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 vs. Samsung Lawsuit Over iPhone Design Officially Reopened
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For those buying the image below and being outraged and judgmental about Samsung, please see below.
The hypocrisy of Apple:
Without the Mac there would be no OSX, without OSX there would be no iPhone.
So, thanks Xerox. And Apple, please drop the lawsuit, stop being petty.
Not to mention the prototype examples that weren't allowed to used by Samsung in court which has allowed the before/after image to be propogated as the truth.
Love how the Xerox had two mouse buttons
Last edited:
Sounds like you don't know what innovation actually is. Apple's design philosophy has never been 'different for the sake of different', like their competitors. Apple only does things which make a legitimate improvement to user experience. Samsung have changed phone designs hundreds of times at all price points, is each one any different in usability from the last? No. Apple doesn't design for interest and 2 weeks of reporter attention. A dual curved edge screen, how interesting, many articles and videos. What's it like to actually use? An abysmal design mistake with serious usability issues.
Only certain people fall for things just because they're new and different. The addition of tens of half-baked technologies which work 60-80% of the time isn't fantastic either. Something Android manufacturers do a lot. Again, just something new and different, not better.
Yet people still for it and they funnily, hilariously even, have become the kind of consumers people that people used to joke were Apple's customers.
LOL, kind of dependent on you actually reading my posting which obviously you didn't. Here, by the way, is a link to the commonly understood definition of "troll" as used in the context of the posting you neglected to read which curiously doesn't include "someone who disagrees with you". Of course if you didn't take the time to read my original links I am not sure why I would imagine you would read this one.I'm so tired of for putting out persons with different opinions as trolls. It's too easy. Use arguments instead please, thank you
[doublepost=1484348500][/doublep
In brief, the first article made it clear that people at Apple were working on GUIs, mice and networking before Steve Jobs went to Xerox PARC and the second article showed how Apple's failure to protect it's intellectual property cost them big time with Windows. That is why it was essential that Apple stomp Samsung's butt for blatantly copying the original iPhone which goes way beyond "rounded rectangles" as keeps getting posted here by people who cannot read beyond a headline.
But I know you stopped reading past the first sentence.
Not to mention the prototype examples that weren't allowed to used by Samsung in court which has allowed the before/after image to be propogated as the truth.
Love how the Xerox had two mouse buttons
If the argument was simply shape then you might have a point but of course that wasn't the argument despite what dozens of people keep posting. The court was aware that the relevant phones in this sample picture intentionally did not have active screens which would have been misleading. Courts can be smart that way.
Yeah, and Steve Jobs preferred the single button design and brought that to market. Guess who shipped more mice, Xerox or Apple? You can actually read what really happened in many great articles on the web, including this one.
All you need to do is look at the ridiculously cluttered status bar to see which one is Android.
[doublepost=1484378668][/doublepost]
Because they are companies and it involves money.
[doublepost=1484378668][/doublepost]
Because they are companies and it involves money.
Actually, what's bizarre is that you actually believe the iPhone 8 is going to use a curved design. There was only one or two rumors on this, which is not verified and you're speaking of it as if it's concrete evidence that the iPhone 8 will be curved. Unless you have inside sources from part manufacturers, then your post is a fallacy.
Crazy that the market leaders are the company that invented the iPhone and the company that ripped them off almost icon for icon.
No.The only salient point here is Apple should stop accusing Samsung for doing the same things they themselves do every other day.If Samsung copied Apple then this also holds true based on their lame claims
Last edited:
I was referring to the before/after pic that keeps getting posted, the prototypes invalidate the argument of Samsungs design before and after the iphone (I'm talking about here and the internet in particular rather than in court) as the before/after pic has been cherry picked, to make Samsung look like they had nothing in the pipeline.
As to them not having active screens, can you verify this, I'm not saying it isn't true but you seem to know, where did you read that?
I don't really care who sold/shipped the most mice, sales number arguments lead me to the conclusion that fast food must be better than a restaurant food.
Also, do Samsung ship more phones globally than Apple?
How's that work?
And where is the single button mouse now?
[doublepost=1484382183][/doublepost]
Which icons did Apple invent and which icons did Samsung copy?
Looks to me like Apple copied previous icons..
[doublepost=1484382269][/doublepost]
No.The only salient point here is Apple should stop accusing Samsung for doing the same things they themselves do every other day.If Samsung copied Apple then this also holds true based on their lame claims
But thats innovation, Apple never do things first, they perfect it in an innovative fashion
Last edited:
The hypocrisy of Apple:
I don't see the hypocrisy. Xerox granted Apple access to Parc concepts in exchange for Apple stock.
Where is the future? There is no future in the past.
Is there so little innovation to look forward to now with smartphones that this becomes a valid pursuit?
I surely hope not. Lead by innovating not litigating. If Apple puts their heads together I'm sure they
can disrupt once again... Besides if the innovation curve has flattened out with mobile computing then Apple
still has a lion share of continuing to service this huge market they basically created. This wreaks of foolish
pride and aggrandized self-preoccupation. I hope this isn't the pride before the fall but if it is get on with it and let it run it's course!
Is there so little innovation to look forward to now with smartphones that this becomes a valid pursuit?
I surely hope not. Lead by innovating not litigating. If Apple puts their heads together I'm sure they
can disrupt once again... Besides if the innovation curve has flattened out with mobile computing then Apple
still has a lion share of continuing to service this huge market they basically created. This wreaks of foolish
pride and aggrandized self-preoccupation. I hope this isn't the pride before the fall but if it is get on with it and let it run it's course!
My topic was specifically about people thinking this was nothing more than rectangles with rounded corners, when clearly there was a much larger and comprehensive effort to copy the iPhone down to very fine detail. I don't know whether that amounts to breaking the law or not, so I can't speak to the validity of the case.
Those facts have never been in doubt. This latest round is merely about revisiting and reassessing the true amount of damages incurred by Apple.
And here we go again. The Mac left in autopilot (nobody at the cockpit), while Apple and Samsung gift us a new episode in their love and hate series, with a teen pop soundtrack.
Hmmm... is the Sierra PDFKit still broken? Nevermind, let's watch the new episode.
Hmmm... is the Sierra PDFKit still broken? Nevermind, let's watch the new episode.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday reopened a longstanding patent lawsuit related to Samsung copying the design of the iPhone nearly six years ago, following an order of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court, according to court documents filed electronically this week.
The court will seek to determine the exact amount Samsung owes Apple for infringing upon the iPhone's patented design, including its rectangular front face with rounded edges and grid of colorful icons on a black screen. The previous $399 million damages judgment was overturned by the Supreme Court last month.
Apple's damages were calculated based on Samsung's entire profit from the sale of its infringing Galaxy smartphones, but the Supreme Court ruled it did not have enough info to say whether the amount should be based on the total device, or rather individual components such as the front bezel or the screen.
It will now be up to the appeals court to decide. Apple last month said the lawsuit, ongoing since 2011, has always been about Samsung's "blatant copying" of its ideas, adding that it remains optimistic that the U.S. Court of Appeals will "again send a powerful signal that stealing isn't right."Calvin Klein, Dieter Rams, Norman Foster, and over 100 other top designers filed an amicus brief in support of Apple, arguing the iPhone maker is entitled to all profits Samsung has earned from infringing designs. They cited a 1949 study showing more than 99% of Americans could identify a bottle of Coca-Cola by shape alone.
Article Link: Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit Over iPhone Design Officially Reopened
Jarndyce and Jarndyce anyone?
Plus Apple greatly improved what Xerox had. The Galaxy S was a poor quality and only really got good around the S4. By good I mean "lag free".