Apple Requests Sanctions Against Samsung Delivering Default Victory in Design Patent Case

[dethmaShine]

Just because I present facts doesn't mean I am anti-Apple. I'm technology agnostic. And just because I use and enjoy Apple products means that I think that Apple as a company does everything right or that their products don't have flaws, etc.

As I've said in other threads - most of my post history will seem negative so someone completely Apple biased because I don't much care for FUD, opinions, blog posts, etc posted as facts. The fact that there are plenty of members on here who fail to think for themselves and actually do some research instead of relying on hearsay is astonishing. And sad.

And still, you don't provide facts. No body is asking you to be Pro-Apple. But if in every other topic/thread/post, you are going to be negative Apple, I don't know how one is supposed to comprehend those tactics.

Well, there is no need to change my perception. Stick to the thread, please!

 

[Mac21ND]

Within the legal industry, Samsung's attorney's are known for their bombastic behavior - they're really over the top in their language and tactics, so this isn't that unusually for them.

Still, it's not good to tick off the judge, which is what they did. Showing a lack of etiquette in the courtroom will get you nowhere.

 

[mdelvecchio]

The rejected evidence includes evidence about the F700 design and development.

wait, you mean this F700?

...dead ringer for the iphone, eh?

lets debunk this F700 tinfoil hat nonsense, shall we:

http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/20/talk-picture-samsung-f700/

 

[Enuratique]

Get Informed

A lot of people on here are pretty misinformed about the facts of the case, and in particular, this little development.

Read this and then get in the discussion. What Samsung did was perfectly legal and not "cheating". If anything, there's the appearance that Apple's using its media lapdog to spread a one-sided view of the trial in the court of public opinion. Tellingly, arn only posts from AllThingsD or Florian Mueller - two very-pro Apple sources. Just sayin', I think Samsung's lead attorney has a point.

 

[faroZ06]

That's ok. Both Apple and Samsung will always think of you as a $ sign regardless of who wins.

I will think of both Apple and Samsung as a company that I have the option of buying stuff from, and I do. $160 is worth less to me than an iPod touch.

 

[dethmaShine]

wait, you mean this F700?

Image​

...dead ringer for the iphone, eh?

lets debunk this F700 tinfoil hat nonsense, shall we:

http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/20/talk-picture-samsung-f700/

No.

My eyes are unable to see the QWERTY keyboard slider. No, I just cannot see that.

No, I wont.

 

[Peace]

And too many Apple products that look like other devices. Building on the shoulders of giants is how humanity moves forward.

He wasn't replying to an Apple hater though.

You see. The release of "evidence" not allowed in court makes one think it's true just by the publicity. You don't know it is or isn't. All you know is you see a document that purportedly shows a samsung device based on a sony device before the iPhone came out. You don't know the history of that non evidence or whether or not it is true.


You don't know whether it's true or not. Samsung has been sanctioned 3 other times in this trial. Mostly for destroying email that Apple could have used as evidence.

Samsung was willfully defying the Judges orders and they knew it.

 

[KnightWRX]

Oh god, did I really just have to debunk that Verge article twice in 1 day ? Can't you people read all the trial threads. Anyway, same post I posted to Rogifan, YES I MEANT THE F700, Because it is HIGHLY relevent. So much so, Samsung is risking contempt of court to show its evidence. Here's why :

wait, you mean this F700?

Image​

...dead ringer for the iphone, eh?

lets debunk this F700 tinfoil hat nonsense, shall we:

http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/20/talk-picture-samsung-f700/

I like this little tidbit from your biased source :

The entire aesthetic of the F700 interface is significantly different than either iOS or TouchWiz: the icons are monochrome and have unique designs, there's that cool X/Y highlight on the selected icon, there's a text label at the top. And the list goes on, especially if you look at the F700's actual homescreen:

Wait, why are we saying the F700's homescreen is different, but ignoring the fact that TouchWiz's homescreen is also "significantly different from iOS" :

Not to mention the piece completely misses what the trial and Apple's complaint is about. The F700 is relevent as Apple is claiming that it holds design patents and owns the basic design elements of their devices (section 25 of the complaint) :

The grid of icons, patent D790, filed Aug 20, 2007.

The basic rectangle with rounded corners and home button, patent D677, filed Nov 18, 2008.

Now, looking at the filing dates on these, it's no wonder Samsung is trying to get the F700 introduced as evidence. It pre-dates both of these and shares the few elements covered by these patents (god are these broad and simple. They're probably infringed on by just about every device out there, ridiculous).

Now, let's not get into trash tabloid journalism. You're a bright man, I'm sure you can dig a bit and understand the actual issues at heart here.

 

[faroZ06]

Yes. Clearly I'm an Android folk because I remain neutral. I'm sure the fact that I have thousands poured into Apple and the Apple ecosystem while only owning one Android device has completely skewered my ability to think clearly. How right you are sir!

When did he ever say that? And would you quit trying to call everyone a fanboy so you can feel like you're unbiased?

 

[LordVic]

My guess is that Judge Koh is going to get very exasperated with both parties before long. That seems to be what historically has happened in every such trial. She already tried to get the two companies to settle out of court.

unfortunately, from an outsider perspective (I consider myself brand agnostic as I use devices from everyone), Judge Koh also hasn't come across as the most unbiased judges in human history.

Samsung was going to have an uphill battle to start with. I wouldn't be surprised that if Apple filed for this motion, that she'd grant it almost immediately.

 

[dethmaShine]

You see. The release of "evidence" not allowed in court makes one think it's true just by the publicity. You don't know it is or isn't. All you know is you see a document that purportedly shows a samsung device based on a sony device before the iPhone came out. You don't know the history of that non evidence or whether or not it is true.


You don't know whether it's true or not. Samsung has been sanctioned 3 other times in this trial. Mostly for destroying email that Apple could have used as evidence.

Samsung was willfully defying the Judges orders and they knew it.

It is quite clear what they are trying to do. They are being sanctioned again and again and are hoping for a mistrial.

 

[Mad-B-One]

So you're not a fan of Mark Zuckerberg then either

Nope.

Actually, I don't consider myself a fan. I consider myself having an opinion (to almost everything). In this case, Samsung tried to pull (another-)one over and it didn't work (again). I know that Apple costs me way more that the parts are worth individually - hence their big Plus. Someone stated here we are just $ for them. And to a certain degree, that is right. On the other hand, I will not follow blindly. My PC at home is an AMD-based system with a Phenom II 1100T because that is the best bang for the buck. Sure, I can't run OSX and have to put up with the shoddy iTunes for PC, but I also have iCloud build-in in Windows 8 etc.
Back to the subject: In my opinion, Samsung is a giant who would have lost a lot by not copying the iPhone. So they did. In South Korea, they will always be untouchable but in USA/EU, they win one ruling and loose three against Apple. I just want to have the best products and wait on the side lines. Samsung will have a hard time convincing me that an Android tablet is worth anything for me. Windows 8 tablets on the other hand, I see that there is less copy but more innovation going on. Look at the integrated stand and keyboard cover! Look how Microsoft tries to go foreward with Windows 8 being simpler and yet deep for the Pros! That is innovation - not customizing the Android system to look more like iOS.

 

[KnightWRX]

You see. The release of "evidence" not allowed in court makes one think it's true just by the publicity. You don't know it is or isn't. All you know is you see a document that purportedly shows a samsung device based on a sony device before the iPhone came out. You don't know the history of that non evidence or whether or not it is true.

Jesus, stop with the Sony crap, that's just part of it. The important part is the internal Samsung documents about the F700 and its other projects involving touchscreen phones. Why are you constantly coming back with the Sony stuff ?

I have made no presumptions about the validity of the evidence, only replied to you that the reason is not "rumored mock-ups", it's because Samsung's legal team filed it late. I gave you the whole brief, which includes the internal design documents on top of the Sony stuff. Stop focusing so much on a single part and see the whole.

You don't know whether it's true or not. Samsung has been sanctioned 3 other times in this trial. Mostly for destroying email that Apple could have used as evidence.

Samsung was willfully defying the Judges orders and they knew it.

Yes, because to them, showing that the F700 pre-dates the design patent filings levied against them is important. They were late in filing it. That is all.

I never made claims to knowing whether it was the truth or not.

 

[2bikes]

Why ? Will you also think of Apple as having copied from Android for feature lists in the last 3 releases of iOS ?

Speaking of OS copies, there is a famous example in patents. Pencils. Someone patents the pencil. You cannot patent a pencil with an eraser attached to it. You have to pay the patent owner first to use his/her invention.

I`m probably bias but I see it as pencil being the iOS.

 

[samcraig]

You see. The release of "evidence" not allowed in court makes one think it's true just by the publicity. You don't know it is or isn't. All you know is you see a document that purportedly shows a samsung device based on a sony device before the iPhone came out. You don't know the history of that non evidence or whether or not it is true.


You don't know whether it's true or not. Samsung has been sanctioned 3 other times in this trial. Mostly for destroying email that Apple could have used as evidence.

Samsung was willfully defying the Judges orders and they knew it.

If Samsung has a policy for deleting emails after 2 weeks and it's proven that this policy has existed prior to this issue, then there's no deception going on. Is it "smart" behavior - probably not (in my opinion). But it doesn't make it dubious if that is indeed their policy. I don't know how long they've had that policy or if it is an actual policy/procedure across the company. Only what I've read.

So yes - they destroyed email that could have been used as evidence. But who here knows whether or not that was a deliberate act relating to the trial or just SOP

 

[Peace]

Oh god, did I really just have to debunk that Verge article twice in 1 day ? Can't you people read all the trial threads. Anyway, same post I posted to Rogifan, YES I MEANT THE F700, Because it is HIGHLY relevent. So much so, Samsung is risking contempt of court to show its evidence. Here's why :



I like this little tidbit from your biased source :



Wait, why are we saying the F700's homescreen is different, but ignoring the fact that TouchWiz's homescreen is also "significantly different from iOS" :

Image

Not to mention the piece completely misses what the trial and Apple's complaint is about. The F700 is relevent as Apple is claiming that it holds design patents and owns the basic design elements of their devices (section 25 of the complaint) :

The grid of icons, patent D790, filed Aug 20, 2007.

The basic rectangle with rounded corners and home button, patent D677, filed Nov 18, 2008.

Now, looking at the filing dates on these, it's no wonder Samsung is trying to get the F700 introduced as evidence. It pre-dates both of these and shares the few elements covered by these patents (god are these broad and simple. They're probably infringed on by just about every device out there, ridiculous).

Now, let's not get into trash tabloid journalism. You're a bright man, I'm sure you can dig a bit and understand the actual issues at heart here.

The iPhone was introduced before that phone in Jan 2007. Mock-ups were circulating from 2006.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/07/samsung-faces-credibility-problem-with.html

This is one reason samsung isn't trusted.

 

[faroZ06]

A more neutral link would be better.

That link is as neutral as MacRumors. Just because it has the name of an Apple-competitor product in it doesn't mean that it's biased. It was only reporting facts.

I think the argument about Samsung designs that are older than the release of the iPhone is dumb, but that's what Samsung is putting forth, not what Android Authority is arguing.

 

[KnightWRX]

unfortunately, from an outsider perspective (I consider myself brand agnostic as I use devices from everyone), Judge Koh also hasn't come across as the most unbiased judges in human history.

Samsung was going to have an uphill battle to start with. I wouldn't be surprised that if Apple filed for this motion, that she'd grant it almost immediately.

Judge Koh has ruled against Apple as much as Samsung. Remember kids : Apple had to appeal a rejection of their injunction request by Koh. It was only when the 9th district court rejected Samsung's evidence that Koh based her own rejection ruling on that she was literally forced to grant Apple's injunction (having no more evidence available to her to reject it).

I don't think Judge Koh is impartial. She does seem like she's getting tired of both sides and their antics to me.

 

[kdarling]

wait, you mean this F700?

...dead ringer for the iphone, eh?

It was Apple who originally claimed the F700 infringed on the iPhone's trade dress.

Samsung wanted to provide proof that it had been designed before the iPhone came out.

Obviously it's to Apple's benefit to not let the jury know that it was.

You see. The release of "evidence" not allowed in court makes one think it's true just by the publicity. You don't know it is or isn't. All you know is you see a document that purportedly shows a samsung device based on a sony device before the iPhone came out. You don't know the history of that non evidence or whether or not it is true.

So what. The Samsung news release wasn't for the jury, as jurors are instructed not to read news, watch TV, or read this forum about the trial.

The news release was for the benefit of reporters.

Samsung was willfully defying the Judges orders and they knew it.

The judge did not allow the evidence in court. There was no order forbidding it from being released to reporters... who could ALREADY have known about it, anyway.

The judge didn't like it because it makes the trial seem lopsided.

 

[neuropsychguy]

Apple needs to let all of this go, there are too many devices, samsung or not, that look like apple products.

That might be true but how many of those devices are made by companies that were/are major suppliers for Apple's products who likely had enough access to enough components of the iPhone to start to piece together its overall design? Samsung certainly did.

 

[dethmaShine]

It is really funny that people are pointing to F700 as a crucial evidence.

If the evidence was so crucial and important to the case, how could've Samsung simply neglected it; even though Apple included it for its own arguments.

How can company file its most crucial evidence after the deadline and then release it to the press. Please be careful --- the press didn't ask for it. Samsung has spoken another lie that they released the documents only when the press asked for it but this absolutely not the case. Simply swinging the jury...

 

[faroZ06]

Speaking of OS copies, there is a famous example in patents. Pencils. Someone patents the pencil. You cannot patent a pencil with an eraser attached to it. You have to pay the patent owner first to use his/her invention.

I`m probably bias but I see it as pencil being the iOS.

Wait, is the pencil thing serious? I'm pretty sure that any pencil patents would have expired by now if they ever existed. This means that the creator of the pencil is dead by now and has been dead for a long time.

 

[KnightWRX]

The iPhone was introduced before that phone in Jan 2007. Mock-ups were circulating from 2006.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/07/samsung-faces-credibility-problem-with.html

This is one reason samsung isn't trusted.

So you're saying that Samsung managed to make the F700 in a single month ?

By that logic, then Apple isn't to be trusted either, they must have copied the LG Prada.

Are you for real here ? FOSS Patents ? You tell me my links are biased and you link me to a Oracle consultant that has made no pretense of being openly biased against Google and has been wrong about every time he's posted an article ?

Are you doing this on purpose man ? Are you just trying to stir the pot here ?

 

[TMay]

Yes. Clearly I'm an Android folk because I remain neutral. I'm sure the fact that I have thousands poured into Apple and the Apple ecosystem while only owning one Android device has completely skewered my ability to think clearly. How right you are sir!

You aren't neutral.
You have never been neutral.
No one here is neutral; everyone has a desired outcome in mind
It isn't even possible to be neutral.

Few here have an understanding of what the facts are.

Fewer still, have the legal background to even make informed comments about the legal process.

All of the above is factual.

Yeah for my team!!!

 

[macsmurf]

lets debunk this F700 tinfoil hat nonsense, shall we

According to this Apple actually initially included the F700 as an infringing product.

Are you saying Apple was paranoid?