Apple and Samsung CEOs to Meet for Court-Moderated Settlement Talks over Patent Issues

KnightWRX · Apr 18, 2012

Michael Scrip said:
You're right... Apple is certainly guilty of borrowing/copying/stealing.

And so is everyone else.

The difference is, everyone else doesn't make a big deal about it. Apple cries foul and plays victim. No one would give a damn about Apple copying other's design if Apple wouldn't make such a mess about copying. Talk about "Do as I say, not as I do".

*LTD* · Apr 18, 2012

KnightWRX said:
The difference is, everyone else doesn't make a big deal about it.

Because most of the *patent muscle* is in Apple's portfolio.

Apple *has* weapons to use. The others don't. Why? Apple's policy from Day 1 has been to patent everything and anything possible related to what they were doing.

So Apple *can* make a big deal about it . . . because they *can.* Period. The result? Thanks to Apple's patent muscle, you still have to go to Apple to get an Apple-like experience. Brand + ecosystem is protected. PATENTS BEFORE LICENSING. Damn smart, and one of the reasons Apple is in the position they're in today. Because they bothered to VALUE what they were doing and went all-out to protect it.

Thats why all the great Apple gear we enjoy so much today is so well-differentiated. That's why you don't get that kind of User Experience anywhere else. Apple didn't sell out to the highest bidder.

KnightWRX said:
Apple cries foul and plays victim.

Be thankful they always did, and still do. Apple has always been litigious. Otherwise you'd still be stuck playing snakes on some Dell brick masquerading as a PDA.

And if YOU were Apple, what would YOU do? The obvious answer is, within the limits of the law, using every tool at your disposal, you'd squeeze your competition as hard as possible. Ideally, you don't want *any* competition. If you run a business, *not* wanting to become the sole supplier means you should be spending your time in a mental ward, rather than behind a desk in that corner office. Apple is using all their tools (the tools others apparently *don't* have or are ignored because they sold out for money) to protect their brand, their market position, and the integrity of their platform.

All this stuff, everything I just posted, should be OBVIOUS to even the casual observer. Unfortunately, it isn't.

aerok · Apr 18, 2012

*LTD* said:
Be thankful they always did, and still do. Apple has always been litigious. Otherwise you'd still be stuck playing snakes on some Dell brick masquerading as a PDA.

Because without Apple, technology would stop advancing and we'd be stuck with Windows Mobile and BB OS...

It was thanks to Apple, phones have color displays

It was thanks to Apple, SMS is viewed in threaded conversations

It was thanks to Apple, wireless bluetooth headsets were invented

It was thanks to Apple, we have 3G data and not stuck on Edge or EVDO

You're right, without Apple, we'd still be using brick phones that can't send text messages. Because without them, phone technology does not progress.

Sarcasm much intented

ShiftyPig · Apr 18, 2012

*LTD* said:
Because most of the *patent muscle* is in Apple's portfolio.

Apple *has* weapons to use. The others don't. Why? Apple's policy from Day 1 has been to patent everything and anything possible related to what they were doing.

Bro, Apple's patent portfolio is as weak as your ramblings on here:

Apple doesn't patent actual processes - it patents a wishlist of characteristics. The problem for Apple - especially since it's the view of the judge presiding over the case - is that you can't patent functionality. The only reason Apple hasn't received rejection after rejection from the USPTO is that it's a lot easier to accept an application than it is to reject it. Accepting takes a rubber stamp, rejecting requires an in depth report as to why it was rejected.

*LTD* · Apr 18, 2012

ShiftyPig said:
Bro, Apple's patent portfolio is as weak as your ramblings on here:

Image

Apple doesn't patent actual processes - it patents a wishlist of characteristics. The problem for Apple - especially since it's the view of the judge presiding over the case - is that you can't patent functionality. The only reason Apple hasn't received rejection after rejection from the USPTO is that it's a lot easier to accept an application than it is to reject it. Accepting takes a rubber stamp, rejecting requires an in depth report as to why it was rejected.

It makes absolutely no difference. Apple fights for the integrity of their product, while the competition sells out through licensing.

You can have your undifferentiated Dell smartphone that as nothing more than a redundancy:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/29/dell-gives-up-on-u-s-smartphone-sales/, OR you can have your iPhone, that is the product of a near-obsessive commitment to protect brand and product integrity. That commitment necessarily involves litigation.

The competition are sell-outs. Nothing more.

sha4000 · Apr 18, 2012

Please just take a time out for a second. Apple obviously is not the only company that knows how to innovate or they would have the market cornered and they would win all these lawsuits hands down. While I appreciate what they do and would not move away from the Mac platform unless circumstances dictate otherwise I see all these lawsuits as a distraction. They have etched their place in the market place in stone and I don't really see any of the current players doing anything to change that anytime soon. I don"t own an Iphone bcuz sprint just got it last year but i wouldn't even get one now bcuz I have become so used to android and actually find it sexier and easier to use than an iphone. I would be giving up too much going to an iphone and I'm not willing to do that just yet. Now if they increased the screen size and made it more customizable i might think about it. And yes I have played around with my friends iphones and was not really that impressed. There fixed

Michael Scrip · Apr 18, 2012

AaronEdwards said:
Apple TV.

Image

WD TV Mini.

Image

Edit: just to make my point clear here. The WD TV Mini predates the 2nd Gen Apple TV.

Edit2: The dimension are as follows (in inches):
WD TV Mini: 3.6*3.6*0.8
2nd and 3rd Gen Apple TV: 3.9*3.9*0.9

Thank you for proving my point. Like I said... everybody copies everybody else. We can find plenty of examples.

I'll see your Western Digital... and raise you an Asus and a Lenovo:

----------

tshrimp said:
Wow. If you removed the line on the mouse pad and replaced the flying windows key I would not be able to tell the difference.

I know!

Out of the hundreds of laptop designs we've seen over the years.... why HP chose this one is a mystery...

Renzatic · Apr 18, 2012

Michael Scrip said:
I know!

Out of the hundreds of laptop designs we've seen over the years.... why HP chose this one is a mystery...

olol, everyone copies Apple. Lets get on a messageboard and talk about how stupid every computer company but Apple is.

smoledman · Apr 18, 2012

Michael Scrip said:
I know!

Out of the hundreds of laptop designs we've seen over the years.... why HP chose this one is a mystery...

One caveat - Apple copies designs that never sold well. Apple's designs get copied after a major hit(iPhone, iPad, Mac Air).

brdeveloper · Apr 18, 2012

tbrinkma said:
The 'supposed iPhone 5 prototypes':
1) are fan-made mock-ups of what they think it will look like, and haven't changed since the *last* round if 'iPhone 5' speculation (which turned out to be the iPhone 4s).
2) existed *before* the Galaxy SII.

Just thought I'd point that out.

Regarding (2): Did it existed before Galaxy SII have been launched or prior to Galaxy SII's conception?

KnightWRX · Apr 18, 2012

Michael Scrip said:
Thank you for proving my point. Like I said... everybody copies everybody else. We can find plenty of examples.

I'll see your Western Digital... and raise you an Asus and a Lenovo:

But again, only Apple plays victim. And thus it's normal that people point out Apple's own "inspirations", because they are crying foul when they also have their hand in the cookie jar.

If Asus or Lenovo were crying foul about "copying", then they would also get singled out. They don't. Nor does HP or Dell or Samsung.

brdeveloper · Apr 18, 2012

KnightWRX said:
But again, only Apple plays victim. And thus it's normal that people point out Apple's own "inspirations", because they are crying foul when they also have their hand in the cookie jar.

If Asus or Lenovo were crying foul about "copying", then they would also get singled out. They don't. Nor does HP or Dell or Samsung.

Apple copied IBM (now Lenovo) because these days they use mostly PC architecture (Intel x86 instruction set). Also, they copied BSD stuff when created OSX. Let me see what more... There is a bunch of GPL apps installed by default in OSX directly ported from the Unix world. This accusation is harder to make against MS Windows. Doesn't Apple ever copy stuff?

Rodimus Prime · Apr 18, 2012

*LTD* said:
Because most of the *patent muscle* is in Apple's portfolio.

Apple *has* weapons to use. The others don't. Why? Apple's policy from Day 1 has been to patent everything and anything possible related to what they were doing.

So Apple *can* make a big deal about it . . . because they *can.* Period. The result? Thanks to Apple's patent muscle, you still have to go to Apple to get an Apple-like experience. Brand + ecosystem is protected. PATENTS BEFORE LICENSING. Damn smart, and one of the reasons Apple is in the position they're in today. Because they bothered to VALUE what they were doing and went all-out to protect it.

Thats why all the great Apple gear we enjoy so much today is so well-differentiated. That's why you don't get that kind of User Experience anywhere else. Apple didn't sell out to the highest bidder.

You mean the crapents that should never of been granted then yes. Apple has been having most of the patents thrown out, declared invalid, or not violating.

They only win in places that have VERY VERY lose guidelines for granting an injunction.

Come on a patent on a black flat slab or slide to unlock are ones that should of NEVER been granted in the first place. Those are great examples of craptents.

KnightWRX · Apr 18, 2012

brdeveloper said:
Apple copied IBM (now Lenovo) because these days they use mostly PC architecture (Intel x86 instruction set). Also, they copied BSD stuff when created OSX. Let me see what more... There is a bunch of GPL apps installed by default in OSX directly ported from the Unix world. This accusation is harder to make against MS Windows. Doesn't Apple ever copy stuff?

Uh ? None of that stuff is copying. They had licenses for the code in question, or in the PC architecture, it's just open and sold by Intel to anyone with money to purchases mass quantities of CPUs...

What are you even on about ?

Limboistik · Apr 18, 2012

Stop feeding the trolls.

vice-versa · Apr 18, 2012

Why do I get the inclination that a lot of Apple fans are mentally ill in one way or another?

It's like they always want to argue and paranoid that people are copying Apple. Paranoia, conspiracy theories, anger, etc etc.

You don't see any LG fanboys complaining about how Apple copied them.

Seriously, every review I read or videos I see on youtube, there is always a bunch of Apple maniacs crying about something.

2IS · Apr 18, 2012

Thunderhawks said:
Mattie Num Nums said:

Settle so that innovation can move forward. Apple hasn't had anything neck breaking in a while.

Looking forward to your innovations.
Just advertise them here and we'll all buy immediately!

Click to expand...

It's not his job to innovate, he isn't the one selling products, Apple is. By that same token, anyone who doesn't know how to cook has no right to say what food tastes and does not taste good and anyone who's not a game developer, can't say a game sucks. I could go on, but hopefully you get the point.

Think first, post second.

brdeveloper · Apr 18, 2012

KnightWRX said:
Uh ? None of that stuff is copying. They had licenses for the code in question, or in the PC architecture, it's just open and sold by Intel to anyone with money to purchases mass quantities of CPUs...

What are you even on about ?

Hmmm... ok... so licensed copies aren't copies.

314631 · Apr 18, 2012

Apple must never settle with any of these companies catering to the fandroid generation. Apple must protect its innovation and IP by taking the fight to the likes of Samsung every which way. I'm very disturbed by these reports of mediation.

Michael Scrip · Apr 18, 2012

KnightWRX said:
But again, only Apple plays victim. And thus it's normal that people point out Apple's own "inspirations", because they are crying foul when they also have their hand in the cookie jar.

If Asus or Lenovo were crying foul about "copying", then they would also get singled out. They don't. Nor does HP or Dell or Samsung.

Of course we're gonna point it out. It's a little obvious... don't ya think?

Apple only makes 2 laptop styles... but there are a hundred other laptops that look completely different.

If you're gonna vilify Apple for copying... why don't you also vilify another company when they copy too?

haruhiko · Apr 18, 2012

Samsung's mobile phone business is too big to be killed now. Most likely the court will only award damages to Apple or ask Samsung to pay licence fees... but not injunction. So what's the point of continuing the litigation if Samsung agrees to pay anyway?

If Apple thinks that Samsung copied them, they should've started much earlier, but they failed to realize the real enemy (they sued the wrong guy HTC..... OMG) that is Samsung and let them surpass in sales (of tens of smartphone all together vs iPhone). Steve or many people may want a thermonuclear war, but it is not very practical. I hope that the settlement will come with a big payment from Samsung though.

wikus · Apr 19, 2012

AaronEdwards said:
Apple TV.

Image

WD TV Mini.

Image

Edit: just to make my point clear here. The WD TV Mini predates the 2nd Gen Apple TV.

Edit2: The dimension are as follows (in inches):
WD TV Mini: 3.6*3.6*0.8
2nd and 3rd Gen Apple TV: 3.9*3.9*0.9

Theyre both ugly.

Boxee Box has the superior design;

And unlike Apple TV, it plays MKV, X264 and all other standard formats the rest of the world is using.

KnightWRX · Apr 19, 2012

brdeveloper said:
Hmmm... ok... so licensed copies aren't copies.

Not in the sense of what is being discussed here... we're talking design "inspiration" for hardware, you're talking about using open source software and open architectures...

Did you really not understand what was at issue here ?

----------

Michael Scrip said:
Of course we're gonna point it out. It's a little obvious... don't ya think?

Apple only makes 2 laptop styles... but there are a hundred other laptops that look completely different.

If you're gonna vilify Apple for copying... why don't you also vilify another company when they copy too?

Because again only Apple plays victim. That's thrice now I've pointed out this little detail.

Michael Scrip · Apr 19, 2012

KnightWRX said:
Because again only Apple plays victim. That's thrice now I've pointed out this little detail.

I don't understand how Apple is "playing victim" here.

Apple isn't suing them saying "OMG they copied our laptops".

But I'm pointing out that it's a little pathetic that ASUS and HP can't seem to come up with a different way to make some of their laptops.

For years these companies have made hundreds of laptop designs.

But lately they've run out of ideas... and making laptops that look strikingly similar to what Apple is doing. That's just my opinion, mind you.

Lemme ask you... what's the point where the Zenbook is considered to be "inspired" by the Macbook Air... or when it's straight up laziness in design?

Did Apple just happen to luck onto the greatest design ever? Is there nothing else Asus could have done?

MacBook-Air-Faces-Serious-Challenge-from-Asus-Zenbook-Ultrabook.jpg

KnightWRX · Apr 19, 2012

Michael Scrip said:
I don't understand how Apple is "playing victim" here.

Apple isn't suing them saying "OMG they copied our laptops".

No, but they are suing people saying "OMG they copied our smartphone/tablet". Discussion over.

Apple and Samsung CEOs to Meet for Court-Moderated Settlement Talks over Patent Issues

macrumors Pentium

macrumors G4

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors G4

macrumors regular

macrumors 604

Suspended

macrumors 68000

macrumors 68030

macrumors Pentium

macrumors 68030

macrumors G4

macrumors Pentium

macrumors regular

macrumors member

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68030

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 604

macrumors 604

macrumors 68000

macrumors Pentium

macrumors 604

macrumors Pentium

Our Staff