have been the other "Apple" related thread. *ponders* #extrememadness #thinipadchunkyheadphones
Click to expand...

Big headphones are the hipster way. About 98% of them consider themselves audiophiles, but can't tell the difference between the horrible iTunes quality music, and pure flac quality.
 
KOH for president.
apple.is.smoking.crack.webp

article.
 
OK ...
Here's an *OBVIOUS* rip off.
Everyone know Febreeze.
There is a new thing Lysol Mist.

It's gotta be the same damn thing.
Will Febreeze sue Lysol Mist ?

lysol.fabric.mist.febreeze.rip.off.webp
 
Garamond said:
EXsNr.jpg


I'll let the image speak for itself.
Click to expand...

Remove the cosmetic look and you can safely bet this applies to Apple also speaking of the guts hardware that resides inside. Plus, and I could be wrong (in the way my eyes deceive me) I have a few PDAs one of which is an ipaq see where i'm going with that? :rolleyes:

Once mobile owners buy into the fact that apple are not really inventors then we have made a step forward. But hey *holds hand up* let's ignore what is truth it does seem to be trending awfully atm. *put's tin foil hat back on*
 
Arty said:
It was released in 2008, not 7, more than a year after iPhone was announced.
Click to expand...
Yeah, saw I messed up the dates, could not find the phone I was looking for. It would be easier to just pick some phones from HTC from 2006, they also looked pretty much the same. Point is, Touch phones have had that basic shape since their conception, more or less.
 
Garamond said:
EXsNr.jpg


I'll let the image speak for itself.
Click to expand...
Every image in the first post were picked for how different they are from the iPhone. None of the phones that show the same form factor, or show a progression towards the Galaxy S, Galaxy S II or Galaxy S III are shown. Samsung, along with Sony Ericsson and Motorola use to play with form factors a lot in the past, but it's cheaper and more lucrative to choose form factors that fit modern design aesthetics.

Apple didn't create the form factor they use for the iPhone. The design of the iPhone can also be said to be copied from the LG Prada (KE850: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada), which won an award in September of 2006, and was officially announced and previewed in December of 2006, a month before the first iPhone.

The majority of phones Apple has shown to discredit Samsung are feature phones, which have a form factor of QWERTY keyboard (Either Blackberry style, or sliders), or were flip phones. The majority of their smartphones (Many which share similar design trends to the iPhone) are left out of the images Apple chose to preview.

I won't deny that the Galaxy S was inspired by the iPhone, but Apple should not be able to claim a rounded rectangle, minimal bezel, the color black and whatever else they think they came up with as part of their trademark look.

The things that should be questioned, are UX Behavior, icon similarities and general design similarities. The issue with this is the various UX behaviors used by Apple aren't unique, and generally have prior art (Kinect scrolling, universal search, seriously?), the icons are things that are common in iconography as people relate them directly to the action they represent, and the design similarities aren't all that similar due to less skueomorphism used by Samsung.

Samsung should be punished for the Galaxy S, however Apple should have the majority of their patents invalidated due to them being broad and infringing prior art.
 
"For determining whether the devices infringe Apple's design patents or dilute its trade dress—the overall appearance of the device—a key issue is whether consumers could confuse Samsung and Apple products. To prove they could, Apple introduced a report from Best Buy Co. BBY +1.64% that mentions people returning Samsung's Galaxy Tab because they had been looking for an iPad."

Ummm ... Reality to Apple: this all but proves Samsung isn't appreciably harming iPad sales .... as people could tell the difference and went back to get the iPad. ​


"The two women and seven men—a group that includes a social worker, an engineer and an unemployed videogame enthusiast—began deliberating Wednesday after a more than three-week trial here. "

I hope the techy videogamer sees through Apple's sob story.​

It's pretty obvious Samsung's designs mimic the iphone. But Apple is crushing the competition and I think a company who is the richest company of all time should stop whining.
 
Digital Doctor said:
It's pretty obvious Samsung's designs mimic the iphone.
Click to expand...
It is an interesting case. The nature of technology is, in the main, derivative. This is good as new generations build and improve on what went before.

But when does something cease to be used as a development springboard and start to resemble a knockoff?

I have been involved in some successful ventures over the years, to the point that competition stopped bothering to innovate and simply resorted to doing the same thing. Yes, I can sleep well at night knowing my group was the originator, but I believe such situations slowly stifle an industry.

Apple do some amazing things, but their motivator was to leave the waters of bankruptcy and convince people that Apple was not some fringe computing platform for artists or geeks. But success has also breed an attitude of "we are amazing, this is what we offer, worship and adore". I see the same thing with the FaceBook UI. "We have almost 1/7th of the world's population on here, what are you going to do, use Google+ ?"

Well I do use Google+ and while I love my iPhone would like even more to be presented with very different and ideally better options. It would make <insert name of dominant company> work harder for my money and ensure they continue to provide choice, instead of their current path of homogenization with every user having the same looking OS, on the same device.

And I don't think that scenario can happen if the main competition simply says "Apple has solved problem X, let's just copy it and aim for market share".
 
theArchitect said:
I love my iPhone would like even more to be presented with very different and ideally better options. ... and I don't think that scenario can happen if the main competition simply says "Apple has solved problem X, let's just copy it and aim for market share".
Click to expand...
I think it will. Without the Samsung Galaxy X3 the iPhone has no legit competition. Industries dominated by one major player (ie. Microsoft in Operating Systems) are what stifle innovation. Apple crying fowl when they are dominating an industry really rings hollow to me. Apple suing someone for "Being too much like us" is probably good PR for Apple as it reinforces the notion they are the best and everyone is a copy.

I think a stronger Samsung is *BETTER* for innovation in the smart phone industry. Apple is the company trying to stifle innovation and competition.
 
Digital Doctor said:
...Apple crying fowl when they are dominating an industry really rings hollow to me. Apple suing someone for "Being too much like us" is probably good PR for Apple as it reinforces the notion they are the best and everyone is a copy.

I think a stronger Samsung is *BETTER* for innovation in the smart phone industry. Apple is the company trying to stifle innovation and competition.
Click to expand...
But for me this is the paradox.

By denying anyone the ability to use your ideas stifles innovation.

But also giving people carte blanche to imitate whatever they want gives an easy out and can also affect development.
 
Top Bottom