Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
working where I would I can only assume that it was not 2 weeks (I know your just saying it as supposedly). It have to be most likely at least 3 years. But, if I was a betting man, it would be 7 years. But, who knows what there laws are in Korea. Could be 2 days, LOL

Here's the problem with lawsuits, evidence and dealing with different countries...

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ruction_will_be_factor_in_upcoming_trial.html

The "mySingle" e-mail system is a web-client first devised in 2000 by Samsung subsidiary Samsung Data Systems and went live across the company's entire network in 2001. Court documents note "mySingle" adheres to "a general guideline [that] calls for all e-mails to be automatically
deleted after the passage of two weeks” without exception.

Samsung argues the auto-delete protocol avoids the theft of confidential data when a computer is lost or stolen and is cheaper than using a 30-day retention period. The only effective way to continually save messages is to click a "save" button in the web client every two weeks. Samsung claims the policy is in line with Korean law.
 
Would they have to pay a licensing fee (meaning would Apple "allow" their design to be licensed). Serious question. Also serious is - if Apple allows it - who sets the price and will it be a bit of a gouging so that any competitor of Apple's has to charge significantly more for their handset/tablet?

Well, I see that outcome differently though. First, Samsung would have to pay (somewhere was mentioned a $1bn or so?) for "lost profits" and "gains" Samsung had by selling the products. Then they would have to pay a licensing fee, I guess, or something equivalent. That would actually make the design something like a FRAND all Androids would have to follow if they are deemed having the same issue (I know it's not a FRAND patent but I just compare it here to simplify).
In my opinion, if Samsung looses, that is not binding for anyone else though. Especially, if Samsung looses on grounds of unfair manipulation and destroying potential evidence, it will not hurt others per se, won't even hust their position too much. It only burdens, let's say LG, that they as LG would have to come up with their own proof that they didn't violate Apple's rights on their intelectual property. If Samsung wins, LG and Co. are falling into a made bed. If Samsung looses, they know they will have to fight Apple on their own.
 
I`m sorry, have we met? You must be the authority on OSs.

In our household, we do have both OSs. We used to have BBs. I`m entitled to have any opinion I have from my own observations.

You on the other hand, lose your credibility by useless insults. There is the real ignorance.

I have all.
I have Android and have used variation fo it from 2.2 to 4.0.
I have a BB OS5, OS6 device
I have a iOS4 and iOS5 device
I have a playbook QNX device
I have OSx device
I have windows
I have linux
I have BEoS (it's fun to play, shush).
.... get the point i"m going for?

Are there some similar concepts? Yes. All feature an "app drawer" or grid based icon system for launching applications. But none of these are the originators of such concept. Grid based systems date back to the early GUI's and are the most common means of launchers.

Did android infringe on patents? i believe some. But is android a direct copy of iOS? BB OS? BEos? No. Android itself as a platform is pretty damn original in comparison to what was out before it.

There are no other platforms that offer the widget based homescreen, that have the same level of depth to OS that it's even capable of being run on other platforms, such as home entertainment systems, and even desktop use (though, I didnt ever get it fully working on my laptops).

What about iOS. i would argue that iOS is actually the least original. But thats because as a platform, iOS is actually fairly simplistic. the OS itself doesn't do a tremendous amount. iOS' biggest plus is that it's a base launcher for it's application centric concept. Again, using a permanently expanded "app drawer" grid system. Which they did not invent.

If you honestly confuse the multiple platforms and think they're extremely similar or even copies fo eachother, I would seriously question your knowledge as to what exactly is in question in all these. You're entitled to your opinion, But there is such thing as an ignorant opinion.
 
Why Apple Has Already Won...

Set everything else aside.

Let's look at the situation _Today Only_


Here are Ten Reasons Why Apple Has Already Won:

1) Apple has the most refined smartphone

2) Apple has incredible momentum in the market place

3) Apple has more markets available in which to sell the iPhone

4) Apple has the mature, stable, and highly profitable eco-system

5) Apple is the darling of the press anywhere in the USA

6) Apple is the Brand of Favor at all economic levels

7) Apple is the leader in sales of music and other media via iTunes

8) Apple has the deepest well of talent in R&D, and related fields

9) Apple always commands full price, no discounting of consequence

10) Apple has a track record of premium customer service




Not to mention, if we all collaborated, this list would be even longer.

At the end of the day, Apple would benefit by getting this behind them.

Build more world class devices, and kill competitors in the market place.

It's as simple as that :)
 
If the F700 is some sort of smoking gun that proves Samsung was on the same tract as Apple ahead of the iPhone unveiling, why didn't their attorneys submit this information immediately? It's not like this is the first case that Apple and Samsung have been in arguing with each other about IP. Does Samsung have the same guy handling their prototype archives that they do backing up their emails? Or was this never meant to make it to actual Court and only meant to be used as PR in the Court of Public Opinion?

I've gone back and looked at the F700 videos over the course of 2007 on Slashgear. The earliest videos (March) show a phone UI (Croix) that was hardly stable (and likely why only reps were allowed to touch it, not press) and only a mild improvement six months later. Even the ones in October of that year look buggy with users complaining of its unresponsiveness. I guess that's why they included a slide-out keyboard. :rolleyes: Even Android sites don't believe the bunk about the F700.

nope.png


WARNING: The beeb bop boop interface in the last video will likely make you need to do a number 1.
 
I think the reason is that it's an American company vs a Korean company in an American court room and naturally the American company must win this. Any other outcome would really surprise me and maybe even restore a little faith in the American legal system.
Oh, cheap anti-Americanism. How surprising.
 
Responses in Bold
Set everything else aside.

Let's look at the situation _Today Only_


Here are Ten Reasons Why Apple Has Already Won:

1) Apple has the most refined smartphone
the new Galaxy S III is being shown off as absolutely astonishing. hardware wise (not design), its brings to the table far more advanced tech than the current 4s has. in benchmarks, and in reviewers hands, the S III has been toughted as one of the best phones available, if not the best. With potentially the ONE X on it's heals. The iphone 4s is a nearly 1.5 year old device (3 years since the 4 was launched for it's looks). While a great device, to say it's the most refined and best phone? ehhhhh, subjective statement is subjective.

2) Apple has incredible momentum in the market place
Appples Momentum WAS tremendous. Did you not see the Quarter Earnings? There's many reasons for it, But Apples momentum has slipped. They're up big time from this point last year, But they are down big time from this point last quarter
idc_2Q12_smartphones.png

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1412842/

3) Apple has more markets available in which to sell the iPhone
Apple is in the same markets as everyone else. In fact, in developing nations, Apple is far from #1. much to many peoples surprise, in developing nations, RIM is still leading with sales due to the cheap nature of their products.


4) Apple has the mature, stable, and highly profitable eco-system
Yes, They do.

5) Apple is the darling of the press anywhere in the USA
The rest of the world doesn't see Apple so well. Many see them as overbearing litigation happy maelstrom who's willing to kill competition to maintain profit than actually go head to head.

6) Apple is the Brand of Favor at all economic levels
Wrong. Apple is the brand of favour fo the middle and upper class. The average "poor" cannot afford a $700 phone, nor the locked in contracts required to get one cheaper. The iphone has done tremendously well in established nations, and places with a defined middle and upper class.

7) Apple is the leader in sales of music and other media via iTunes
haven't looked this up. can't refute or whatever. so., "citation needed"

8) Apple has the deepest well of talent in R&D, and related fields
"citation needed", cause this is a very very bold claim to say they have the best people, when other companies have been developing other things that have shown to be just as popular. Apple might be the biggest single phone manufacturer, which might actually show that their talent pool is very narrow as to be single product focused, but Android platform itself has overtaken apple in sheer volume of adoption.

9) Apple always commands full price, no discounting of consequence
Apple demands full price, and when they can't comprimise, the consumer goes elsewhere. Again, Android has the bulk share of mobile phones around the world throughout many different levels of affordability. Consumers love choice.

10) Apple has a track record of premium customer service
Agreed. my dealing with Apple customer service has been top notch.


and kill competitors in the market place.
There's two ways of killing competition. Beating them at competiting by making products that people want more than their competitors, Or blocking the competitors from ever participating. Lately, Apple has changed gears from the first, to the second. That has pissed off a lot of people.

It's as simple as that :)
funny, it's not. As none of those reasons are what this lawsuit is about, and none of those have any bearing in the decision. I just felt like responding to kill time at work :p
 
Here's the problem with lawsuits, evidence and dealing with different countries...

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ruction_will_be_factor_in_upcoming_trial.html

The "mySingle" e-mail system is a web-client first devised in 2000 by Samsung subsidiary Samsung Data Systems and went live across the company's entire network in 2001. Court documents note "mySingle" adheres to "a general guideline [that] calls for all e-mails to be automatically
deleted after the passage of two weeks” without exception.

Samsung argues the auto-delete protocol avoids the theft of confidential data when a computer is lost or stolen and is cheaper than using a 30-day retention period. The only effective way to continually save messages is to click a "save" button in the web client every two weeks. Samsung claims the policy is in line with Korean law.

These guys don't have backups? Email Archivers? I retain backups for years across many servers, let alone an Exchange box or whatever. I could care less about the client side, but the server side is not backed up is crazzzzynesss... Oh well, thanks for the info! :)
 
Would they have to pay a licensing fee (meaning would Apple "allow" their design to be licensed). Serious question. Also serious is - if Apple allows it - who sets the price and will it be a bit of a gouging so that any competitor of Apple's has to charge significantly more for their handset/tablet?

The reason why I would see this happen is because it is now an "industry standard" and would fall under something like FRAND - meaning they have to license it under fair conditions. That is not bad. It is a gold mine! Not only that but if you look at who earns the money in the industy, Apple will get an even bigger share of the wins which in return leaves the competition significantly less money to invest in research. Some might even disappear or shift their focus on things Apple does not produce or might be up for grabs.
Samsung itself might be forced into very comprehensive cross-licensing deals with Apple as well. Apple also might force LG & Co. to switch to Windows this way. Funny part is, I wonder why Apple and Microsoft team up so many times and are not involved in big battles on court grounds. Also, Nokia as the former giant seems to be somehow staying away from Android. All that coincidence? I don't think so. There is more going on than we see on the surface. Android and its partners are not that much threatening competitors to Apple (since they are the only ones making the big bucks) but rather to Microsoft's OS and Nokia's hardware.
 
The reason why I would see this happen is because it is now an "industry standard" and would fall under something like FRAND - meaning they have to license it under fair conditions

I don't think that there are legal grounds to force them to license the design
 
I wouldn't bother replying to Apple haters on this one. They typically refuse to see things for how they are and will only want to see a case like this continue because of their hate for Apple.
Interesting how the usual suspects show up immediately to defend [insert company name here] against Apple. I have no problem admitting I'm an Apple fan. But I don't waste my time on Android/MS/Samsung etc. fan sites defending Apple. I don't get the point of it. :confused:
 
If the F700 is some sort of smoking gun that proves Samsung was on the same tract as Apple ahead of the iPhone unveiling, why didn't their attorneys submit this information immediately? It's not like this is the first case that Apple and Samsung have been in arguing with each other about IP. Does Samsung have the same guy handling their prototype archives that they do backing up their emails? Or was this never meant to make it to actual Court and only meant to be used as PR in the Court of Public Opinion?

I've gone back and looked at the F700 videos over the course of 2007 on Slashgear. The earliest videos (March) show a phone UI (Croix) that was hardly stable (and likely why only reps were allowed to touch it, not press) and only a mild improvement six months later. Even the ones in October of that year look buggy with users complaining of its unresponsiveness. I guess that's why they included a slide-out keyboard. :rolleyes: Even Android sites don't believe the bunk about the F700.

Image

WARNING: The beeb bop boop interface in the last video will likely make you need to do a number 1.

Wow. Just read the comments.

It's no surprise that Android fans are by far the most vocal authority on the internet and are pretty bad mouthed.
 
If Apple is sliding, what does that say about everyone else...

Image Image

Historically, these changes are normal market fluctuation. as most of these companies have seen less than <2% market share change over the quarter in America. This would be normal.

Looking from Apples own financials has shown a much different picture.
Q2
linechart.png


Q3
2q12_revenue_history.jpg


where's the revenue in phone sales going? (as I said, there are a few different reasons, but to say that they're carrying tons of momentum as the post i was reffering to is inaccurate


Old news. There's no real evidence that she's throwing the case to apple cause of her bias.
I just question the allowing of her to reside over it given her previous history. We call this a Conflict of interest. While she MAY be able to remain unbiased, there's no guarantee.
 
How are the interests of truth served by banning evidence from court?
The interests of fairness are served by preventing one party from sandbagging another. As is the interests of actually having a trial take place in this decade. The discovery period was *one year* long. During this period, Samsung somehow neglected to turn over evidence relating to the design of one of their own phones. Evidence which they now claim is very important. You can't deliberately fail to disclose evidence to the other side during discovery, turn it over late (putting them at a disadvantage), and argue that it should be admitted because it helps your side.

If this had been "newly discovered evidence" - evidence that Samsung didn't know about and couldn't reasonably have been expected to know about, the evidence would probably have been admitted - if Samsung found newly discovered evidence *today* it might be admitted, even. But when the evidence is just sitting in Samsung's files and they don't bother to turn it over to Apple until after the deadline...well, no court is going to be inclined to permit that.



They aren't.
Blame it on lazy lawyers and arcane procedures.
But the Judge does have the final say on what can and cannot be allowed.
The judge could have also allowed Apple more time to review Samsung's late submission, but she chose not too.
She's interested in a fast trial. Why? Because she knows whatever the outcome, it will get appealed anyway.
The lawyers might be lazy, but the procedures aren't arcane - Back in April of 2011, the one year discovery period was announced. Everyone knew about it; it wasn't secret. There's nothing arcane in that.
 
I don't think that there are legal grounds to force them to license the design

That is right. They can just do something different. Same way with any other patent or trademark. If you want to use the intellectual property though, you have to. If Samsung looses, they either have to make sure that they don't infringe by changing the design (e.g. the "N" Galaxy tablet in Europe) or they would have to pay. Now, they would have to pay for the ones they produced and sold already though and then fines etc. - after that, they can choose to either continue profiting from the sleak design and pay Apple if the design becomes FRAND (or whatever there would be, I'm not an expert).
 
This confirms a suspicion I had, less anything to substantiate my feelings.

It seems to me that with all the hero worship that surrounded, and still surrounds Steve Jobs, combined with the case being held in a Northern CA Court, the outcome is highly likely to be in Apple's favor with little attention to the true facts.

Furthermore as any of us that have been in court, or witnessed a high profile, high dollar case can attest. Reality goes out the window. Justice? What justice?

There's far too much data that can and will be manipulated.
 
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.

I would avoid responding to someone that loves Apple so much they said they would gladly accept a price increase on their products
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.