Apple Granted Access to Unreleased Samsung Hardware in Patent Suit

[Aduntu]

The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.

If you think the issue exists simply because of a "touchscreen computer with applications," you're dumber than you already look. You either haven't seen the blatant copying on Samsung's part, or you're being a troll.

Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live in a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!!

Your ignorance is evident by your ridiculous comparison. You cannot blatantly copy something that was made by someone else and not expect backlash from the company you stole from.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

LMAO!

Version 2 of the galaxy tablet will be atrocious. I have a couple of groupies who want to argue my prediction but they will see.

As for some history of version 1, see these notes and links:

1. Galaxy tablet release date: September 2010

2. First 1 million units reported sold: December 2010


3. I already posted a lot on this previously. See it here as I will not waste time repeating it. The first two links above are not in the list

4. Wikipedia states 6 million shipped as of April this year but cites the WSJ article that does not provide this figure. So it is not clear that many shipped, let alone sold.

 

[Jcoz]

For those who are apparently unclear on the concept, patent protection is a "use it or lose it" proposition. You get exclusivity on the use of the patent AND legal protection of your rights PROVIDED you monitor others' use/abuse of your patented IP. So Apple HAS TO go after any perceived infringement or it risks losing the rights to protect itself against future infringement. It's not bullying, it's what the law requires a patent-holder to do when it sees a possible infringing act.

An analogy would be property rights. You see neighborhood kids cutting through your property for years and do nothing and then you try to get one of them arrested for trespassing. They can use your inaction in the past to suggest that you weren't vigilant and in fact gave them license to cut through. Same here. If Apple lets Samsung slide, all the next guy has to do is to say "we're not doing anything that Samsung didn't do but Apple didn't care about them."

Please, no need for reason or logic in this thread.

 

[mack pro]

That seems strangely generous to Apple - offering them access to unreleased Samsung products in case they might, maybe, infringe on Apple's patents/trademarks. That seems a little 'guilty until proven innocent' to me.

You can't really imagine anyone ordering Apple to hand over any of their unreleased products. In fact, one side-effect of this ruling might be that Apple may get even more obsessive about future product secrecy, thus giving competitors a potential chance to file for a preliminary injunction.

It looks like Apple's getting special treatment even if that's not the case.

 

[quizdogg]

You don't understand ...

Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

Its not bullying, it business. I commend Steve and the rest of Apple for doing their best to stay on top.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

I don't know what that has to do with your original claim ten-oak but congratulations anyway.

I'll stop smashing my head into the wall and drop this now as it seems you have difficculties with the questions at hand.

You can't put sense where it won't go so to say.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

But to post it as fact before it is has even been released is idiocy.

I'd guess if anyone came on here and posted "Windows Phone 7 sells more than the iPhone ever will" that there would be cries for proof/sources or at worst, ridicule over the poster.

Can you not see this yourself? I know he is biased but to spew inaccuracies leaves little credibility in a poster.

EDIT: I suppose that I could sum it up that there are good fallacies that are easily overlooked here and bad. This leaves little room for good, adult discussion.

Adult discussion does not include dwelling on my mistake about version 2's release. You can keep up with that but you cannot argue the version 1 sales were anywhere near those of the ipads. And I will say again that version 2 will be a failure based on what I have seen. Go ahead and demand numbers for a product not released again. It won't change my prediction. Samsung is still "rethinking" version 2 as far as I know.

 

[JAT]

At least the xoom has some originality.

?? Really? Is that the buttons on the back?

Samsung should hold apple hostage by not producing anymore chips and lcds

Lol

Why would they break a lucrative contract? Apple is willing to buy every single panel they make in certain sizes. Your idea would be the stupidest thing Samsung could do.

 

[gnasher729]

I think if I was Samsung, I would be giving Apple the crappiest most half finished prototypes I could find.

Not producing what you are asked to produce in a discovery request usually ends very, very, very painful. If Samsung produces "half finished" prototypes so that Apple cannot determine whether or not they are copies of Apple products, then any judge would decide that obviously Samsung has something to hide, so they _are_ copies.

...you people don't get it, do you?

This is the most brilliant win-win. Win: Apple can shut down Samsung if they find something they can sue for/argue with. Win: Apple sees ALL the design and engineering, so they can learn from the superior design ideas and laugh at the flaws and clumsy bits.

Brilliant, but evil.

Totally clueless. Apple does _not_ see any of these designs. No Apple engineer will ever see them (until they are available to the public). No Apple in-house lawyer will ever see them. The only people seeing these devices are outside counsel, and if they show these to anybody, they will be in deep trouble. There would be contempt of the court first, theft of trade secrets next.

 

[Mac.World]

Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

They did that a couple of times. Got burnt by both companies as a result.

 

[toddybody]

Its not bullying, it business. I commend Steve and the rest of Apple for doing their best to stay on top.

Doing their best to stay on top? OMFG youve got to be joking. This is piss poor business ethics and completely unfair.

 

[sciwizam]

LMAO!

Version 2 of the galaxy tablet will be atrocious. I have a couple of groupies who want to argue my prediction but they will see.

Doesn't compute.

I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

I don't know what that has to do with your original claim ten-oak but congratulations anyway.

I'll stop smashing my head into the wall and drop this now as it seems you have difficculties with the questions at hand.

You can't put sense where it won't go so to say.

From what I gather you only want to deflect my my comments on Samsung's failed tablet by harping on my mistake about version 2's release date.

Is there another reason you keep asking for sales or ship numbers for version 2?

Lets clear it up shall we?

1. Version one is a failure.

2. You want me to show you numbers for version 2 sales and shipments. I can't because it hasn't been released yet. Please tell me if this is what you are asking? Because I think it is established that it hasn't been released yet. But do make it clear if you are asking something else. We wouldn't want to get this wrong.

3. My opinion is that version 2 will be a failure just like version 1. See my other posted links on the dismal sales of the galaxy tablet. Do you understand that this is my opinion and what I base it on? Do you understand i can't give you numbers for version 2 but I feel confident about my prediction no matter how much you want to disagree or ask me again for sales nubmers that don't exist?

4. Now if you can get past asking me for numbers that do not exist, understand I am offering an opinion, and disagree with my opinion, then please explain why given the failure of version 1, that you disagree with my opinion?


Thanks

Doesn't compute.

Doesn't compute?

It is called a mistake. Can you understand a mistake? Version 2 is not released yet. I thought it was.

You should work for a political campaign. Constant deflection.

Now given everything else, explain why version 2 will not be a flop.

And let me add that continuing to focus on my mistake about the release date is not an argument. Attacking my mistake is not an argument at all.

 

[tekker]

From what I gather you only want to deflect my my comments on Samsung's failed tablet by harping on my mistake about version 2's release date.

Is there another reason you keep asking for sales or ship numbers for version 2?

Lets clear it up shall we?

1. Version one is a failure.

2. You want me to show you numbers for version 2 sales and shipments. I can't because it hasn't been released yet. Please tell me if this is what you are asking? Because I think it is established that it hasn't been released yet. But do make it clear if you are asking something else. We wouldn't want to get this wrong.

3. My opinion is that version 2 will be a failure just like version 1. See my other posted links on the dismal sales of the galaxy tablet. Do you understand that this is my opinion and what I base it on? Do you understand i can't give you numbers for version 2 but I feel confident about my prediction no matter how much you want to disagree or ask me again for sales nubmers that don't exist?

4. Now if you can get past asking me for numbers that do not exist, understand I am offering an opinion, and disagree with my opinion, then please explain why given the failure of version 1, that you disagree with my opinion?


Thanks

LOL if Apple really thought the Galaxy Tabs were going to be ******, they wouldn't be suing Samsung over it.

 

[Thunderhawks]

iPad 3 didn't sell any in 2011 in the end. It was delayed until Q1, 2012.

So, Galaxy June 8th Sales win this year, unless ipad 2 comes out in August!

But seriously folks.... who in the world cares what is shipped when?

The constant pissing contest between ipad and others is a total waste. I like brunettes. That doesn't make all blondes or redheads bad choices.

Buy the product you like best and be on your merry way!

Everybody happy now?

 

[ny3ranger]

Really? That just seems....unfair.

It would be unfair if their products didn't really resemble apples products. They are close enough that they lost the ability to keep their upcoming products look and feel hidden from apple. Unfair but hey if you didn't make it similar then you wouldn't be in this scenario.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

LOL if Apple really thought the Galaxy Tabs were going to be ******, they wouldn't be suing Samsung over it.

A reasonable argument (compared to "show me version 2 numbers" when we all know it hasn't been released yet).


I disagree though. I think Apple is just protecting itself. If they allow Samsung to get away with such a blatant copy, then others will too.

 

[inlovewithi]

Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)

I bought a PDA in 2003, and if you change the home screen to the style where it shows Icons, and I showed it to a fanboy, they would say that it was a copy of the Iphone.

 

[ridley182]

In your face Samsung! Next time come up with your own designs.

 

[Meandmunch]

A tablet is ultimately a tablet, especially when the race is to get as thin and flat as possible. That said, I think the back of the Samsung is very distinctly Samsung (and rather nice I might add) Apple does not have a case there. However the interface smacks of iOS badly.

Just out of curiosity why was my comment voted down?

 

[shaynes]

What this thread makes clear is that few people here have actually read the lawsuit in question, or have taken any time to learn about the applicable legal terminology. For one thing, the majority of the claims in the lawsuit Apple filed with Samsung are concerning trade dress, not patents. Second, as soon as you claim that Samsung is not an innovative or influential tech company, you lose absolutely all credibility.

 

[dba7dba]

I wouldn't associate the level of innovation with number of patents, all that shows it that they have more lawyers than engineers.

Are you saying IBM is not innovative?

R&D spending by Apple & Samsung. Slightly different time frame but still...

Apple 1.1B in 2008
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/11/07/apple-adds-staff-boosts-randd-spending-in-fy2008/


Samsung 6B in 2009
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2010/1115/R-D-spending-Here-are-the-Top-10-firms/Samsung

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

LOL if Apple really thought the Galaxy Tabs were going to be ******, they wouldn't be suing Samsung over it.

A reasonable argument (compared to "show me version 2 numbers" when we all know it hasn't been released yet).


I disagree though. I think Apple is just protecting itself. If they allow Samsung to get away with such a blatant copy, then others will too.

No one would of mentioned "version 2 numbers" if you hadn't posted them as fact.

Kudos that you eventually admitted a mistake tho. Had you done earlier I wouldn't have questioned your sources any further. We're all only human afterall and more than susceptible to make mistakes.

 

[pcuser94]

It's called business.

It's called forming a monopoly. Literally destroying all competition. It is a sin and it is a crime. Steve Jobs has horrible business tactics and should be sued.

 

[MacAddict1978]

Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

You were ass backwards in this statement, but turning it around a bit, Apple did learn from Microsoft. Don't forget that Microsoft did this exact same copy and paste deal in the 80's with the Windows interface. Apple did try to sure, but the problem was they'd been working with Microsoft and sort of accidentally gave the farm away. If not for a bunch of misteps in those dealings, the Windows user interface would look vastly different today or they'd be paying out the butt to Apple.

Apple is just not willing to repeat history and design an interface for a competitor again. Nor should they. Samsung has the little faux dock, IOS layout, color schemes, similiar icons...