In other news, Albert King was posthumously awarded a large settlement against Stevie Ray Vaughn's estate for copying and improving that 'bendy thing' you can do with a guitar. All music, by injunction, will be required to revert to when that first happened.
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 and Samsung Respond to the $1 Billion Patent Verdict
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The first galaxy S device on at&t didn't look like the iPhone at all. Maybe some of the screen looked similar but the phone as a whole didn't resemble the iPhone. And this was when at&t was the only carrier with an iPhone.
I came to my conclusion because the Jury did not side with Apple on its controversial rectangle design patent that related to the shape of the iPad; which is what Samsung made it out to look like the Jury granted the money on that basis of. Additionally, it is very hard to find information on exactly how much money Apple was granted on each patent - as I could only find a dollar amount breakdown per device. So if you have access to that information, please share it with me.
Additionally, I also assumed that the $1.05 billion fine will certainly not stand at that amount. And if anybody believes that it will, they're being naive. Most likely, they will certainly receive all of the fines for the utility patents, which the jury found to be willful infringement, meaning they could receive up to 3x that amount. My thinking is that the patent courts the case will go to in appeal will find that many of the design patents are invalid - because they probably are.
However, I am humble in admitting that i could be wrong, I just don't think so, otherwise I wouldn't be publicly posting my thoughts.
The bottom line is this: I was trying to call Samsung's response to the court's findings as elementary and immature. Whether or not they thought they could legally "incorporate" apple features into their device for free, their reaction was unprofessional.
One distinct advantage for Apple, is now they have just one more way to keep the competition on notice.
"Mess with us and we'll sue you. We have a proven track record in court and you could be next."
That could be quite a deterrent.
Fascinating that's for sure.
"Mess with us and we'll sue you. We have a proven track record in court and you could be next."
That could be quite a deterrent.
Fascinating that's for sure.
Stealing ideas is fine. Stealing product designs is not. There's some grey area, but it should be fairly clear that the quotes are not actually in conflict, if you actually take them in context.
jW
Ok, so use different terms. It's ok to be inspired by something else ("stealing" the idea), but not to copy it directly ("stealing" the design).
It's really quite simple.
jW
Thanks for totally missing what I actually said, and instead assuming that I'm an idiot.
jW
Last edited by a moderator:
Just glad Apple wasn't around too far into history now, they probably would have patented putting numbers in sequential order on the phone in a grid.
Q. Was Friday's verdict final?
A. No.
Samsung is challenging it. First, Samsung will first ask the trial judge to toss the verdict. Then it will appeal to a court in Washington that specializes in patent appeals. Samsung has vowed to take the fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary.
A. No.
Samsung is challenging it. First, Samsung will first ask the trial judge to toss the verdict. Then it will appeal to a court in Washington that specializes in patent appeals. Samsung has vowed to take the fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary.
Wrong. And I should know this as I was a big Motorola fan when they made their best stuff.
Bell Labs engineers invented cell phones. They couldn't build them because the tech didn't exist at the time, but further development of the ideas continued for decades.
According to wikipedia, the first cell phone system was MTA, launched in Sweden in 1956. Ericsson and Marconi supplied the hardware.
Motorola was the first to make an entirely handheld cell phone prototype in 1973. But they most certainly did not invent the cell phone.
As for your claims that Motorola's got the best RF.... that used to be the case. Motorola split into Motorola Solutions (the real Motorola), and Motorola Mobility (the rejects that Google bought.)
I'm willing to bet my old Motorola e815 flip phone could beat out every single one of the Motorola phones from the last 2 years in terms of connection quality over RF, by a wide margin. Motorola Mobility's kind of like HP; a hollow shell of the former glory that their parent name once held.
I acknowledged earlier that it was actually the handheld that Motorola invented which was most pertinent to the point I was making. The Appleonians are the ones splitting hairs about this. Much of the tech in todays phones came from Motorola. Fact.
The 815 had excellent RF. I'll still put up most any Motorola against the iPhone, Samsung, HTC etc in terms of RF quality and a bit of reading on a few cell phone sites will show that many feel the same way. The iPhone has never been noted as a strong performer in weak signal areas.
Really? it should be close to ICS except faster and deeper integrated with Google service.
MTA wasn't a cell system. Like many mobile phones of the time, it only talked to a single transmitter in the middle of each town. There was no hand-off to another tower.
Was there any actual cellular network that preceded what they did?
It sounds like MTA had more than one transmitter:
http://www.ericsson.com/ericsson/corpinfo/publications/review/2006_03/03.shtml
According to wikipedia, cellular doesn't imply automated handoff. The definition of cellular only required that there be transmitters servicing small hexagonally mapped cells, where each cell operated on a slightly different frequency. Their example of a cellular network was a taxi company's communication system that as a user moved from cell to cell, the user would have to manually connect to the new cell's towers.
From what I can gather, AMPS was the first standard with handoff. But this was 5 years after Motorola's first handset proto.
Yep. There were two MTA transmitters, one in each of two separate cities
They were not tied together.
While your link doesn't mention the fact that they were in different cities, it does note:
So who forces apple to innovate when they "just copy" also?
Actually, it was done a few times over the years, but nobody paid attention because 1) the technology or price wasn't quite ripe, 2) it wasn't let out of R&D, and/or 3) it wasn't done by someone with high publicity.
One of the best examples I can think of offhand, was the Norwegian Freepad back in 2000. Like the later iPad, its UI was created specifically to be touch friendly, and designed as they put it, so that it would be "so easy to use, that your grandmother can use it," Sound familiar? Its specs read just like an iPad would've back then... including having a dedicated app store.
Similar touch friendliness was tried with phones. One example is the 2003 MyOrigo touch phone with swipe between menu pages and integrated 3D orientation sensor:
Ditto for other multi-touch, pinch zoom, etc devices that came before the iPhone: most people never knew about them, but it doesn't meant they didn't exist. Lots of technology isn't known by the mass consumer until they can buy it.
Yep. There were two MTA transmitters, one in each of two separate cities
They were not tied together.
While your link doesn't mention the fact that they were in different cities, it does note:
Good catch, I missed that!
Hmm, how about ARP? Finland, 1971, predates Motorola's prototype by 2 years. 140 base stations. Still no hand-off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoradiopuhelin
Are you kidding me? Innovation comes from reiteration and improvement.
The biggest hypocrite of them all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
This ruling was a complete loss for the consumer. And I refuse to support a hypocritical company that tries to dominate the industry like this and hinder innovation.
Everything is a Remix
Elements of creativity:
Copy
Combine
Transform
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg
Elements of creativity:
Copy
Combine
Transform
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg