Google Plays a Bigger Role in Latest Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit

epic-retouching · Mar 30, 2014

can't believe there are people actually defending Samsung. Anyone with a brain stem can tell that the phone looked identical minus the samsung logo. I think the only defenders are blind Apple haters who are claiming that Apple are the blind ones. Look at the evidence and tell me that the Samsung Galaxy whatever (stupid naming convention) is not the same as the iPhone3GS. Not to mention that as soon as Apple continued using this iPhone 4 design, samsung had to stop coming up with their design for the S3, S4 they all look the same as each other. It's like they are just following in Apples foot steps.

People hate on Apple for not changing their design for a few version but then no hate for Samsung sticking to the same design for their versions? BLIND Apple hate.

If I was Apple I would be suing relentlessly until I got things sorted. I don't like to have my ideas/artwork stolen and sold for profits. This is how Apple make a living. You go start working for free and have others sell the stuff you do for their benefit then come back here and tell me Samsung are not in the wrong.

PS this is Samsung suing Apple this time so stop hating on Apple for bringing this up.

Yojimbo007 · Mar 30, 2014

The main crook in the picture is google not samsung..
I alway wonder why google was not the one apple went after first !

Robert.Walter · Mar 30, 2014

sixrom said:
It's obvious.

American company

American court

Well respected American company.

There's no justice, simply victory for the ones in favour.

Sadly the longer Apple drags on with legal assaults, less time and money go towards doing innovating things.

Killed off by the intentional generation of negative energy is not in anyone's best interest. Yet it seems to validate Apples need to fight.

So Apple's victories in foreign courts are also due to favoritism? (Or maybe NSA blackmail of foreign judges?

So Apple is spending its last management calorie and last dollar on Samsung such that they are neglecting new product creation?

Seems only conspiracy and delusion remain when facts and reality are non supportive of a pro samsung opinion.

seamer · Mar 30, 2014

Is Samsung inferring that Apple was not capable of having the ideas for the patents before the patents were filed? Because, like, filing dates are vastly different to "hey, how do you think this would work?"

MrX8503 · Mar 30, 2014

Yojimbo007 said:
The main crook in the picture is google not samsung..
I alway wonder why google was not the one apple went after first !

Google gives Android away for free. That and Google has been actively changing their OS to avoid a bombshell lawsuit.

d4NjvRzf · Mar 30, 2014

kdarling said:
For example, the "universal search" is something that people have been doing for years. Whether or not Samsung infringed, all hinges on what a missing comma means, and which year dictionary is used. You might as well flip a coin.

The "universal search" patent seems like a standard exercise in object-oriented programming; treat a collection of databases as opaque objects ("heuristic modules"), call the search method of each database on the query (the specifics of which are left unspecified), and pool the results. It's something you might assign for homework in a programming class, but apparently you can no longer do so without infringing patents. Since when have programmers included a "patent" phase in their build scripts?

UKgaryb · Mar 30, 2014

Dangerous game, wasn't it reported that a good percentage of Google's ad revenue was from iOS?

All it would take is for apple to revoke all Google apps + block google ip ranges for Ad's to get one back at google.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/03/29/google_earns_80_of_its_mobile_revenue_from_ios_just_20_from_android

BvizioN · Mar 31, 2014

Yojimbo007 said:
I alway wonder why google was not the one apple went after first !

Apple goes for whoever have a device on the market that it thinks may have infringed it's patent.
Clearly Google was not the one selling these Galaxy devices.

BlueParadox · Mar 31, 2014

69Mustang said:
Not helpful at all. This is how misinformation gets spread. The thinly veiled knocks on Samsung are not convincing in an honest summary. You would have been better served by just saying "Samsung copied the s#%t out of Apple's ideas". I personally think they both need to stop this crap but that's just my opinion. No matter which company wins, it doesn't benefit us at all.

What absolute rubbish! Sure, if it was any other company other than Samsung, then I think you'd kind of have a point. But this is Samsung, one of the largest copy-cat companies in the world. They've been busted via official documents admitting to thieving the iPhone design, as well as many other Apple designs. Their "hidden" agenda is to copy, make a huge profit from the theft, get busted, go to court, get sued, appeal, delay, appeal again, and eventually pay damages which are only a fraction of the massive profits they've made from their rip-off designs (not all, but many). Like I said - any other company other than Samsung...

epic-retouching · Mar 31, 2014

sixrom said:
It's obvious.

American company

American court

Well respected American company.

There's no justice, simply victory for the ones in favour.

Sadly the longer Apple drags on with legal assaults, less time and money go towards doing innovating things.

Killed off by the intentional generation of negative energy is not in anyone's best interest. Yet it seems to validate Apples need to fight.

Sadly Samsung know it can do this and by the time they lose in court the phone in question has already been outdated twice. Scum company, I think Apple do well to take $1billion off them each time, maybe one day Samesung will develop a brain of their own and stop shameless acts.

peterdevries · Mar 31, 2014

BlueParadox said:
What absolute rubbish! Sure, if it was any other company other than Samsung, then I think you'd kind of have a point. But this is Samesung, one of the largest copy-cat companies in the world. They've been busted via official documents admitting to thieving the iPhone design, as well as many other Apple designs. Their "hidden" agenda is to copy, make a huge profit from the theft, get busted, go to court, get sued, appeal, delay, appeal again, and eventually pay damages which are only a fraction of the massive profits they've made from their rip-off designs (not all, but many). Like I said - any other company other than Scamsung...

You totally miss his point. The OP asked for a summary of THIS trial and was given a summary that was incorrect and biased. Although the points you personally bring up might have some truth in it in a broader sense (although coloring your argument with Samesung and Scamsung doesn't help your argument), it has nothing to do with this specific trial.

----------

epic-retouching said:
Sadly Samsung know it can do this and by the time they lose in court the phone in question has already been outdated twice.

That really doesn't matter. If Apple "wins" they can sue for damages inflicted on revenue like they did before.

Cyborg21 · Mar 31, 2014

sixrom said:
It's obvious.

American company

American court

Well respected American company.

There's no justice, simply victory for the ones in favour.

Sadly the longer Apple drags on with legal assaults, less time and money go towards doing innovating things.

Killed off by the intentional generation of negative energy is not in anyone's best interest. Yet it seems to validate Apples need to fight.

Umm... It's actually now Google (American) + Samsung (Korean) vs. Apple (American)

Audigy · Mar 31, 2014

People easily forgot or they are simply to young...

If you are one of those, I recommend you to have a look at what Apple did to Xerox.

Apple4everr · Mar 31, 2014

Why does Apple go after google for android pretty much copy that ios in the first place, don't get how Samsung always gutted sued and HTC and all the small companies don't get sued either, why not apple get money for ever android OS device?

Cyborg21 · Mar 31, 2014

Audigy said:
People easily forgot or they are simply to young...

If you are one of those, I recommend you to have a look at what Apple did to Xerox.

'' Apple obtained permission ahead of the Xerox PARC visit. In addition, Apple provided compensation in exchange for the various Xerox PARC ideas such as the GUI.

The Motley Fool, a financial publication of investment news and provider of investment advisory services, says this about the real story of Apple and PARC:

Xerox could have owned the PC revolution, but instead it sat on the technology for years. Then, in exchange for the opportunity to invest in a hot new pre-IPO start-up called Apple, the Xerox PARC commandos were forced under protest to give Apples engineers a tour and a demonstration of their work. The result was the Apple Macintosh, which Microsoft later copied to create Windows. ''

BlueParadox · Mar 31, 2014

Audigy said:
People easily forgot or they are simply to young...

If you are one of those, I recommend you to have a look at what Apple did to Xerox.

Wrong - there's still time to do a bit of research and enlighten yourself to the facts. Recommend you read the post 2 or so on from your comment and understand the relationship between Apple & Xerox. There's a healthy partnership between these two; age irrelevant.

apolloa · Mar 31, 2014

Jess13 said:
Apple has been demolishing Scamsung both in US courts and other nations' courts as well.

----------

I'm honestly tired of dissing Scamsung ⎯ separate from my spelling of the company name ⎯ but for any Scamsung defenders, I have this for you:

September 2013

Apple iPhone 5s: Gold, with Home button fingerprint scanner

Half a year later

Scamsung S5: Gold, with home button fingerprint scanner

Scamsung® We try to copy Apple™

Sigh... I see this thread will go like all the rest full of hypocrites.

Motorola put the finger print scanner idea on a phone a couple of years back and Nokia have made a gold phone years ago, I think even before the first iPhone, so Apple has also copied all of them.

Samsung copied the iPhone for the first and part of the second Galaxy phones, and they have copied the idea of locating the finger print scanner in the home button.

SlCKB0Y · Mar 31, 2014

UKgaryb said:
All it would take is for apple to revoke all Google apps + block google ip ranges for Ad's to get one back at google.

Because not having Google services on iOS would seriously hurt Apple.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/03/29/google_earns_80_of_its_mobile_revenue_from_ios_just_20_from_android

Appleinsider - the moderate, unbiased, voice of reason for all things Apple.

----------

BlueParadox said:
Recommend you read the post 2 or so on from your comment and understand the relationship between Apple & Xerox. There's a healthy partnership between these two; age irrelevant.

Hhahaha. You're kidding right? The short sighted Xerox execs at HQ had no idea of the significance of the PARC innovations, took the Apple shares and Apple absolutely looted PARC. Xerox have been kicking themselves ever since they first saw the Macintosh.

kdarling · Mar 31, 2014

epic-retouching said:
can't believe there are people actually defending Samsung. Anyone with a brain stem can tell that the phone looked identical minus the samsung logo.

Wrong thread. This trial is NOT about look or feel, but about some ridiculously simple software patents presented by both sides.

PS this is Samsung suing Apple this time so stop hating on Apple for bringing this up.

Apple began this one by suing Samsung in Feb 2012. Here is the original complaint. Samsung countersued.

d4NjvRzf said:
The "universal search" patent seems like a standard exercise in object-oriented programming; treat a collection of databases as opaque objects ("heuristic modules"), call the search method of each database on the query (the specifics of which are left unspecified), and pool the results. It's something you might assign for homework in a programming class, but apparently you can no longer do so without infringing patents. Since when have programmers included a "patent" phase in their build scripts?

Nice to see an intelligent comment. Yes, students in an OO class would come up with the same methods Apple managed to get a patent on.

As I mentioned, infringement here comes down to how you read it.

That patent's claims require that a search term goes to " ... to a plurality of heuristic modules, wherein: each heuristic module corresponds to a respective area of search and employs a different, predetermined heuristic algorithm corresponding to said respective area to search the area ....".

I.e. each heuristic module employs a different algorithm.

However, the Nexus universal search in question, does NOT employ a plurality of modules with each one using a different algorithm... which is why a panel of three judges already commented that, as the patent was written, the claims were probably not infringed.

Apple's counterargument was that they didn't mean it that way; that instead the "each" and "different" weren't meant to be considered together. Trouble is, it doesn't easily read that way to anyone.

--

This is not a trial about right or wrong, and most especially it is not about any IP theft. It's about lawyers mincing words to make money for themselves and their clients.

apolloa · Mar 31, 2014

kdarling said:
Wrong thread. This trial is NOT about look or feel, but about some ridiculously simple software patents presented by both sides.

Again, no. Apple began this one by suing Samsung in Feb 2012. Here is the original complaint. Samsung countersued.

Nice to see an intelligent comment. Yes, students in an OO class would come up with the same methods Apple managed to get a patent on.

As I mentioned, infringement here comes down to how you read it.

That patent's claims require that a search term goes to " ... to a plurality of heuristic modules, wherein: each heuristic module corresponds to a respective area of search and employs a different, predetermined heuristic algorithm corresponding to said respective area to search the area ....".

I.e. each heuristic module employs a different algorithm.

However, the Nexus universal search in question, does NOT employ a plurality of modules with each one using a different algorithm... which is why a panel of three judges already commented that, as the patent was written, the claims were probably not infringed.

Apple's counterargument was that they didn't mean it that way; that instead the "each" and "different" weren't meant to be considered together. Trouble is, it doesn't easily read that way to anyone.

So how the hell did Apple get a patent on something that is programming 1 O 1? If it's something used by everyone, why are they not suing HTC or Nokia etc? Or is this just what it is, Apple trying again to stop the Samsung competition through suing and blocking sales.

BvizioN · Mar 31, 2014

apolloa said:
Samsung copied the iPhone for the first and part of the second Galaxy phones, and they have copied the idea of locating the finger print scanner in the home button.

You don't seriously think it was just a coincidence that S5 got fingering scanner just after the 5S, do you?

However I wouldn't go that far and say they did copy it. They did implement it their own way (apart from the location bit)

Traisoon · Mar 31, 2014

Samsung = Corruption

kdarling · Mar 31, 2014

apolloa said:
... they have copied the idea of locating the finger print scanner in the home button.

A couple of notes:

1) The Galaxy fingerprint scanner is at the bottom of the display, not in the home button.

2) Apple did not invent the idea of putting it in the home button. It had already been suggested by at least one scanner supplier beforehand, along with other possible locations such as the power button.

koruki · Mar 31, 2014

apolloa said:
Sigh... I see this thread will go like all the rest full of hypocrites.

Motorola put the finger print scanner idea on a phone a couple of years back and Nokia have made a gold phone years ago, I think even before the first iPhone, so Apple has also copied all of them.

Samsung copied the iPhone for the first and part of the second Galaxy phones, and they have copied the idea of locating the finger print scanner in the home button.

When you follow up with a similar product consistently it kind of hints at copying. Piecing together little bits of stuff from various phones half a decade ago is hardly a good argument.

Dj64Mk7 · Mar 31, 2014

dermeister said:
Sure. Apple is suing Samsung for basically wholesale copying of the iPhone, both in terms of software and trade-dress, meaning the Samsung devices look so similar that users can't even tell the difference. Apple produced a document with something like a 130+ bullet point review by a Samsung employee of Apple's device and how to copy it.

Samsung is counter-suing on the basis of standard-essential patents, meaning technical patents that are so basic that one cannot hold-out - by law, it must be licensed to anyone for a "reasonable fee". Apple contends that Samsung is asking for more than the value of the standard patents, effectively desiring to steal value from Apple in excess of the value of the patents.

The nihilists who want to claim both sides are equally at wrong proclaim that both are suing for patents, and both claims are thus equivalent and absurd or cancel out, or proof that there should be no such thing as patents.

The Samsung brigade claims Samsung suing is proof that Apple copies too. Furthermore, it downplays the fact that Samsung devices were blatant copies by the absurd reduction of the iPhone to "a black rectangle", and, as Samsung's lawyers said "who can have the right to black rectangles". The insult to everyone's intelligence not withstanding, the Samsung brigade has taken up the lawyer's slogan.

The Apple brigade claims that Samsung is a shameless copy-master with copying so ingrained in it's corporate culture that the poor kleptocrats don't even understand right from wrong anymore.

Helpful?

So, you're basically saying that Apple is suing Samsung for 'copying' features of iOS and the iPhone? Is that what this whole thing is about?

Google Plays a Bigger Role in Latest Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit

macrumors member

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68040

macrumors 6502

macrumors 68020

macrumors newbie

macrumors regular

macrumors 603

macrumors 6502

macrumors member

macrumors 68040

macrumors 6502

macrumors member

macrumors regular

macrumors 6502

macrumors 6502

Suspended

macrumors 68040

macrumors P6

Suspended

macrumors 603

macrumors member

macrumors P6

macrumors 65816

macrumors 65816

Our Staff