Apple Demands $1 Billion From Samsung for Design Patent Violations as New Damages Trial Kicks Off

[Raist3001]

Other than the round corners, and similar icons, it would be very difficult to mistaken the Samsung phone for an iPhone. Or vice versa. Settle the patent infringments and lets move on. Apple is just as guilty for stealing patents as the next business.

 

[Cloudkicker]

If you want take a trip back to 2006, to a time when the iPhone didn't exist, & the only hint is "a possible iPod Phone" in this CNet article.

https://www.cnet.com/news/best-mobile-phones-of-2006/

Apple wasn't the first to use a lot of smart phone features.

Stubbornly, Apple wants to be creeps about a solitary physical shape. Fine. Then I guess they're going to be that one kid on the block. The brat who wants double points for ever goal scored, just because it's his kickball.

While Apple benefits from trails well, well blazed by 8-10 different manfacturers. Corporations that had different opperating systems (BlackBerry, Windows, earliest Android). Heck, BlackBerry made both their own hardware & OS. lol These corps. didn't go:

[Examples]: "We at Motorola put the first camera in, so nobody but Motorola can use one without paying us obscene royalties! Nah-nah."; "Oh, yeah?! We're Nokia & we put the first touch screen! You want access to this temple, you pay the proper tribute."

Maybe Apple should either 1.) Quit while they're ahead. 2.) Pick their battles more carefully. 3.) Steamroll through & live with the consequences. Since iPhone didn't even have copy & paste for several years, I'd like to see a gang up of the Ghosts Of BlackBerry, Windows OS & still living strong Android OS & RECIND iOS c&p.

 

[Tech198]

For a long time they said Apple TV was their hobby. Not so. Their real hobby is lawsuits.

And the goal posts keep shifting...

Not a fair game if you ask me. Try kicking a goal into a moving object... (It's bloody impossible..)

 

[neutralguy]

If you want take a trip back to 2006, to a time when the iPhone didn't exist, & the only hint is "a possible iPod Phone" in this CNet article.

https://www.cnet.com/news/best-mobile-phones-of-2006/

Apple wasn't the first to use a lot of smart phone features.

Stubbornly, Apple wants to be creeps about a solitary physical shape. Fine. Then I guess they're going to be that one kid on the block. The brat who wants double points for ever goal scored, just because it's his kickball.

While Apple benefits from trails well, well blazed by 8-10 different manfacturers. Corporations that had different opperating systems (BlackBerry, Windows, earliest Android). Heck, BlackBerry made both their own hardware & OS. lol These corps. didn't go:

[Examples]: "We at Motorola put the first camera in, so nobody but Motorola can use one without paying us obscene royalties! Nah-nah."; "Oh, yeah?! We're Nokia & we put the first touch screen! You want access to this temple, you pay the proper tribute."

This itself tell you the difference between Tim Cook and Elon Musk. Musk made all the patents free to use so that the EV industry can move faster. And here Tim is still stuck on stupid shape.

 

[macduke]

So, if Apple was YOUR company, you'd just say c'est la vie?

Just LOOK at those two phones.

I think you replied to the wrong person.

 

[The Game 161]

but thank you for your screens though lol

 

[fairuz]

Thanks for proving my point. When Apple wins they should be paid, when Apple loses it’s an injustice and they got screwed.

If Apple loses to a company that's not a joke, then they should pay.
[doublepost=1526428122][/doublepost]

The best way to become a fool is to argue with one, so stop arguing with one. Comparing a non-practicing patent troll to a real company that actually makes a product and their money is based on the products sold is just idiotic. Why bother arguing with such childish thoughts?

idk, I'm just waiting for something on my laptop to finish installing anyway.

 

[dwaite]

Thanks for proving my point. When Apple wins they should be paid, when Apple loses it’s an injustice and they got screwed.

You keep bringing this up, but the reason that each conflict is resolved by a separate legal case is that each situation has its own circumstances and points. So yes, Apple could win in one case and lose in the other, without being hypocrites, based on the merits of the parties in each case.

I get the impression you are trying to imply that fanboys are blind and always want Apple to win, but you are the one who is repeatedly reducing complex, multi-year legal battles to 1-2 sentences.
[doublepost=1526428607][/doublepost]

Samsung should triple the price for the displays.

Samsung isn't one mind - the heads of the display and chip divisions could very well look better when the mobile division messes up.

Such a change would have to come from the very top, and would look terrible in the press. It would also risk anticompetitive lawsuits (remember, its Samsung and not Apple who have > 50% of the smartphone market sales). It would probably dissuade just about every other third party from single-sourcing parts from Samsung as well, having a big impact on their bottom line.

 

[Glideslope]

Apple Legal. "The gift that just keeps giving." How about innovate, not litigate? Arthur, please, time for Tim to go.

 

[bladerunner2000]

Apple is just as guilty for stealing patents as the next business.

Like the time Steve Jobs claimed Apple invented multi-touch?

Except for one year prior, a Ted X talk showing multi-touch based on 80s tech;

 

[Regime2008]

This itself tell you the difference between Tim Cook and Elon Musk. Musk made all the patents free to use so that the EV industry can move faster. And here Tim is still stuck on stupid shape.

I wish i could LOVE this comment! This is what separates a huge portion of the industry from Apple. The world seems to be going forward, while Apple is taking strides backwards.

 

[apolloa]

Copied "Some Parts"????

Some PARTS?!?!?!?

It's a damn-near pixel-for-pixel, dimension-for-dimension, UNABASHED RIP-OFF!!!

No, they mearly copied the grid layout and that’s it. You cannot claim someone copied a oblong shape with round corners! And Apple were not the first touchscreen smartphone by a long way!
I have zero sympathy for Apple when it does things like refuse to pay Ericsson, just to get a better deal! And only gives in when Ericsson is literally about to destroy them in court! The way Apple hypocritically carries out its deals is pathetic.

 

[Even Longer]

deleted.

 

[69650]

Apple don’t deserve a penny. They only won the original patent case because it was a biased jury.

 

[Fixey]

I hope Samsung loses, it is about time this bullying company gets punished.

Samsung has a past history of ripping companies off and dragging it out in the courts until the company they are ripping off runs out of cash, thus time it’s a company that has all the cash in the world and to Apple its not realy about the money but the principal of it.

Samsung clearly made Android to look like iOS and designed the phone with rounded corners and speaker grill so it would a lot like the iPhone, they copied it as much as possible and hope that they could get away with it just as they have all ways done.

 

[tooltalk]

I hope Samsung loses, it is about time this bullying company gets punished.

Samsung has a past history of ripping companies off and dragging it out in the courts until the company they are ripping off runs out of cash, thus time it’s a company that has all the cash in the world and to Apple its not realy about the money but the principal of it.

Samsung clearly made Android to look like iOS and designed the phone with rounded corners and speaker grill so it would a lot like the iPhone, they copied it as much as possible and hope that they could get away with it just as they have all ways done.

For a few seconds, I thought you were talking about Apple when dragging lawsuits forever with all their tax-evaded cash.

Actually, it was HTC phones that angered Jobs to declare a thermonuclear war on Android -- Samsung was an afterthought. Further, Apple's designs weren't all that original either and copying someone else's copied design usually isn't considered a theft (eg, prior art), at least that's why most non-US courts agreed with Samsung.

 

[mi7chy]

Ironic the iPhone 3GS is now an abomination in design with tiny useless 3.5" display, large ugly bezels, physical home button, cheap plastic housing, etc. Apple should now be paying Samsung and Android for copying large display phablet, minimal bezels, no home button, gorilla glass back, etc.

 

[pat500000]

I guess it's difficult to say no when your main competitor comes to you begging for the AMOLED displays with a boatload of money.

Maybe triple the cost of what apple offers would mediate the situation.
[doublepost=1526432213][/doublepost]

That would be incredibly foolish of them.

And apple products aren’t?

 

[FrozenDarkness]

Maybe triple the cost of what apple offers would mediate the situation.
[doublepost=1526432213][/doublepost]
And apple products aren’t?

i don't think you understand how business works. Pettiness rarely "works."

There are plenty of companies that copy Apple, Xiaomi being one of the bigger offenders. This isn't just about samsung, this is about proving that litigation can protect your intellectual property. If it can't than well, that's the world some people want to live in.

 

[chizzlebot]

Translation: if Apple sues it’s justified and if they win they should be paid, if Apple is sued and loses the winner is a patent troll and Apple is being screwed...pathetic fanboyism.

Your translation reveals a lack of insight and understanding. Not all patent suits are equally justified. Virnetx are patent trolls who make nothing. Apple have a very long history of investing in and releasing world changing hardware and software.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

Funny how Apple thinks it should be full value of the phone.
For Qualcomm they think their royalty should be based on a component, not price of device; even though their signed a contract that says otherwise.

They want whatever works for them, even if it is contradictory.

funny how people do this...
[doublepost=1526432523][/doublepost]People quickly forget the deck that samsung made on apple design and how they should extract that for the galaxy.

 

[TomMcIn]

The article said it best

If SameSong produced a crappy phone without the copied features, how many would they have sold. They copied because sales of the phone without Apples features were tanking. All of the extra phones SameSong sold - most of them - sold because of the features they copied. Therefore all the extra phone sales are due to Apple and Apple's claim is correct.
[doublepost=1526433454][/doublepost]

The article said it best

If SameSong produced a crappy phone without the copied features, how many would they have sold. They copied because sales of the phone without Apples features were tanking. All of the extra phones SameSong sold - most of them - sold because of the features they copied. Therefore all the extra phone sales are due to Apple and Apple's claim is correct.

 

[Smearbrick]

1 billion dollars because they claim to have created a rectangle with rounded corners.

 

[groovyd]

The original iPhone didn't have "apps" like we know them today. It was a very expensive feature phone that couldn't even do MMS messages.
And it wasn't the first touch screen phone.
Samsung got dinged on a basic design element. As such, they should pay for the elements they were found to have infringed.
After all, Apple believes this is how they should be charged for using other people's patents.

... and the original sPhone also didn't have apps like we know them today. It was a bit cheaper of a feature phone that also couldn't do MMS (?) or SMS. And it definitely wasn't the first nor the second touch screen phone. But it was somehow still remarkably similar to the original 'iPhone'. Imagine that... they even managed to copy the things the original iPhone couldn't do or wasn't the first at lol...
[doublepost=1526435027][/doublepost]IMO Apple well deserves the entire billion and it really should have been payed a decade ago including lawyers fees and accumulated interest since the first phone sold by Samsung.

 

[BlargKing]

Honestly, they don't look that similar. Unless your almost completely blind, theres enough difference to tell them apart at a glance.

Apple doesn't own black rectangles.