Appeals Court Rules Apple Was Entitled to Sales Ban on Samsung Products in Earlier Trial

[scaramoosh]

So basically you whack your thing for the love of Android?

huh?

I think they all have their merits, but to say Android and Samsung suck is such a dumb statement. To me Android is like Windows (desktop) you customize it to how you like it and no other OS on a phone lets you do that any more. I love it for that, you miss the ability to do that stuff when you're on an iPhone and to some extent a Windows Phone.

Lets not forget that the iPhone before the 6 spent 3 years lagging behind Android. Apple have stepped up their game, but they still have a long way to go in some circumstances, though so does Android and Windows Phone.

I love them for different reasons, though since Microsoft ****ed Nokia up... not really a fan of them so much any more, Nokia had the camera market for phones tied up, then Microsoft ruined it all.

 

[Jax44]

huh?

I think they all have their merits, but to say Android and Samsung suck is such a dumb statement. To me Android is like Windows (desktop) you customize it to how you like it and no other OS on a phone lets you do that any more. I love it for that, you miss the ability to do that stuff when you're on an iPhone and to some extent a Windows Phone.

Lets not forget that the iPhone before the 6 spent 3 years lagging behind Android. Apple have stepped up their game, but they still have a long way to go in some circumstances, though so does Android and Windows Phone.

I love them for different reasons, though since Microsoft ****ed Nokia up... not really a fan of them so much any more, Nokia had the camera market for phones tied up, then Microsoft ruined it all.

Just messing with you

 

[Someyoungguy]

I just don't get why IOS people love to claim everything else is ****... have any of you used the GS6? It's way more advanced than the iPhone 6 is every way, the screen alone is a reason to buy one, when you put it side by side to an iPhone 6, it's no contest.

My G/F has an iPhone 6, I had a 5s but I just sold it, I got a Nokia 1020 on Windows Phone and a Galaxy S6, the GS6 is by far my favourite out of them all. I love Android because I can tailor it to how I like, the biggest problem I have with IOS is how I cannot put the Icons where I want, they always auto go to the top left. I just root my phone, get rid of the stuff I don't want, which you cannot do on IOS, then whack a Google Launcher on it, put Widgets on my screen so I can have a nice big weather forecast thing and a thing for emails and news.

It's so nice to have all that stuff, plus I can download torrents and stream them to my TV, use any codec I want, I can view Live Streams because I have Flash Player installed. It has the best camera so far, amazing mics, the storage benchmarked the fastest so far and so you see no slow down.

I think Samsung are doing a good job and Apple are too, but you cannot help but feel frustrated with how slow IOS evolves, the whole UI has changed to this nice looking modern clean design, but we still have the same old dated Icons that you cannot do anything with. Even Windows Phone has Live Tiles and it's not like any of this has an impact on the battery, I get better battery on my two Phones that I did with my 5S and my G/F does with her 6. I used to get 4-5 days on a single charge with the Z1c, that had amazing battery life, Sony do some amazing work there, but they're always top of the charts.

I tried a GS4. The hardware was fine. That, and stealing movies seems to be your main concern, so knock yourself out. I felt the whole time like i was using a cheap knock-off. I spent 20 minutes waiting for a GPS lock in Google Maps - turned out I needed to reset the phone. The awesome resolution made the Car and Driver app. text microscopic and unreadable. I could never find a launcher with all the features I wanted. There wasn't a good way to synch to my Mac. There was lag even dialing a phone number - very distracting to starting hearing the tones 3 seconds after you start dialing. It goes on and on. I ended up wishing I could run iOS on that hardware.

P.S. - Even Adobe has abandoned Flash.

 

[bladerunner2000]

So basically you whack your thing for the love of Android?

I've been temp banned for much less than comments like this. Sigh.

 

[Jax44]

I've been temp banned for much less than comments like this. Sigh.

My poor attempt at humor, what with all the slap a rom, whack a this, etc.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Agreed. Would rather see apple and samsung get back to producing products instead of wasting EVERYBODYS time with this piddly ass crap. Everyones tired of it.

Samsung making billions off of Apple's copyrights is "piddly"? Well, ok. I guess that can't possibly produce products and be in court at the same time, too. Ok.

 

[koruki]

Companies copy successful stuff from other companies. Including apple. Get over it. None of you will have a personal gain from either company winning a court case. So don't act butthurt.

Relax, you sound more butt hurt reading my response to someone else. He mentioned rubber banding, so I mentioned rubber banding in response. Read in context buddy, I don't lose anything if Samsung copies it but if everyone is just allowed to copy everything then the whole system would break down. Apple is surviving cause they have a loyal fan base. If it had been another company, to lose the selling features in a product you've developed would be devastating.

 

[danranda]

I just don't get why IOS people love to claim everything else is ****... the GS6 is way more advanced than the iPhone 6 is every way.

I love Android because I can tailor it to how I like... I just root my phone ... which you cannot do on IOS, then whack a Google Launcher on it, put Widgets on my screen...

Did you really just say Android is better because you just root your phone and then remove things and add things??
The same can generally be done on iOS... it's referred to as jailbreaking

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

Can someone who knows their stuff explain these Patents in detail?

Data Syncing and background syncing .... I've been syncing data since Windows Mobile days.
Slide to Unlock .... Isn't this an Android/Google issue?
Autocomplete ... Again, why is this Samsung specific, and what's so different about Apple's autocomplete vs pre iPhone days.
Universal search .... You can actually patent that, or is the way it works a patent?

Someone please clarify.

 

[bladerunner2000]

My poor attempt at humor, what with all the slap a rom, whack a this, etc.

I've nothing against your humour, but it is very well known that the MacRumors mods have an agenda of censorship. You dont hear about it often because they basically remove comments or perma-ban members. You're better off voicing yourself over twitter without them having any kind of influence on you.

 

[Wondercow]

Samsung was ordered to pay Apple a settlement of $119.6 million

Samsung cant be ordered to pay a settlement. A settlement is just that: the parties settle their dispute amongst themselves. If it's ordered by a court it's an award.

 

[apolloa]

Slide to Unlock .... Isn't this an Android/Google issue?

For the slide to unlock, it's a patent that Apple should not have, in the highest Appeals court in Germany they upheld a ruling that Apple could not claim for damages for it because of prior art by Neonode. Apple appealed and again they said it was invalid. Neonode patented the slide to unlock idea in 2002 amongst it's touch screen patent according to the article, patent number: 8,095,879

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/8095879

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/25/germany-slide-to-unlock/

Watch the video from 3 minutes 55 seconds.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

For the slide to unlock, it's a patent that Apple should not have, in the highest Appeals court in Germany they upheld a ruling that Apple could not claim for damages for it because of prior art by Neonode. Apple appealed and again they said it was invalid. Neonode patented the slide to unlock idea in 2002 amongst it's touch screen patent according to the article, patent number: 8,095,879

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/8095879

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/25/germany-slide-to-unlock/

Watch the video from 3 minutes 55 seconds.

Interesting, thanks.

 

[macs4nw]

.....i swear, it almost seems like lawyers are just running this show so that they can keep making money off everyone.

No s***, they're blissfully laughing all the way to the bank and they're the last ones who'd be even remotely interested in changing the status quo, but we all know the system is broken and needs a complete overhaul to bring it into the 21st century.

We certainly need some sort of IP protection, because without being able to recoup any part of the massive cash infusions necessary to advance the state of the art, no company would have any incentive to spend the required resources. And that could lead to possible technological stagnation, not to mention 'lowest common denominator' products.

Having said that, some limits are needed as well as clear and unambiguous guidelines, especially where it concerns 'simultaneous development' and other assorted gray areas. And this last paragraph will be the most difficult hurdle to true reforms.

What's clearly needed is a working group of representatives from all sides including legal eagles to hammer out clear new guidelines, and to make sure the new rules are fair, equitable, and most of all enforceable in the new global reality we live in.

All the current legal proceedings are literally siphoning billions from companies' bottom lines, resulting in money diverted from research, as well as higher prices for consumers. The sooner this reform process is started, the better off we'll all be. Sorry Legal profession.

P.S. Couldn't find a current or up-to-date version of one of those dizzying 'who's suing whom' graphs that anyone who's paid any attention to these ongoing patent wars of the last half dozen years or so probably has seen.

 

[szw-mapple fan]

Agreed. Would rather see apple and samsung get back to producing products instead of wasting EVERYBODYS time with this piddly ass crap. Everyones tired of it.

Exactly how was your time compromised by this lawsuit? Are they wasting everybody's time by filing this lawsuit (which has some merit), or is everyone wasting their own time by reading and arguing about it?

 

[jayisblessed]

Yeah, well, it's not like Samsung could have gone crying to the US President because of a sales ban now is it Apple...................

Such hypocrisy, ideas in OSX and iOS now that Apple has 'borrowed' (stolen) from other platforms.

Personally I feel the entire case should go the the high court, especially now that one of the main patents held by Apple in the case has been made void. Doubt it will happen though.

I've read on other sites about the slide to unlock feature, the feature Apple stole from Neonode, and that the highest appeal court in Germany rules Apple's slide to unlock patent as invalid because of Neonode having it before. Then any blocking of slide to unlock on devices by Apple would be void in Europe now?

In fact America is the only place Apple has won most of it's cases. So I guess it's possible in America you won't be allowed to have slide to unlock on any of Apples competitors, that's nice for you.

If you look at this Korean company - Samsung's history, it is a very despicable and disgusting company ever. This Korean company likes to stab people from behind, they stole from many companies like Sharp, etc, and the worst part is they deny and try to waste their competitors time and drag them down. I will never ever buy or recommend any of this Korean - Samsung phones.

 

[sudo1996]

Uh... So what now? Even if Apple wins, is this going to mean anything?

 

[igorsky]

It's really like "do you HAVE to do this?" – Samsung makes parts for Apple, FFS. How do the legal departments of both companies convince the CEOs those lawsuits are a good idea?

Firstly you mean Samsung is grateful that they get to make parts for Apple. In case you haven't seen their recent financials, Samsung is sucking wind right now.

Second, Samsung Semiconductor has nothing to do with Samsung Mobile and their sleazy business practices.

Third, one has nothing to do with the other...you can have a business relationship and are still entitled to the expectation that your business partner won't try to rip you off at every turn.

 

[igorsky]

I just don't get why IOS people love to claim everything else is ****... have any of you used the GS6? It's way more advanced than the iPhone 6 is every way, the screen alone is a reason to buy one, when you put it side by side to an iPhone 6, it's no contest.

I just don't get why Android people love to pass along their opinions as facts. Might be something to do with that inferiority complex that they all seem to have.

 

[winston1236]

So how does this fall in the grand scheme of things? I would honestly like to see a graphic of some sort to be able to see how and where Apple is in each Samsung suit.

This is exactly what I was going to post. Not it.

 

[LordVic]

The patents have already been litigated. If the patents were as obviously invalid as you're stating then surely Samsung would have spent some of their millions to put you on the stand to click your link for the jury. Don't confuse how the media refers to the patents ("word completion") with what is actually patented.

There are a lot of bogus patents awarded, no doubt, but the problem they cause is the cost of litigation. Particularly when the two sides of the suit are unbalanced. This one was litigated by two giants with boundless resources, and (some of) the patents stood. I'm sure Samsung fought this vigorously, and the patents themselves stood up under the scrutiny.

The Wright brothers, Edison, Xerox-- whenever you claim that someone invented something there is someone else who will point out that really someone else did and the person you're talking about made a small change and got the glory. Every invention is an incremental improvement on the inventions before it. The argument is about that increment, and it is very often quite tedious. It all sounds trivial to the layman and even more trivial to the technologist because once it is known, it appears obvious. That is why it is important to be first and why patents driving this need to be first drives innovation more broadly.

I also have the feeling that the patent system is fundamentally flawed, but to fix it we need to think deeper than "this is basically the same as that". Everything has a predecessor. The question is how to formalize what is novel in a universal way. Traditionally when it comes down to judgement calls, we typically leave it to the courts and very often juries.

The problem with software patents, unlike physical device patents is the application and description.

the Code itself, which is used to accomplish the action isn't patentable. This has left them to move what is patentable.

with a physical invention, the action which accomplishes a task, the how, is what is patented. With Software patents, it's the "why".

An example used before

Hammering in a nail. with a mechanical invention, the patent is applied to the machine or device that is used. a long rod with weighted end shaped as such, to be used to impact. So the Patent applies to the physical item being used. the tool.

With the way Software patents are done: They patent the act of hammering a nail. The tool is irrelevant. it's "if you drive a nail into wood in anyway"

The problem I have with this, is that it blocks invention. There are always multiple ways of accomplishing the same thing. By blocking, through patents different ways of accomplishing the same activity, you are a barrier to innovation.

This is how the patent system has been co-opted by a lot of major corporations (not just apple) to stifle competition

But an example:

Apple's "slide to unlock" patent is vague enough that it actually encompasses any software (no matter how it is written) that can be used to provide a gestured motion to unlock a device. This includes such things as pattern unlocks such as android uses as a security method. The code, underlying functionality is completely different, but because it's a "gesture in a predefined region of the display", it infringes.

so the problem I'm having is fundamentally flawed patent system is being gamed by very few, Very rich people in order to control everything. Instead of what it's actually meant for, to protect invention.

/rant

 

[jamezr]

I'm just curious;

one of the patents they listed was the Slide to unlock. wasn't that recently invalidated? Edit: Just checked, it was German court that invalidated their slide to unlock patent, Nothing to do with US that I can find

Also: how does Apple have a patent on "word completion' recommendations that was awarded in 2011, when this technology has existed in various forms prior to that?

The 3rd patent is a little more complex. But the fundamentals are "if you click something in one program it'll launch the other program with that info already, like clicking a phone number in mail to open the dialer".

again, very interesting patent. Does the patent cover the action or the method to cmplete such action? For example, I had been writing programs for work that did similar action as this. Click a weblink in a browser program that would launch Word or excel for example already filled in.

There's more here than simple patents. there's clearly a fundamental problem with how patents are awarded, what they're awarded for, AND how they're enforced.

NONE OF THIS MAKES SENSE FOR EITHER PARTY!?!? i swear, it almost seems like lawyers are just running this show so that they can keep making money off everyone.

Some of the patents you mentioned have been invalidated by most of the world except the US. I think it speaks to the US patent system when you can patent "slide to unlock at the bottom of the screen" or an earlier invalidated Apple patent " rectangular shape with rounded corners" "rubber banding" "pinch-to-zoom"

 

[igorsky]

The problem I have with this, is that it blocks invention. There are always multiple ways of accomplishing the same thing. By blocking, through patents different ways of accomplishing the same activity, you are a barrier to innovation.

I've heard this argument before and I respectfully disagree. Samsung, and it's infinite resources, could have easily spent the time to create another way to unlock their phones. They could have innovated something. Instead, in their obsessive desire to falsely create the public perception that their devices are synonymous with Apple's, they chose to copy Apple's implementation. That is the opposite of innovation. Frankly I don't understand how anyone can argue that the patent system stifles innovation. You have two options...you can either innovate and create your own idea, or you can license the use of an idea from the patent holder. Samsung did neither of these things.

I'd also encourage you to be more fair when thinking about patents. If "slide to unlock" was your patent and some sleazy corporation came in and ripped it off, would you not want to take them to court to protect your intellectual property?

 

[Analog Kid]

The problem with software patents, unlike physical device patents is the application and description.

the Code itself, which is used to accomplish the action isn't patentable. This has left them to move what is patentable.

with a physical invention, the action which accomplishes a task, the how, is what is patented. With Software patents, it's the "why".

An example used before

Hammering in a nail. with a mechanical invention, the patent is applied to the machine or device that is used. a long rod with weighted end shaped as such, to be used to impact. So the Patent applies to the physical item being used. the tool.

With the way Software patents are done: They patent the act of hammering a nail. The tool is irrelevant. it's "if you drive a nail into wood in anyway"

The problem I have with this, is that it blocks invention. There are always multiple ways of accomplishing the same thing. By blocking, through patents different ways of accomplishing the same activity, you are a barrier to innovation.

This is how the patent system has been co-opted by a lot of major corporations (not just apple) to stifle competition

But an example:

Apple's "slide to unlock" patent is vague enough that it actually encompasses any software (no matter how it is written) that can be used to provide a gestured motion to unlock a device. This includes such things as pattern unlocks such as android uses as a security method. The code, underlying functionality is completely different, but because it's a "gesture in a predefined region of the display", it infringes.

so the problem I'm having is fundamentally flawed patent system is being gamed by very few, Very rich people in order to control everything. Instead of what it's actually meant for, to protect invention.

/rant

Thanks, I misunderstood where you were going the first time.

I don't see the analog between the hammer and slide to unlock though. I haven't read the patent, maybe I should, but based on your description it sounds like they aren't patenting the action of unlocking a phone, they're patenting a method: using a gesture on a touch screen. At the time, that was quite novel.

It doesn't cover switches, knobs, taps, biometrics, which are all still available. Knock has an interesting approach, for example. A new technology was introduced, the touch screen, and Apple invented a way to use that to avoid activating your phone in your pocket without the need for additional hardware. The less-new people think touch screens are on a phone, the more impressive it is that nobody else thought of it first.

If Apple hasn't patented the pattern based methods then Google or Samsung can, and Apple can be restricted from using such methods without license, even though Apple holds the underlying patent on gestures in a region of the display. Samsung or Google would need to license Apple's patent to use their own, but that happens in other forms of utility patent.

Again, I think there are issues with software patents. I hate having to add claims to every patent saying "doing what I just said, but in software", I think 20 years is too long for patent coverage, I very much agree with the asymmetry problem between small inventors and corporate giants, etc. Given the amount of invention in the software industry though, I don't think we should prevent patents for good software inventions.

 

[pat500000]

we need to unite..and not make war. This kills productivity..and time wasting.