Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:46 PM   #26
avonord
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
This is like two neighbourhood restaurants. One spent days and night coming up with tasty and new dishes, and tries to cash in on the new ideas. The other restaurant keeps imitating the dish and sells them at a lower price. The residents are happy because they get a similar dish for a lower price. When the 1st chef starts complaining, the neighbours all go to the 2nd chef's defence. The ingredients have always been around, they say, so it's not a copying.

But they don't realize that after a while, the smart chef will be discouraged from creating any more new dishes because it's simply not worth the effort. And they don't realize, sometimes, it is not the one or two ingredients that make the dish tasty. It's the combination on the whole dish.
__________________
iPad Mini 2 | iPhone 6 | iPad 2 | 2011 iMac i5 3.1Ghz 8GB RAM 256GB SSD + 1TB HDD
avonord is offline   34 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:46 PM   #27
jhende7
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by rendevouspoo View Post
That's like LG suing Panasonic for putting an 'input' button on their television remote.
No, that's like LG coming up with a new and innovative method to change inputs without the need to ever touch a "button", then Samsung deciding that there just going to copy it because it's "obvious". That was their whole defense. "We copied it because it's obvious" However no one can seem to explain why they didn't do it before Apple.
jhende7 is offline   19 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:47 PM   #28
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
For me there are two issues involving the court case - but these are just my issues and obviously I'm not the judge or jury.

1) Willful copying
2) Patent validity.

I can concede that Samsung did #1 although I also think in some regards it wasn't copying but building/jumping off of Apple's (and others) designs.

But patent validity is the important one to me long term. As of now, the judge and jury decided Apple's patents are valid. If this holds true through appeals - then #1 is no contest. But if they are invalidated - then #1 loses steam as far as punishable.

I didn't watch the video (I'm at work) - but did the jury take into any consideration that some of the models aren't even on ATT and at the time - a lot of Apple's iPhones were ATT exclusive (in the USA). Or did they just assume that people WOULD have bought an iPhone had they not been "confused" by a phone on a different carrier that doesn't even carry Apple's iPhone?
samcraig is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:48 PM   #29
Blorzoga
macrumors 68020
 
Blorzoga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by rendevouspoo View Post
Good. They need to win the appeal. Consumers do too. The litigation thugs of Apple need to stop suing over petty stuff like 'pinch-to-zoom.' That's like LG suing Panasonic for putting an 'input' button on their television remote.
You mean petty stuff like pinch-to-zoom that Apple patented and is therefore entitled to license? Are you serious?
Blorzoga is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:49 PM   #30
mbh
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steviejobz View Post
Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.
This jury only had 9 members. Source
mbh is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:49 PM   #31
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandamonia View Post
So one man led a 12 man jury to agree with him because he thought he was right!

Samsung should be able to appeal this pretty easy because the more i read the more i think this whole trial was a joke.
If you read carefully, there were two jurors who did most of the discussion (one on each side). That is actually fairly common. Also, the jury had 9 members, not 12. Nothing the two jurors have said undermines their deliberations. There is no evidence of tampering or bias. In fact, the jurors have indicated that there was no "hometown bias" at work, a lot of them, including the foreman, don't own Apple products, and that there was a lot of discussion on the merits of each side's case.
KPOM is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:49 PM   #32
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by avonord View Post
This is like two neighbourhood restaurants. One spent days and night coming up with tasty and new dishes, and tries to cash in on the new ideas. The other restaurant keeps imitating the dish and sells them at a lower price. The residents are happy because they get a similar dish for a lower price. When the 1st chef starts complaining, the neighbours all go to the 2nd chef's defence. The ingredients have always been around, they say, so it's not a copying.

But they don't realize that after a while, the smart chef will be discouraged from creating any more new dishes because it's simply not worth the effort. And they don't realize, sometimes, it is not the one or two ingredients that make the dish tasty. It's the combination on the whole dish.
Happens often. And the incentive for the 1st chef is to create something continuously so the menu doesn't get stale and to continue to lure people to his or her restaurant instead.
samcraig is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:52 PM   #33
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post

I didn't watch the video (I'm at work) - but did the jury take into any consideration that some of the models aren't even on ATT and at the time - a lot of Apple's iPhones were ATT exclusive (in the USA). Or did they just assume that people WOULD have bought an iPhone had they not been "confused" by a phone on a different carrier that doesn't even carry Apple's iPhone?
They awarded 1/3 of what Apple wanted. Plus, AT&T did gain a lot of subscribers during its exclusivity period.
KPOM is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:53 PM   #34
albertc
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I didn't watch the video (I'm at work) - but did the jury take into any consideration that some of the models aren't even on ATT and at the time - a lot of Apple's iPhones were ATT exclusive (in the USA). Or did they just assume that people WOULD have bought an iPhone had they not been "confused" by a phone on a different carrier that doesn't even carry Apple's iPhone?
I think this is a great point
__________________
2011 13" MBP
iPhone 5s 16GB Silver
albertc is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:53 PM   #35
nutmac
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by rendevouspoo View Post
Good. They need to win the appeal. Consumers do too. The litigation thugs of Apple need to stop suing over petty stuff like 'pinch-to-zoom.' That's like LG suing Panasonic for putting an 'input' button on their television remote.
Pinch-to-zoom was not part of the patents that Samsung was found to be in violation.
nutmac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:56 PM   #36
JayLenochiniMac
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Sanfrakota
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjohnstone View Post
He needs to stop talking.
Every time he opens his mouth, he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.
It's bad enough the jury flat out ignored the judges orders on damages, he's now admitting to doing all but taking the role of Apple's counsel in the jury room.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steviejobz View Post
Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.
We could say the same about some of the 12 loud-mouthed jurors who acquitted OJ Simpson Was the verdict overturned as a result? No.
__________________
Home iMac 27" 2.9GHz Intel Core i5
Work iMac 24" 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme
Mobile iPad (4th gen) & iPhone 6
JayLenochiniMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:56 PM   #37
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
They awarded 1/3 of what Apple wanted. Plus, AT&T did gain a lot of subscribers during its exclusivity period.
That doesn't answer my question. But thanks. I was already aware of what is already "known"
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:56 PM   #38
TMay
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carson City, NV
Oh, and BTW, Moto agreed to FRAND licensing by Apple to be determined by German Courts for cellular SEP.

Bodes ill for all the rest of Moto's and Samsung SEP patents that they are battling Apple and MS with.

Could be that not much value will be obtained by Google $12B purchase of Motorola other than licensing fees, and those fees will almost certainly to be eclipsed by licensing fees that the OEM's have and wll have to pay on Android OS use. The end result is that Android isn't free as far as the OEM"s are concerned, and has the result of making production and sales of smartphones less viable.
TMay is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:01 PM   #39
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by jontech View Post
TOO.... MUCH..... LOGIC....


Ahh my Android head!

Nope.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	illogical.png
Views:	19
Size:	993.9 KB
ID:	354895  
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:01 PM   #40
rjohnstone
macrumors 68030
 
rjohnstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: PHX, AZ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blorzoga View Post
It's called being the foreman, genius.

No **** sherlock.
But it's not the foreman's duty to decide for the rest of the jury or to even convince the rest that his way is right.

One of the foreman's primary responsibilities:
"He or she decides how the evidence is reviewed and assures that all evidence and arguments made during the trial are considered."

With 700 questions being decided in 2 1/2 days, that means they averaged less than 2 minutes per question.
That's barely enough time for a thorough first pass let alone the final verdict.
__________________
"You can't really dust for vomit" - Nigel Tuffnel
Some Apple *****, some Android ***** and some Windows based *****.
rjohnstone is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:04 PM   #41
Mgb74
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
I wonder if the same result would have occurred if the trial was in S. Korea. Or if on neutral territory. There is a graphic going around that shows that before iPhone, Samsung smart phones were eerily similar to Blackberry's. After iPhone launched, the design switched. Coincidence?

Anyone recall the BASF commercials from the 80's & 90's? Their tag line was "we don't make your VHS tapes, we make them better.". That could be Samsung's too: "We didn't spend money or have the creative intellect to invent the iPhone, but we took a rectangle with rounded corners and made 4 home buttons instead of one. That made ours better. We gave you, the consumer, more button choices. We also didn't come up with our own operating system, we were smarter, we let someone else do that too. One model? We have 8. They all do almost the same thing, but it's more choice for you, the goat, uh er consumer. Confused? So are we. But we're better, we think."
Mgb74 is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:05 PM   #42
jhende7
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
Happens often. And the incentive for the 1st chef is to create something continuously so the menu doesn't get stale and to continue to lure people to his or her restaurant instead.
B.S The 2nd chef would never be able make the exact dish because its a lot harder to reverse engineer food then it is a visual implementation of an operating system.

Aside from that I find it hilarious that you think Apple should just let everybody copy the s*** out of their work in order to satisfy some pie in the sky holier than though idea that their moral and core value should be to continuously improve and innovate to bring the industry forward into the new age.
jhende7 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:07 PM   #43
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgb74 View Post
I wonder if the same result would have occurred if the trial was in S. Korea. Or if on neutral territory. There is a graphic going around that shows that before iPhone, Samsung smart phones were eerily similar to Blackberry's. After iPhone launched, the design switched. Coincidence?

Anyone recall the BASF commercials from the 80's & 90's? Their tag line was "we don't make your VHS tapes, we make them better.". That could be Samsung's too: "We didn't spend money or have the creative intellect to invent the iPhone, but we took a rectangle with rounded corners and made 4 home buttons instead of one. That made ours better. We gave you, the consumer, more button choices. We also didn't come up with our own operating system, we were smarter, we let someone else do that too. One model? We have 8. They all do almost the same thing, but it's more choice for you, the goat, uh er consumer. Confused? So are we. But we're better, we think."
meh - too wordy to be considered clever

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhende7 View Post
B.S The 2nd chef would never be able make the exact dish because it a lot easier to reverse engineer food then it is a visual implementation of an operating system.

Aside from that I find it hilarious that you think Apple should just let everybody copy the s*** out of their work in order to satisfy some pie in the sky holier than though idea that their moral and core value should be to continuously improve and innovate to bring the industry forward into the new age.

I never said anything you just accused me of. Take a deep breath.
samcraig is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:10 PM   #44
BC2009
macrumors 68000
 
BC2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steviejobz View Post
Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.
Man -- I sure wish Samsung had a say in jury selection. Its too bad the plaintiff gets to hand pick the jury.

/s

I'm just glad they did not select the jury from commenters on tech forums. Then we really would have had a skewed view of the evidence.
BC2009 is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:10 PM   #45
rjohnstone
macrumors 68030
 
rjohnstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: PHX, AZ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayLenochiniMac View Post
We could say the same about some of the 12 loud-mouthed jurors who acquitted OJ Simpson Was the verdict overturned as a result? No.
There were only 9 in this case. Civil cases have slightly different rules than criminal cases.

The prosecution in the OJ case is barred from trying him again. This pesky thing called double jeopardy that prevents DA's from filing the same charge over and over again until they get the verdict they want.
__________________
"You can't really dust for vomit" - Nigel Tuffnel
Some Apple *****, some Android ***** and some Windows based *****.
rjohnstone is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:12 PM   #46
pacalis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by sha4000 View Post
Said all the right things when being questioned I would think.
I think so to. Without being there I thought this decision tilted too far in Apple
s favor and I also thought that the statements the foreman made were ill advised.

However, he does seem to be a highly considered guy, and defended the worst of his prior quoted comments very clearly and very fairly. I think damages will be reduce, but overall infringement claims are going to stick.

All that as one thing, he ends with "I'm a windows guy." Lol. Yup, MS is coming up right in the middle of this.
pacalis is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:12 PM   #47
minderbinder106
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by avonord View Post
This is like two neighbourhood restaurants. One spent days and night coming up with tasty and new dishes, and tries to cash in on the new ideas. The other restaurant keeps imitating the dish and sells them at a lower price. The residents are happy because they get a similar dish for a lower price. When the 1st chef starts complaining, the neighbours all go to the 2nd chef's defence. The ingredients have always been around, they say, so it's not a copying.

But they don't realize that after a while, the smart chef will be discouraged from creating any more new dishes because it's simply not worth the effort. And they don't realize, sometimes, it is not the one or two ingredients that make the dish tasty. It's the combination on the whole dish.
Chefs do this and yet somehow restaurants still exist.
minderbinder106 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:13 PM   #48
Overg
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
While I agree with the trail results, I have to admit that the jury system in USA is ridiculous!
How can 12 uniformed people, who have no idea what so ever in technology, can decide in such trail. All they want is to go home and get over with.
Seeing this movie prove my point.
Sad justice system, really sad.
Overg is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:14 PM   #49
Ca$hflow
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London, ON
No Juror had a iPhone or samsung smartphone

I think this is really interesting. It seems to me that this created a very fair jury. Also you do realize that Apple and Samsung choose jurors. I don't understand why people think that Apple stacked the jury. In the jury selection process BOTH parties intensely question each jury member. Then Samsung and Apple must both decide unanimously yes or no to each jury member before being accepted as a juror. I'm sure Samsung lawyers knew what they were doing.
__________________
15" Unibody MacBook Pro, 3.06 GHz, 8GB RAM, 750GB HD; 20" iMac, 2.0 GHz, 2GB RAM, 250GB HD, iPad 2 64GB 3G, 64GB 3rd Gen iPod
Ca$hflow is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:14 PM   #50
pandamonia
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
If you read carefully, there were two jurors who did most of the discussion (one on each side). That is actually fairly common. Also, the jury had 9 members, not 12. Nothing the two jurors have said undermines their deliberations. There is no evidence of tampering or bias. In fact, the jurors have indicated that there was no "hometown bias" at work, a lot of them, including the foreman, don't own Apple products, and that there was a lot of discussion on the merits of each side's case.
There are a number of manufacturers near where i live and trust me there is home town bias in every industry.
pandamonia is offline   2 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Jury Finds Both Apple and Samsung Guilty of Patent Infringement, Samsung to Pay $119.6 Million, Apple to Pay $158,400 MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 609 May 23, 2014 06:53 PM
Samsung to Appeal $119M Patent Verdict as Foreman Says Apple Should Target Google Instead MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 203 May 8, 2014 01:48 PM
Apple Responds to Samsung's Request for Information on Trial Jury Foreman MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 33 Jan 16, 2013 02:07 AM
Judge Will "Consider" Questions on Jury Foreman in Samsung v. Apple Trial MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 154 Nov 27, 2012 07:36 PM
Jury Members Discuss Thought Process Behind Apple vs. Samsung Verdict MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 730 Sep 4, 2012 11:43 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:50 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC