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 Verdict: Preliminary Injunction Hearing, Possible Consequences, and an Appeal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have to agree with this, assuming the verdict stands, the consumer will have to adapt to needless differences in OS.
This is a good thing that Apple won. Not for Apple but for the consumer. This will mean at last instead of seeing thousands of clones, we will at last see innovation again. When Nokia were top everyone was copying and cloning them. If you look at Apple products their products have stayed mostly the same aesthetically for a number of years. Sure there had been a few design tweaks and some candy added to their software. However they have no competition because everyone is trying to copy them! Now they can't copy maybe we will see some real innovation, so much so even Apple will be driven to change!
At least Galaxy S3 is not included in the penalty 
it's good to hear that
http://i45.tinypic.com/imnk9i.jpg
There are the products which would have a consequence after the trial
it's good to hear thathttp://i45.tinypic.com/imnk9i.jpg
There are the products which would have a consequence after the trial
Listen, your hate for Apple is showing through your support of a THIEF, and admitting that you don't care. Your precious Samsung is a Sham.. Son. They wouldn't have the GSIII if it weren't for iPhone. I'd hope that Samsung's new GSIII would be better than a 2 year old iPhone chassis (I disagree that it is, however), since they saved all that R&D money by letting Apple do it.... then copy Apple's concept, and throw on a few extra tidbits and such.
You clearly have never been a leader, a creator, an innovator, because you don't understand the concept of protecting what's YOURS. Spending countless dollars, hours, blood, sweat, tears, innovating your own stuff, then having some leach just copy your every move. Samsung has EMAIL'S GALORE speaking of how insanely obsessed they were with Apple. They even had the audacity to make fun of Apple's fans because they don't have that passionate following of their own that they so wish they can also emulate from Apple. Funny thing is, now everybody knows that they were making "fun" of Apple by advertising a product that's an Apple wannabe.
You clearly want an Apple device but not from Apple. Sorry, but that's called Patent infringement, and the law doesn't allow it.
As for Google, they make ZILCH from Android. Anything they make is off of App sales. No biggie, as Apple makes even more from App sales, and has the MOST PROFITABLE DEVICES IN HISTORY. Apple can swallow Google whole with just the cash they have in the Bank (actually, they'd have Billions left over).
Larry Page just sold 25% of his stake in Google, maybe he knows that Apple is gonna drop the hammer on their leaching arses as well.
----------
That's tough. Apple invented those concept on a phone. You want them? Then buy Apple. Others will have to invent THEIR OWN ways of approach. If they're not as good, then it's not Apple's problem. Apple made a great and simple user experience, and it belongs to THEM.
Consumers being mad that Apple is taking away THEIR CREATIONS from others, so they can't have their Apple clones, are just incredibly selfish and clearly have no experience in business and art (creation VS imitation).
Apple NEED to protect their markets, because if they don't, then WE WILL HAVE SO MANY CLONES, THERE WON'T BE PROFITS LEFT FOR ANYBODY, I.E EXCESS DILUTION. WHEN THAT HAPPENS, INNOVATIONS STOP BECAUSE NOBODY HAS ENOUGH MONEY FOR MASSIVE R&D.
Apple protecting what's theirs is GOOD for the consumer, because it doesn't dilute the markets so much that all these companies go bankrupt eventually because they can't make any money. That's what happened to all those old now "flash in the pan" tech companies. Apple won't let that happen, because they're smart.
----------
Not trolling there. I was simply respond to the fact that as a consumer I must be " selfish ", and should totally buy Apple products because they win court cases
No, you should buy them because it seems everything your mad about Samsung losing, are Apple creations. You want them? Buy them from those who legally own the rights to them, otherwise, you're advocating for a knockoff.
Whatever doesn't change from Samsung, are things that they aren't found to infringe on. I feel that even the GSIII should be extensively re-imagined, because it's an evolution of a product line that was created SOLELY because of Apple's lead, and solely to compete head on with Apple *by making the exact same products as best they can*.
I don't really understand the logic of that sentiment. It doesn't jibe with reality. The iPhone was originally sold unsubsidized -- $599 and $499, for the 8GB and 4GB, respectively. Despite the hoopla and fanfare on launch day, sales were shallow after the launch, leading Apple to rethink the business model. Initially the model was consumer pays full boat, and carrier pays Apple a % of each cell phone bill. To juice sales, Apple had to go to the more traditional, subsidized handset model, where the carrier pays full boat, and sells to the consumer at a loss.
But even $199, $299 iPhones were not inexpensive enough for some consumers which is why Apple kept previous models on to sell at $99, $50, or even $0. History has proven the vast majority of consumers will not pay more than $299 for a phone. So these higher prices you are predicting are only in your mind.
Also, even without the named Android phones in the suit, there are plenty of phones, iOS, Win, Android, from which consumers can choose. The outcome of this suit was not that any phone that doesn't have an Apple logo is banned from the marketplace. Competition is alive and well for those that want to play.
Attempt being the key word.
Surely an appeal would also open up Apple's claim for infringement on the iPad trade dress for re-examination, with the possibility of another billion in damages that Apple missed out on the first time.
At least Galaxy S3 is not included in the penalty
http://i45.tinypic.com/imnk9i.jpg
There are the products which would have a consequence after the trial
That's a problem that Apple has; it takes time to start a court case, and in that time, Samsung can produce new products. Apple will examine whether the Galaxy S3 is still infringing on the same or other Apple patents and take action accordingly.
People calling "Monopoly" on Apple are funny, and I question if their minds are thinking straightly.
Android is the attempted monopoly here. They are supplying their OS to be the "Generic OS of the world". Every phone these days has Android, IOS is just there for ONE phone. Apple has no interest in a monopoly, they just need others to stop copying their lead.
Android is the one that WOULD be a monopoly if it weren't for Apple's leadership making them so relevant in the markets.
Also, people keep stating that "Android outsells iPhone".... I hope it would! It's a free generic OS that everybody gets when they don't get an iPhone or MS Smartphone. It's a free upgrade most of the time! You "take" Android, but you only get IOS when you "Want to buy it".
iPhone isn't interested in market share against Android, it's interested in profit margins to feed the company so the company keeps it as the supreme Smartphone. All glass casing isn't cheap, for one. If Apple wanted to take market share from Android, it'd be simple: License IOS for free and create more Apple phones: Bye bye Android.
However, Apple isn't interested in that. They're akin to a Luxury Car manufacturer, less dilution, a select high end product, i.e keeping it high in the brand cachet department.
Android is the attempted monopoly here. They are supplying their OS to be the "Generic OS of the world". Every phone these days has Android, IOS is just there for ONE phone. Apple has no interest in a monopoly, they just need others to stop copying their lead.
Android is the one that WOULD be a monopoly if it weren't for Apple's leadership making them so relevant in the markets.
Also, people keep stating that "Android outsells iPhone".... I hope it would! It's a free generic OS that everybody gets when they don't get an iPhone or MS Smartphone. It's a free upgrade most of the time! You "take" Android, but you only get IOS when you "Want to buy it".
iPhone isn't interested in market share against Android, it's interested in profit margins to feed the company so the company keeps it as the supreme Smartphone. All glass casing isn't cheap, for one. If Apple wanted to take market share from Android, it'd be simple: License IOS for free and create more Apple phones: Bye bye Android.
However, Apple isn't interested in that. They're akin to a Luxury Car manufacturer, less dilution, a select high end product, i.e keeping it high in the brand cachet department.
Honestly, in this case that shouldn't be necessary, because Apple makes billions in payments to Samsung every quarter.
You live in a delusional world. This ruling is pivotal for a number of reasons. Firstly, it proved the validity of Apple's patents. That means that any company found using these valid patents will be subject to the same fate.
Secondly, this opens the door for Apple to easily walk through and sue Android maker Google, and any of their hardware partners and the outcome will be the same - +/- a billion dollars.
Just so happens that Samsung is the largest of their hardware partners and Apple just made slaying them look like a walk in the park. What do you think will happen to smaller hardware partners? (ant - meet boot!).
I respect Apple for laying the smack down. They were all warned early on that the iPhone was patented to the "T" and they intended to protect it. I guess you have to learn the stove is hot by touching it and getting burned.
All of you mac fanboys that are celebrating now, I want to see you celebrating when you will have to pay twice as much to get your gadgets.
Apple would patent the oxygen we breathe if they could and charge us for it.
And before you jump into any conclusions, I'm an iPhone user myself, this doesn't mean I have to agree with Apple's actions. This is a happy day for Apple, a sad day for consumers and the technology world.
Apple would patent the oxygen we breathe if they could and charge us for it.
And before you jump into any conclusions, I'm an iPhone user myself, this doesn't mean I have to agree with Apple's actions. This is a happy day for Apple, a sad day for consumers and the technology world.
Why?
You realize most of the patent violations have already been adjusted in the most recent models? And the trade dress patents are pretty easy fixes.
Some people want to believe that Samsung is now screwed and they won't be able to compete now or that they have to come up with something radically new. They don't. They just have to tweak things as to not violate. No doubt these things that haven't been changed already have been discussed and approved in preparation for any legal issues.
Samsung, on some patents, either knew they were violating or were walking a thin line. They hedged their bets and as of now, lost.
Like I have posted before. This ruling is pivotal for a number of reasons. Firstly, it proved the validity of Apple's patents. That means that any company found using these valid patents will be subject to the same fate as Samsung.
Secondly, this opens the door for Apple to easily walk through and sue Android maker Google, and any of their hardware partners and the outcome will be the same - +/- a billion dollars.
I personally don't think that Apple will go after Google directly. I think they are going to rip apart all of Google's hardware partners. Secondly, Google is too smart to be caught up in this right now. In fact they warned Samsung that they are treading dangerously too close to copying Apple. Samsung decided not to heed Google's warning.
I mean seriously - did anyone think this outcome is such a surprise?
They copied hardware design, software look and feel, plugs, stands. Seriously, this wasn't a surprise to me at all. Don't be a fan of Android or iOS, Samsung or Apple - and take a strong look at the evidence. No other outcome could be expected.
Google themselves told Samsung not to directly copy iPhone when using Android. (it is in the court documents)
Of the patents that won, none mentions a square rectangle. That was from Samsung's PR.
Pretty sad how some people here at celebrating like they won something or have a part in this....here's a clue, you Don't. You are nothing but $$ signs to Apple.
Go outside, get a life and stop living through this stupid lawsuit.
Some of you probably woke up with a high hard one thinking about this today.
so pathetic
Go outside, get a life and stop living through this stupid lawsuit.
Some of you probably woke up with a high hard one thinking about this today.
so pathetic
Liar. They didn't sue Google because Google didn't officially make money from the OS. They gave it to others and THEY made money with it. Anyone with even a casual knowledge of law knows there needs to be monetization of the stolen IP in order to go after them for damages.
Oh please if the verdict had gone the other way this place would be full of gloating trolls left and right.
Listen, your hate for Apple is showing through your support of a THIEF, and admitting that you don't care. Your precious Samsung is a Sham.. Son. They wouldn't have the GSIII if it weren't for iPhone. I'd hope that Samsung's new GSIII would be better than a 2 year old iPhone chassis (I disagree that it is, however), since they saved all that R&D money by letting Apple do it.... then copy Apple's concept, and throw on a few extra tidbits and such.
You clearly have never been a leader, a creator, an innovator, because you don't understand the concept of protecting what's YOURS. Spending countless dollars, hours, blood, sweat, tears, innovating your own stuff, then having some leach just copy your every move. Samsung has EMAIL'S GALORE speaking of how insanely obsessed they were with Apple. They even had the audacity to make fun of Apple's fans because they don't have that passionate following of their own that they so wish they can also emulate from Apple. Funny thing is, now everybody knows that they were making "fun" of Apple by advertising a product that's an Apple wannabe.
You clearly want an Apple device but not from Apple. Sorry, but that's called Patent infringement, and the law doesn't allow it.
As for Google, they make ZILCH from Android. Anything they make is off of App sales. No biggie, as Apple makes even more from App sales, and has the MOST PROFITABLE DEVICES IN HISTORY. Apple can swallow Google whole with just the cash they have in the Bank (actually, they'd have Billions left over).
Larry Page just sold 25% of his stake in Google, maybe he knows that Apple is gonna drop the hammer on their leaching arses as well.
----------
That's tough. Apple invented those concept on a phone. You want them? Then buy Apple. Others will have to invent THEIR OWN ways of approach. If they're not as good, then it's not Apple's problem. Apple made a great and simple user experience, and it belongs to THEM.
Consumers being mad that Apple is taking away THEIR CREATIONS from others, so they can't have their Apple clones, are just incredibly selfish and clearly have no experience in business and art (creation VS imitation).
Apple NEED to protect their markets, because if they don't, then WE WILL HAVE SO MANY CLONES, THERE WON'T BE PROFITS LEFT FOR ANYBODY, I.E EXCESS DILUTION. WHEN THAT HAPPENS, INNOVATIONS STOP BECAUSE NOBODY HAS ENOUGH MONEY FOR MASSIVE R&D.
Apple protecting what's theirs is GOOD for the consumer, because it doesn't dilute the markets so much that all these companies go bankrupt eventually because they can't make any money. That's what happened to all those old now "flash in the pan" tech companies. Apple won't let that happen, because they're smart.
----------
No, you should buy them because it seems everything your mad about Samsung losing, are Apple creations. You want them? Buy them from those who legally own the rights to them, otherwise, you're advocating for a knockoff.
Whatever doesn't change from Samsung, are things that they aren't found to infringe on. I feel that even the GSIII should be extensively re-imagined, because it's an evolution of a product line that was created SOLELY because of Apple's lead, and solely to compete head on with Apple *by making the exact same products as best they can*.
want a cookie?
Not people under 70. My aunt (64) learned that lesson a couple of DECADES ago when she asked a young employee to Xerox something and the employee had no idea what she meant and when my aunt explained, couldn't understand why someone would call a Canon photocopier a Xerox.
And FWIW, my 80+ father calls his iPad an Apple or a computer. "Most" people don't call Samsung tablets iPads because most people don't know or care that Samsung makes tablets.
I may be wrong but I thought Apple won on pinch to zoom, double tap and bounce back. Bounce back is the only one that would seem easy to change to me as the other two are "core" usability gestures.