Apple and Samsung Respond to the $1 Billion Patent Verdict

[kis]

Anyone who thinks that stealing the ideas of other companies advances innovation is just wrong.

I totally agree. Unfortunately, Apple stole a crapload of stuff as well: bounce-back (stolen from Mitsubishi), the whole design for the iPad and the iPhone, the whole touch-screen thing - (Prada), the widget system (Konfabulator), the notification system (Android / Google). Of course, they also innovated. But so did Samsung.

If I steal something and then have a patent judge tell the public that I've invented it, I guess it isn't stealing according to US laws.

 

[throys]

I dont think Apple is being a "bully" or going overboard.

Apple has always had high standards, why should they let Samsung copy them?

Its really pathetic how far Samsung has went. They copied the iphone 3G design with the galaxy, and then went as far as to copy the home screen layout right down to the icon. You can say its ridiculous that there is a patent for a rectactangle all you want, but its obvious Apple bougth that patent only to screw samsung for copying.

Samsung copied the iPad with the galaxy tab

Samsung copied Apple by using the same actors that were originally for an Apple ad for their ad

Samsung even made an ipod touch competitor.

They have ZERO innovation.

Samsung's defense was that Apple is evil because they made patents for rectangles with rounded edges, implying that is a generic design (which it is) and that is why they were sued. Oh really? If Apple is so bad then why arent they suing Sony, Acer, Motorola, HTC, and all of those other cell phone companies? MAYBE because those companies arent copying atleast nearly as bad as Samsung.

The ipod came out first, then everyone else copied. The iphone came out first, then everyone else copied. The ipad came out first, then everyone else copied

Hammer on the head. Companies shouldn't wilfully and blatantly copy like what Samsung did make huge profits from it and then been ignorant about it. They took 4 months comparing the iPhone in a room stealing, copying designs and made it so confusingly the same. They were ignorant.

 

[Abazigal]

GS3 is the most advanced phone in hardware features only (and I reckon that the HTC One X is superior with its LG full RGB IPS display). Apple has proven that a device is far more than just hardware specs. Design, craftsmanship, and software are arguably even more important.

Samsung's horrible GUI is just laughable. Other companies like HTC actually innovate and don't just rely on Google to supply the OS, then skin it with a lame iOS knock-off. Have you tried using Bada? It's pathetic.

Granted, when you look at companies like RIM and HTC who choose not to copy, and seeing the dismal state they are in today, they aren't exactly the best examples to use.

Conversely, Samsung copies, and is a financial success to show for it.

So what's the moral of the story here?

Also, does not one question why Samsung opts to cram so much specs into their S3? Isn't it exactly because android is such a resource hog that it literally needs quad-core processors and 2gb of ram to run smoothly, something IOS can do at just a fraction of the resources (dual-core and 512mb of ram). To me, it seems like a drawback, rather than something to crow about. Likewise, a larger casing allows for a bigger battery, which points to another of android's shortcomings.

Given a choice, I am sure Samsung too would elect to use fewer materials in manufacturing to increase profits.

 

[ijohn.8.80]

What is a straight bully?

One that doesn't carry an oversized man bag complete with chihuahua

 

[usc2k]

Have you ever USED an android phone, or even a Samsung phone? I think not, judging from your position on this topic.

I have and it is a blatant copy. At first glance, it's difficult to tell the difference between the two OSs (especially in marketing material). Now, let's look at Windows 7 and OS X Moutain Lion. They share many, many features, but both companies have clearly developed a style that distinguishes their products. Look at the "delete" function on both. In Windows it's a "Recycle Bin", green and white. In Mac OS it's "Trash" with an aluminum look and feel. They both perform the same action but the companies made efforts to distinguish their products. Now look at the "Phone" button on iOS and then in Android. At first glance, can you really tell the difference? This is the distinction between what is and isn't a blatant ripoff and defining yourself as a unique product. Even the industrial design is the same. A Galaxy looks like an iPhone. When Microsoft came out with the Zune, at least they had the decency to make it turd brown so the consumer knew what they were getting. "Is that a piece of sh** your pocket? Why no, sir. It's my Zune."

----------

I totally agree. Unfortunately, Apple stole a crapload of stuff as well: bounce-back (stolen from Mitsubishi), the whole design for the iPad and the iPhone, the whole touch-screen thing - (Prada), the widget system (Konfabulator), the notification system (Android / Google). Of course, they also innovated. But so did Samsung.

If I steal something and then have a patent judge tell the public that I've invented it, I guess it isn't stealing according to US laws.

Not at all. And it isn't even about who applies for the patent first as a patent is almost always granted to anyone who can prove first-use. This is very clearly laid out in patent law and designed to protect larger companies from stealing your ideas because you couldn't afford a patent attorney.

Apple has borrowed many ideas, yes. Maybe even stolen a few (but that is why they have had to pay patent settlements as well). But they improved upon those ideas or - at the very least - gave them a distinction that made them clearly Apple.

What Samsung did was the equivalent of copying the source code of amazon.com, calling it jungle.com and acting as if nothing was wrong with what they did.

 

[kis]

Look at the "delete" function on both. In Windows it's a "Recycle Bin", green and white. In Mac OS it's "Trash" with an aluminum look and feel. They both perform the same action but the companies made efforts to distinguish their products. Now look at the "Phone" button on iOS and then in Android. At first glance, can you really tell the difference?

Not at all. And it isn't even about who applies for the patent first as a patent is almost always granted to anyone who can prove first-use.

Well yes, I can - the button on the iPhone is round, the one on the SGS is rectangular. It also has a different feel to it. It's basically exactly as with the trash bin example you just made above. They both perform the same action but look and feel different.

Unfortunately, Apple never proved first-use for anything. They just patented things first, that's all. Apple (successfully) bet on the companies they stole their stuff from not suing them because doing so is insanely expensive. They usually stole from smaller companies that don't have the financial means - or from some that are far away (such as Mitsubishi - who showed Apple the bounce-back effect on one of their devices in Japan before Apple stole the idea and patented it first in the US) who won't notice until it's too late.

 

[elppa]

Cotton: Humble, gracious, sincere.
Samsung: Fear, uncertainty, doubt.

 

[thasan]

Many of Samsung's engineers are actually american, and at least Samsung is innovating upon android. Look at some of the amazing technical features of Touchwiz, albeit some of them are dodgy at times, but they at least implement them. The icons you reference as well, date Apple back over a decade, so yea Apple copied them too. As to your comment on them making "cheap" tv's, please clarify this, last time I checked they were one of the leaders in the market.

same colour...and same design icons?? sure
im not american but i wonder how many americans work at SAIT
sure samsung is innovating but i dont see them much better than HTC in that front.
granted samsung tvs are 'great' now but i still prefer sinking sony (also know they have shared plants).

 

[KTF]

was about tim

 

[wordsworth]

When we speak as consumers many of us claim that 'stealing' and 'copying' are good for the consumer in the long run if the result is a wider range and better choice of products – and price options.

However, if we are key personnel at a company like Apple and hundreds of millions of dollars are poured into research and development, manufacturing and marketing, it certainly seems wrong (and beyond merely 'competitive') for other companies to piggyback on your hard work, bright ideas and design/manufacturing skills. Not to mention the risks involved in being a cutting-edge company in an unforgiving marketplace.

There must surely be some mechanism to protect innovation and the commensurate costs/efforts that ensure such innovation becomes a finished retail product. Otherwise the damage to such innovators will occur when bringing such products to the marketplace while everyone else 'copies'.

If the competitors have 'stolen' that which genuinely 'belongs' to, say, Apple, then it is potentially hugely damaging to Apple. Samsung, for example, had an iPhone competitor available pretty quickly. That, and similar offerings from other companies, surely damaged the short-term and longer-term success of the iPhone as a massively radical and innovative product. There are numerous iPhone clones now. Apple revolutionised the phone industry and it deserves to come out of it smelling of roses.

Of course, Apple is no innocent in these things, as we all know. Thanks, Xerox!

How does one distinguish between legitimate adopting of good ideas and 'theft'? That's partly what all the legal fuss is about and I imagine the arguments will run and run.

 

[spl456]

It's not like Apple has never stolen other developers' ideas (the Xeros graphic interface and Macintosh).

"Good artists copy, great artists steal". P.Picasso

I agree.

Have a look at the latest Safari update, it has a search function like Google Chrome has in the address bar. Now, you can't tell me that Apple didn't take that from Google.

 

[batchtaster]

No copying promotes less innovation. Right.

 

[thewitt]

No, my point is that Apple's patents are much too broad and current laws allow it to be so, which is why they need to be altered.

And until such time that the patent law changes, it's still the law.

You can hate it all you want, but if you break it you pay the price.

 

[alstrike]

Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for Samsung. Throw all their execs in jail.

Hahahahaha

Do you even know how big Samsung is?

 

[bushido]

Apple is destroying their image in Europe more and more as u can see in the declining interest of apple products in Europe compared to other nations (shown in their last Q results)

the media is gonna have a blast here today

 

[applebook]

I agree.

Have a look at the latest Safari update, it has a search function like Google Chrome has in the address bar. Now, you can't tell me that Apple didn't take that from Google.

That is available on FireFox too. Why do these companies "borrow" these ideas? Because (A) they are good and very crucially (B) they aren't patented!

That's right. Apple "borrows" ideas all the time. The difference is that usually they are cagey enough not to violate (blatantly) copyright laws. Samsung just ain't too bright. As an OEM manufacturer, they had inside knowledge of unreleased Apple products. Surely, Samsung should be guilty of being stupid and careless. If you're going to steal ideas, you need to circumvent copyright laws, not bulldoze over them!

 

[Gaijin de Moscu]

Apple is destroying their image in Europe more and more as u can see in the declining interest of apple products in Europe compared to other nations (shown in their last Q results)

the media is gonna have a blast here today

Very interesting. I live here in Europe and I haven't noticed Apple destroying its image.

Samsung does innovate. But it has also been copying other companies since the beginning of time. In Japan, where I lived before, Samsung is mostly "admired" for stealing the Japanese designs and selling them cheaper around the world. The Japanese companies, who actually innovate, are slower and more expensive than Samsung. In fact, they don't even sell many of their latest innovations abroad.

The whole business model of that company seems to be based on high-quality imitation. in a way, it IS good for consumers, because we get good, cheap knock-offs of innovative Japanese or American products.

I owned Samsung products before and I loved them. They filled a niche. But at this time, I can buy the originals, so I've switched to Apple, Sony, Sharp, etc.

 

[Nemean]

Ok i do not get how some people are not noticing the obvious point here the patents are in place to protect apples ideas but samsung can still licence the patents. All im reading from samsungs statement is we cant be bothered to innovate so we copied apple and now because they won we wont be able to help the consumer by offering more devices of the same sort because we are too cheap to license the patents from apple. But then maybe i have no idea what i am on about?

Oh and also to all the people defending samsung saying that what they copied was ok and patent law needs to be changed what would you have changed? If it was changed then a company such as apple would never put money into research and development and would instead wait for one stupid company who wasted all that money to do so and then samsung apple sony all of them would rip off the device and make cheaper copies of it. So we would have about 10 of the device on the market and the company who would make the least profits would be the one who originally made it. Does this seem like a better idea because if it was me i would just not bother making a product and follow the more profitable route and copy others designs if their was no law stopping me. As far as im concerned this would lead to less innovation as companies would not invest in research and development (the innovation side) in order to give other companies bigger profits.

As i say the way patents work at the moment if you do not come up with the idea you have to pay x amount of money to use it. This makes sense to me. Maybe the amount of money to use a patent could be altered to make it accessible but i have no idea about that.

 

[mazz0]

Team Samsung for the sake of consumers. I could care less who copied who. I don't want these lawsuits to go out of control!

Apple Wins - Apple's Lawyers Win, More Lawsuits, Consumers will eventually lose with less smartphone choices in the market.
Samsung Wins - Apple's Lawyers Lose, Consumers can continue to have the status quo, Apple still is wining regardless.

Everyone copies each other. There patents for some things are unwarranted. This case should have been dismissed entirely.

• couldn't care less
• who copied whom
• fewer smartphone choices
• winning (or whining?)
• their patents

 

[wrightc23]

I'm surprised by the reaction of many or perhaps rather I shouldn't have been?

Apple are clearly the new Microsoft.

The amount of evidence arising from this case supporting Apple's claim that Samsung have simply copied Apple's product line is considerable. Common sense would lead you to draw that conclusion from simply looking at Samsung's product line before and after the iPhone/iPad.

It's hardly unreasonable for Apple to seek to protect their distinctive designs. No one is suggesting you can't borrow or be influenced by the design of others but the whole point is that it is part of an innovative process that produces a distinctive product rather than simply copying or cloning.

I'm sad to say that it seems to be a consistent pattern of many far eastern technology companies to simply clone a rivals product. In the long run this will do Samsung no harm at all, they'll be forced to innovate their own designs which will offers us greater choice and this ruling will probably help rather than hinder Samsung sales by significantly raising their profile.

 

[MrNomNoms]

Today's verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices.

What a load of crap - all you did was copy Apple and then sell it at a lower price; how the hell is that promoting innovation by any stretch of the imagination? how is that benefiting consumers where innovation that does occur is by one company and the rest of the industry follows that one company? At least Microsoft tries to create something different with Windows Phone 8 - heck, I used and after a while it actually grew on me. How about Samsung actually utilise some of those engineers they have and get them to produce something that is unique and different like what Microsoft have done with Windows Phone 8.

 

[jamojamo]

Apple is destroying their image in Europe more and more as u can see in the declining interest of apple products in Europe compared to other nations (shown in their last Q results)

the media is gonna have a blast here today

We'll have a very good test case of their "destroyed image" coming up in a few weeks especially since this news will still be "fresh" and the new iPhone will be launched.

My guess is it has no impact on their image.

 

[wrightc23]

We'll have a very good test case of their "destroyed image" coming up in a few weeks especially since this news will still be "fresh" and the new iPhone will be launched.

My guess is it has no impact on their image.

I doubt it as well, I've got an iPhone 4S and a Galaxy S3. They are different interpretations of the smartphone platform and they're both great as far as I'm concerned.

I do wonder why so many seem to invest so much of their own status and dare I say it ego with multinational electronics manufacturers? Ultimately neither Apple or Samsung are 'good guys'. They are both giant producers of consumer electronics. Many of today's arguments over this ruling seem to stem from whether you're an Apple fan or not, or whether you love Android or not.

In this case it appears a legitimate complaint from Apple regarding pretty clear copyright infringement has been upheld.

I've read several articles today describing this as Apples attempt to dominate the global smartphone and tablet markets. If you look at market share this simply isn't the case. Apple is already a minority player in the smartphone market and will probably end up being so in the tablet market in the long run.

It's hardly unreasonable to expect it's competitors to show a bit of innovation.

 

[sineplex]

Cant wait to see what Microsoft will come up with...what? wait? their not in this fight?

microsoft and apple have agreements not to sue each other.
since bill gates gave them $150 million to start over.

 

[576316]

Ha! Maybe now Samsung can learn from this and start making its own products instead of, quite clearly, ripping off other's products.

Microsoft paid for patent uses, so should you Sammy!