"they basically lied to everyone and used the iPhone design for AND against them in a horrifyingly amoral way."
All I really want to know is how re-introducing the stylus is horrifying and amoral. Smells like sarcasm to me.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Marketing Chief Phil Schiller Appears On the Witness Stand in Apple/Samsung Damages Trial
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"they basically lied to everyone and used the iPhone design for AND against them in a horrifyingly amoral way."
All I really want to know is how re-introducing the stylus is horrifying and amoral. Smells like sarcasm to me.
I found it funny when Apple decided to stick to the iPhone 4 design for the 4S, make it thinner for the 5 and same thing for the 5S. Samsung actually had to change their design because they had nothing new to copy. So what do Samsung do? Start saying Apple lost its innovation with design but take a look at Samsung galaxy phones, been the same for a while now too lol. The iPhone5 change from the 4S was a lot more than the Galaxy s4 from the S3. Hypocrite cockroach company that just steals ideas, just like as soon as they heard Apple were making a watch boom 2 months later the Samsung generic galaxy gear releases packed with bloat ware and not even water resistant. Will never support a company with their morals.
----------
back in the year the 3g and this galaxy phone were out, take away that logo and boom you got yourself a black iPhone hahaha
----------
back in the year the 3g and this galaxy phone were out, take away that logo and boom you got yourself a black iPhone hahaha
Think again.
I think people are confusing Apple and Samsung. Samsung run their business in a completely different way to Apple. In Korea, they are a cartel. The own newspapers, media outlets, 80% of technology manufacturing, and been caught paying off the odd politician and even members of their judiciary. If this were Apple, you think they would be treated with such respect? VVVV
http://www.kernelmag.com/features/report/3028/samsung-power-corruption-and-lies/#
The fact that Samsung has been sued one time or another, by some of the biggest companies in the world, should say something about their integrity and their blatant disregard for intellectual property. They have no respect for it. Now Dyson are having to sue them for ripping off their IP. Letting them go unchecked will eventually destroy product innovation and devalue property rights. Once thats gone, who would bother spending billions in R&D if all your work can just be lifted?
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-1-Hardware-Design.html
I challenge anyone to prove to me that Samsung don't have theft and/or copying in their DNA. Otherwise we may as well allow the Mafia to run technology industries. Trust them at your peril.
I think people are confusing Apple and Samsung. Samsung run their business in a completely different way to Apple. In Korea, they are a cartel. The own newspapers, media outlets, 80% of technology manufacturing, and been caught paying off the odd politician and even members of their judiciary. If this were Apple, you think they would be treated with such respect? VVVV
http://www.kernelmag.com/features/report/3028/samsung-power-corruption-and-lies/#
The fact that Samsung has been sued one time or another, by some of the biggest companies in the world, should say something about their integrity and their blatant disregard for intellectual property. They have no respect for it. Now Dyson are having to sue them for ripping off their IP. Letting them go unchecked will eventually destroy product innovation and devalue property rights. Once thats gone, who would bother spending billions in R&D if all your work can just be lifted?
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-1-Hardware-Design.html
I challenge anyone to prove to me that Samsung don't have theft and/or copying in their DNA. Otherwise we may as well allow the Mafia to run technology industries. Trust them at your peril.
So if I understand your argument, it's healthy for companies to be able to copy and steal others' designs and those that are first to market with great ideas will just have to put up with it, because it's healthy for consumers?
I could argue that that very thing is unhealthy for consumers. It gives a leg up to competitors that don't have to spend on R&D and can therefore undercut the original innovators, driving them out of business. The copycats can then charge whatever they want once their competition is eliminated.
It might be an extreme example but illustrative nonetheless on why it's good for consumers to protect inventors.
Samsung so desperately wants to be Apple. One day it wouldn't surprise me if they changed their name and logo to some favorite Korean citrus fruit. Tangerine?!
CultOfMac has a great article about how Samsung steals from Apple and openly admits it. Comes down to simple economics. If you can make $300 million stealing from Apple, and only have to pay Apple $52 million for stealing those ideas, they still make $250 million.
http://www.cultofmac.com/254695/for-samsung-stealing-cheating-and-lying-are-business-as-usual/
http://www.cultofmac.com/254695/for-samsung-stealing-cheating-and-lying-are-business-as-usual/
Step it up to the notch where people question your design skills, then step it up two notches further?
That would surely make for great devices.
Samsung so desperately wants to be Apple. One day it wouldn't surprise me if they changed their name and logo to some favorite Korean citrus fruit. Tangerine?!
Image
Actually, lots of Asian people use the term "Fruit" instead of "Apple" because of some strange translation error. So if anything, they're going to call themselves Vegetable.
Last edited:
I may not be saying it properly, but competition is healthy. Asking whether Samsung stole the idea is basically like asking which came first, the chicken or the egg.
One could argue that rounding up Patents just to sit on them and sue others for infringing on them later is just as harmful.
I get your example, as extreme as it is. But as I've mentioned before, choice is what drives the competition. Competition is what lowers prices (theoretically). If someone wants an Apple, they'll buy an Apple, regardless of how much cheaper the Nexus costs (I know they're not Samsung). If someone wants to spend less on a similar device, they'll buy the cheaper device. Do they want a Stylus? Why not buy a Note?
I still believe it's healthy to have these choices without breaking too far from tradition.
Saying no one can make anything remotely similar to what you've already created is like saying we have every right to become a monopoly, which is what drives prices and rights to intellectual property up and it harms consumers (just as theoretical as your example). We obviously see things differently. Yet similar as far as outcomes go.
Last edited:
Obviously R&D for the first iPhone had been going on for YEARS. It's not like Apple saw the Prada, and then immediately rushed to build their phone. These things take time. Heck even the iPad was in development in the early 00's but was scrapped because Jobs didn't think the public was ready, and they went on to focus on iPhone instead.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/10/dyson-sues-samsung-vacuum-design-rip-off/
So Samsung are at it again!
Last edited:
LG Prada, circa 2006
Can you explain how the iPhone -which had been in development since 2004- and was very publicly unveiled on January 9, 2007 could possibly be "copying" a handset first revealed 9 days later on January 18 (http://www.lg.com/us/press-release/mobile-innovation-meets-avant-garde-design)? Did Apple invent time travel?
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/10/dyson-sues-samsung-vacuum-design-rip-off/
So Samsung are at it again!
LOL thanks I just learned a new internet buzzword.
Samsung = the original KIRF
So true indeed!
autrefois
macrumors 65816
So I can create a laptop with a strikingly similar case as the 15-inch MBP and copy the Mac's Finder to a T, but as long as I change how you access the faux Finder and sell the laptop as a 17-inch model, then it's okay?
I never said they copied it. I'm just saying that devices were headed in that direction, and the design of certain phones could appear to be copying others.
Oh MR, I can't believe you still go on about the trial. There is nothing newsworthy left there.
I am personally offended and appalled by Apple's rhetoric. I always bought Apple product for the substance - not for the looks. And IMO the substance has suffered in recent years. The case, to me a 9 year Apple user, simply adds insult to injury.
In all that, I actually liked the response of the Samsung reps: they didn't want to fragment market with phones with different/incompatible UIs. (Heck, the Tizen, new mobile OS from Intel and Samsung et al, is very very hard to distinguish from the Android. And that is intentional.)
Design patents in question were so flimsy that it is even hard to believe they were granted in the first place. But well, they were granted and Sammy copied them. The best course of action for Apple was to settle for some reasonable amount of money and be done with it. Yet, they keep kicking the dead horse of the case, exploiting their home field advantage to the full. It's painful to watch and only winners there could be, as always, are the lawyers.
Worst part: the case might encourage Apple to pick the patch of litigation, not innovation. Because their innovations are already struggling and not what they used to be.
I am personally offended and appalled by Apple's rhetoric. I always bought Apple product for the substance - not for the looks. And IMO the substance has suffered in recent years. The case, to me a 9 year Apple user, simply adds insult to injury.
In all that, I actually liked the response of the Samsung reps: they didn't want to fragment market with phones with different/incompatible UIs. (Heck, the Tizen, new mobile OS from Intel and Samsung et al, is very very hard to distinguish from the Android. And that is intentional.)
Design patents in question were so flimsy that it is even hard to believe they were granted in the first place. But well, they were granted and Sammy copied them. The best course of action for Apple was to settle for some reasonable amount of money and be done with it. Yet, they keep kicking the dead horse of the case, exploiting their home field advantage to the full. It's painful to watch and only winners there could be, as always, are the lawyers.
Worst part: the case might encourage Apple to pick the patch of litigation, not innovation. Because their innovations are already struggling and not what they used to be.
Or the case might encourage Samsung to change to a path of originality, rather than shameless copycat-emulation.
Nice to know that you give Samsung a pass for its blatant tactics. Not just Apple, but many other companies, even Dyson (a vacuum manufacturer) simply cannot tolerate Samsung's blatant rip-off strategy.
Attachments
No.
Blackberry wasn't going to copy a PRADA phone.
You are simply wrong & rewriting history to how you would prefer it to have happened.
----------
Agreed!!!!!
It is DEFINITELY horrifying. But not amoral.
"remotely similar"???
Umm...
News flash:
NOBODY but you has said that. Anywhere. Ever.
Lol, Google "patent lawsuits where the company is suing because another product is remotely similar".
Oh, zero hits??
Call a patent lawyer, pose as a potential client & say "will you take my case? I think there may be something remotely similar to my product out there?"
Laughed at & hung up on?
Guess your wildly outlandish claims are being taken seriously by no one but yourself.
Also that doctored pic of the galaxy s is the international version.
American one may or may not have looked like this.
My sister in law had the LG prada, horrible phone but it looked nice. Lets not even talk about the knight ridder. Accept that Apple copies things and makes them better and more popular.
"Good artists copy, Great artists steal." - Mr Jobs
American one may or may not have looked like this.
My sister in law had the LG prada, horrible phone but it looked nice. Lets not even talk about the knight ridder. Accept that Apple copies things and makes them better and more popular.
"Good artists copy, Great artists steal." - Mr Jobs