Apple Accuses Samsung's Version of Android and the Galaxy Note 10.1 of Infringing Patents

[Evoken]

Originally Posted by lordofthereef

This is getting to a point that I don't think I will keep buying Apple products if it continues. [...] I am going to give my money to companies that innovate, rather than litigate.

Originally Posted by lordofthereef

It's important to know who the company you support is and what they stand for rather than just throwing your money at them for shiny new toys.

Well put, you and me both. Apple acting like a spoiled brat with all these lawsuits while at the same time failing to innovate and deliver with their latest products has really turned me off from the company to some degree.

I mean, I love my Mac and I don't ever see myself switching to Windows or Linux. I have been using Apple's computers for more than 15 years and I have always been a very satisfied and happy Apple customer/fan. But over the last year or so? Not so much, not pleased at all with the direction the company is heading and how it has been handling things. The whole lawsuits and litigation nonsense (which definitely has to stop) has been a big turn off for me and I no longer see the company in such a positive light as I did before.

I really, really hope that things turn around for the better.

[cclloyd]

[yusukeaoki]

I just think we need to take Samsung down for good so they wont come up with these crap.

[roxxette]

Originally Posted by cclloyd9785

Attachment 375576

[Porco]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

No, because you're not depriving the patent holder of anything. You're copying his idea.

It's a similar argument pirates make to justify downloading movies and music, but it's different in the sense that you can't immediately take an idea and implement it into your own products. Once that first mover product is on the market with a brand new, innovative idea, it enjoys a period of exclusivity.

Plus, someone else using your idea isn't guaranteed to lose you money. Apple is the perfect example once again, because the company has grown and become more profitable over the last 10 years, despite everyone allegedly "stealing" their ideas.

It's nothing at all like theft. It's patent infringement. And patent infringement is patent infringement. Nothing more or less. Do you think Apple stole from Creative when they released the iPod? No. They infringed on their patent.

Patents are not copyrights. And the infringement of the two things are different. I would agree calling most copyright infringement 'stealing' or 'theft' is technically wrong and sometimes a little hyperbolic.

With patents though, although not physical items, they might as well be, because they are exclusive and can't be duplicated like MP3s or movie downloads. Only one party can hold the patent (unless it's part of an organised group or agreement). So I think it is a lot more like physical stealing or theft.

Apple should absolutely be held to account when they infringe patents too, or else they shouldn't expect to be able to protect their own.

[F123D]

If apple spent just half the effort they put into these lawsuits into developing iOS, there wouldn't even be any competition. Unfortunately, they don't, and iOS has become dull and stale.





When you think outside the box, more people than you think.




Mine should be arriving by the end of the week.

[JGowan]

Originally Posted by samcraig

They don't owe Apple a dime yet.

And let's try and avoid being racist. Shall we?

How was that racist? There was no slur. Sumsung is a Korean and to Apple, they have been quite pesky. There are plenty of amazing Koreans that Apple has no problem with. This set of Koreans isn't one of them. Lets not sling racist mud without really looking at context, shall we?

[Porco]

Originally Posted by F123D

If apple spent just half the effort they put into these lawsuits into developing iOS, there wouldn't even be any competition.

That sounds like it might be true. But when you think about it some more, do you really think their staff of lawyers, who they would have either way, are also programmers and engineers in their spare time? Or do you think Apple's programmers and engineers are all working on law suits instead of future products?

And don't you think that Apple's work has, on some level, helped out Samsung design everything that leads up to that Note III? (Enjoy it btw, nice purchase!) And if so, isn't that a bit of an advantage to Samsung? And surely at some point Apple should have the right to say 'hang on, more and more people are liking our rivals' products, which have got better faster than ours because they used our ideas...'?

I'm not saying Apple should automatically win any time they feel copied. Not all their suits will have merit. All I'm saying is they, and everyone else, should have the right to defend the ideas they believe they own an exclusive right to use. Even if you disagree, I go back to my earlier point that Apple are just working within the system they find themselves in, and if you don't patents no amount of criticism of Apple will change that system.

[iChrist]

Originally Posted by slrandall

Please don't put these on the front page anymore.

PEOPLE! YES, good post.

Take a stand. Stop clicking and commenting on these awful posts by Arn. Then he will get the picture!

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by Porco

Patents are not copyrights. And the infringement of the two things are different. I would agree calling most copyright infringement 'stealing' or 'theft' is technically wrong and sometimes a little hyperbolic.

With patents though, although not physical items, they might as well be, because they are exclusive and can't be duplicated like MP3s or movie downloads. Only one party can hold the patent (unless it's part of an organised group or agreement). So I think it is a lot more like physical stealing or theft.

Apple should absolutely be held to account when they infringe patents too, or else they shouldn't expect to be able to protect their own.

I'd say both of them do come down to an abstract definition of ownership, as neither one of them are actual physical products. Patents are ideas. Clever and innovative ways of doing things. When the system works, the patent holder is allowed exclusive right to their implementation of an idea. If someone finds a way to do something better than what's defined in your patent, then they're not infringing. They've innovated upon your patent, which is a process the system fosters.

When it doesn't work, people are allowed to patent some random vague thing that's ill defined, and basically gives them exclusive right to the idea in its entirety. If you look at some of these software patents, you'll see it's not just the process they have the rights to, but the end results as well. Back in the day, that was verboten in patent law. Not so much now, unfortunately.

Case in point, the Apple vs. Creative lawsuit. Apple lost, and had to fork over half a billion for....what? The UI. And what was the UI like on the old Creative Zen and original iPods? A stack of alphabetized monochrome words you sorted through. It was a text based file system, basically. Apple couldn't make a different implementation of a text based file system for MP3 players, because Creative owned the exclusive rights to the concept.

That's a bit dumb, isn't it? Apple could've used an entirely different backend to produce their file system. Their implementation likely had nothing in common with Creative's. Yet because the end results were the same, they were found guilty of infringement.

But despite all that, does their infringement mean Apple stole? No. It was a vague idea to begin with, and really the only way to organize a music folder for a portable device at the time. They did what they could with what they had. Theft had nothing to do with it. What they did was copy and improve upon the idea, which didn't deprive Creative of anything.

Patent infringement isn't theft.

[JGowan]

Originally Posted by genovelle

It's like your old bicycle you have in the garage. You haven't rode in years, but does that make it any less your bike? If the next door neighbor just came and moved it to his garage while you were at work would be happy about it?

great F-in' analogy!

[Lancer]

I get were Apple is coming from, if someone steals your ideas then they should pay.
I just wish they would work together and innovate their products so we all benefit.

[Jibbajabba]

Originally Posted by PsychoLogicXen

Scheduled to start in 2014?! I really don't want to hear about this case for another 1.5-2 years before it even starts.

Oh you will .... you really will

----------

Originally Posted by iChrist

PEOPLE! YES, good post.

Take a stand. Stop clicking and commenting on these awful posts by Arn. Then he will get the picture!

That's the problem. Some nonsense news get 100s of posts. Even if half of them just say they are annoyed about them - Arns mission is done - increased post count and rating. Who cares about the value of the posts. Quantity vs. quality and all that

[george-brooks]

Oh god, not again.

[adder7712]

Originally Posted by yusukeaoki

I just think we need to take Samsung down for good so they wont come up with these crap.

Good luck taking down a massive conglomerate that produces more than consumer electronics.

[Oletros]

Lawyers must be very happy, they're earning a lot of money

[iLLUMI]

For goodness sake Apple, just buy out Samsung already. Heh heh!

[Karmakamilleon]

Apple is not going after Samsung cuz of their patents, they want to drive Samsung to the ground because they are a big competitor doing very well in the android market. Apple wants to drive them out of business.

[Oletros]

Originally Posted by iLLUMI

For goodness sake Apple, just buy out Samsung already. Heh heh!

And Google

[JonyHolt]

Originally Posted by orestes1984

Appleis looking like SCO.

Please enlighten me, Im not sure what SCO is.

[dai.hop]

Originally Posted by samcraig

They don't owe Apple a dime yet.

And let's try and avoid being racist. Shall we?

Interesting. What was racist about that comment?

[flameproof]

Originally Posted by Porco

Like stealing, like theft, is stealing, is theft... both are just a way to describe someone taking something someone else has and not pay them for it.

No. When I steal from you then you are minus 1 item. To infringe a copyright or patent is an infringement, but not theft.

[roxxette]

Originally Posted by JonyHolt

Please enlighten me, Im not sure what SCO is.

Smoking crack operation ?

[Porco]

Originally Posted by flameproof

No. When I steal from you then you are minus 1 item. To infringe a copyright or patent is an infringement, but not theft.

*sigh* Again, simile and metaphor, not literally.

A patent is not a physical object, but when someone infringes it, it destroys the very essence of what a patent is. Unless the patent is defended, it makes the patent meaningless, and removes the protection you had. That protection is the 1 'item' you are minus! So in that way it is LIKE stealing, which is why one might say it IS stealing, metaphorically. Not literally!!

Whereas when you infringe copyright with say, an illegally downloaded MP3, you have a copy, but the copyright holder doesn't materially lose their copyright, even if they don't get to sue every single infringer. They are not minus 1 item, like you say.

[oldwatery]

1983...Apple fights Big Brother!
2013...Apple IS big Brother!