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 Renews Motion Calling for U.S. Ban on Samsung Products
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You dont just "Get over it" when it comes to theft
You dont just "Get over it" when it comes to theft and when that theft is then used to make a profit. You protect yourself, your product and the future of your company and fend of the parasites siphoning off your innovation and simply rebranding it as their own.
You dont just "Get over it" when it comes to theft and when that theft is then used to make a profit. You protect yourself, your product and the future of your company and fend of the parasites siphoning off your innovation and simply rebranding it as their own.
Considering how lackluster the last couple iPhone updates have been, it seems like Apple is now at the point where instead of innovating they figure it's just easier to sue.
Apple only seemed to take an interest in suing Samsung once the Galaxy line of phones (S3 and S4, for example) became REALLY popular.
Apple only seemed to take an interest in suing Samsung once the Galaxy line of phones (S3 and S4, for example) became REALLY popular.
A ban on Samsung sounds really cool. And it makes me smile
Yeah, a lack of competition is exactly what this market needs.
The problem with the case whether it had merit or not. (The case about design patents has merit.)
The problem with the particular case is that Apple lawyers came much better prepared than the Samsung lawyers. Apple managed to dismiss a lot of Samsung's evidence and prevent a number of key witnesses from appearing. Basically, Samsung had no chance to present its case about prior art at all - on purely procedural grounds. Meaning that case has being litigated as if decades of electronics and computer science didn't happened at all, then Apple popped out of nothing and then Samsung popped up too and copied everything Apple. (E.g. the files with old Braun designs, which Apple keeps coping to this date, haven't made it into the case. Ditto the mobile phone from 90s with literally the same interface as iPhone.)
All in all, the case will go on for quite some time. Best thing one can do, is to simply ignore it.
How exactly did Apple "Steal" anything from Xerox. In exchange for seeing all of Xerox's technology (which included not only the GUI, but OOPS which was the foundation of Obj. C), Apple allowed Xerox buy 100,000 shares at Pre-IPO prices (at about $10 a share)... I'll admit it was a lousy deal for Xerox, but they made and agreed to the deal......
Sounds like you got your "education" from watching a made for TV movie.
I haven't followed this case closely, but it seems to me that the patents in question in this lawsuit are about Utility patents rather than Design patents. Design Patents, which deal almost exclusively with ornamental factors, are difficult to defend (and don't even exist in many countries outside the US).
While Apple does indeed file tons of design patents, (and again, not being familiar with this case) I would guess that the patents in question (Pinch, Tap, rubber-banding) and Utility Patents, not design... Apple would have a much better argument if this is the case.
They do, it's called acquisitions. And Apple is defending it's IP and needs the lawyers to do so. Get over it.
These ridiculous gesture/feedback UI patents should've been thrown out the minute they showed up at the patent office. We need to fix our broken patent system.
Apple did not invent multi-touch input. Apple did not invent gesture input. Apple did not invent metaphorical visual feedback.
As someone who's worked in GUI research and design for decades, the fact that Apple thinks this stuff is their invention is both laughable and offensive. Apple has turned the whole industry on itself, stifled innovation, and acted like an egotistical crybaby where they've completely ignored the entire GUI research and design community, stolen other people's work, and then ignorantly acted like they're the only people who ever invented anything.
Apple did not invent multi-touch input. Apple did not invent gesture input. Apple did not invent metaphorical visual feedback.
As someone who's worked in GUI research and design for decades, the fact that Apple thinks this stuff is their invention is both laughable and offensive. Apple has turned the whole industry on itself, stifled innovation, and acted like an egotistical crybaby where they've completely ignored the entire GUI research and design community, stolen other people's work, and then ignorantly acted like they're the only people who ever invented anything.
Does quoting someone make you sound smart, even if it is completely out of context?
Something to ponder.
OMG facts! Stop it, Stop it Mr. Burns!!!
We need dumb cat gifs for the masses to truly understand.
----------
Does quoting someone make you sound smart, even if it is completely out of context?
Something to ponder.
Does quoting make you sound dumb?
Do rolleyes make you seem smart and sophisticated?
Does not acknowledging the argument make it not exist?
Something to ponder....
Does quoting someone make you sound smart, even if it is completely out of context?
Something to ponder.
there's so much irony here.
Yup, same here. And I'm not shy about telling anyone that buys a Samsung product that the company is corrupt. Nearly all of them just don't care, they shrug it off as no big deal because they have their copy-cat device firmly planted in their hands and that's all they can see.
Funny you should mention Xerox, because Apple has copied them. Lulz.
----------
Whether they had permission or not is irrelevant. The fact is, they didn't come up with the idea themselves and copied it.
----------
They didn't steal it, but still not their idea. They still copied Xerox's stuff.
Your post is not even worth a reply, but I will anyway.
Learn your history. Apple did not steal Xerox's tech, they legitimately took it and made it into a consumer product. Xerox was not interested in doing that because they never had the forward-looking vision that Apple did. You are claiming that Xerox invented MacOS, but MacOS was far more advanced than what Xerox had created. That, alone, is a big distinction.
Apple's strength of innovation is about building ecosystems and ease-of-use. Innovation does not equal invention. Too many people get hung up on that claiming that Apple doesn't invent anything. Well, it was never just about that. Apple delivers an experience by bringing together technology and arts and marrying the two into a well-designed product and/or service. To the order that no other company has been able to match in such large quantities and across such a wide range of products.
Apple didn't invent electricity, which is the most basic element that goes into a functioning electronic device. An application like SoundJam is no different. It's just a macro-component to a much larger end-to-end solution and experience.
There are some here who think Apple can do no wrong and has never copied anyone ever. It would also make their brain melt that companies can create better phones than the iPhone.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/27/5248252/sherlock-holmes-and-john-watson-are-in-us-public-domain
They did innovate. Samsung copied their innovations, thus apple needs to defend itself. When did you get the notion that engineers are the ones suing? Or is it the lawyers working on the lawsuit?
----------
Go after Samsung first. Then the rest will be easy.
----------
Apple adds features to products and software they use. Touch screens existed before, yes, but Apple made it better, as you would say. Samsung directly and consciously stole from Apple. Did you know Samsung has done with with other industries?
----------
What you call innovation is different than the definition of innovation. Please tell us how exactly Apple just repackages other technology. Apple adds to the product or software, which is the definition of innovation. Samsung used the same exact technologies and marketing to get sales. Even their lawyers couldn't distinguish the differences.
----------
Exactly. If I make something and others rip me off you betcha I will go for their throat. This is business and it isn't friendly.
going to change direction slightly and come back to the Original post and request... cause I'm even sick of the who steals what argument.
I just want to know the legal merrit for the argument Apple is using here.
They're not adding modern devices to the class action lawsuit. so the S4 and the like aren't being included in the suit or included in the original injunction.
What it sounds liek apple is saying is "The new devices are similar enough to the old devices and the OLD devices were infringing, so without the old devices, the new devices would never have been made so they should be banned too".
this seems like a pretty big logical leap to me and a little bit of a reach for apple.
IMHO, if apple has issue with the new devices, they either add them to the patent lawsuit or shut up about them. Trying to block their sale seems petty and anti-competitive.
I just want to know the legal merrit for the argument Apple is using here.
They're not adding modern devices to the class action lawsuit. so the S4 and the like aren't being included in the suit or included in the original injunction.
What it sounds liek apple is saying is "The new devices are similar enough to the old devices and the OLD devices were infringing, so without the old devices, the new devices would never have been made so they should be banned too".
this seems like a pretty big logical leap to me and a little bit of a reach for apple.
IMHO, if apple has issue with the new devices, they either add them to the patent lawsuit or shut up about them. Trying to block their sale seems petty and anti-competitive.
Apple is not doing themselves any good with this BS. I don't own a smartphone, but if I did it would be a Samsung. I don't like monopolies.
How is Apple a monopoly? Users prefer Apple's products, yes. But there are many other companies too. You can't rip off something do you can "break monopolies" and "enforce antitrust." This is more like you painting a masterpiece and someone photo copying it and selling their copy and making money off your work.
----------
Hold on. You don't feel like buying thief's products. I get that. But you don't feel like buying the company that is trying to defend its property?
----------
Made in China makes it okay to rip off designs and research and development? You put your time into something commercially successful. I'll go steal it and sell it for you, and won't give you a dime.
----------
Why? They copied. They should be stopped. Why should they continue to rip off a company's work? Here's a brand new, amazing, revolutionary, exciting proposition... Samsung should make some other way to implement those features they copied from apple. Wouldn't that be true innovation? Yes.