Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Wins Injunction Barring U.S. Sales of Samsung Galaxy Nexus Phone

Labeno said:
It's funny how so many people think Google did not infringe on Apple's copyrighted property. It would be a different story if these same people would just put blood sweat and tears into some product that they created on their own, then release it to the public, and over the next few months watch all the copy cat products start filtering into the market. Then they would finally say, "wait, I'm the one who came up with that unique idea. If you developed that in a vacuum, you couldn't have possible come up with the same idea. You copied my hard work." For all you folks out there who think Android is not copying, did you see anything like an Android phone before the day the first iPhone was introduced to the public? Nope. Then shortly after, iPhone look-alikes started popping up everywhere, a.k.a. Android. This is exactly what copyright law protects against. I'm an entrepreneur, and I support fighting again copyright infringement.
Click to expand...

Ideas aren't born in a vacuum. Apple had plenty of help and I struggle to find anything that they solely innovated themselves. Most of their recent "innovations" are just knocking off smaller people who did it first or buying them up corporate style.
 
joelisfar said:
“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong.”

“I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”
Click to expand...

Couple of things...... First being off, Android and iOS are not 100% orgianl ideas, they both stole ideas from Windows Mobile, Palm, RIM and a couple of others. Nothing wrong with using other ideas and improving them.

Android was in development when iOS was just still an idea in .....

They pretty much are totally different operating systems....

They don't look the same...or work the same.....

They have totally different goals......

Oh yeah, Android will never be killed.

This is totally insane.

I get the Galaxy Tab, not the phone.

I can't believe the day has come when Apple is worse than Microsoft :D

Owning an Android AND iPhone, I like em both.

I'll never own a Windows Phone, just not a fan of the UI. I'll keep to my Android and iPhone. BUT.

This makes me want the Windows Phone platform to start gaining ground with Windows 8, that way maybe it will stop Apple from suing over stupid **** like this.
 
I haven't seen the patents in question but does the Nexus use a Google branded search ala Siri or what exactly?

I have both an iPhone 4S and an HTC One X and the latter has just the standard ICS voice dictation and search from voice to the search engine. Is this the IP they are talking about?
 
Zombie Acorn said:
Ideas aren't born in a vacuum. Apple had plenty of help and I struggle to find anything that they solely innovated themselves. Most of their recent "innovations" are just knocking off smaller people who did it first or buying them up corporate style.
Click to expand...

That could be argued back to the innovations of Tesla.:)
 
djphat2000 said:
I'm going to take a stab at this and say "virtually everything"?
Not saying I "know" for sure on this. But, before the iPhone. The best thing you could have that was close to it, was what Palm Treo? Or some Nokia Symbian OS? I'm guessing, as again I could be wrong. But, in any event. I don't remember Google having any kind of OS before the droid. There "droid" was supposed to be for BlackBerries next OS for their phone was it not?
Which wasn't really that close to what iOS was and currently is.

From what I remember (help me if I am wrong):
1) Internet sucked on every phone till iPhone
2) Mail was great on blackberry's
3) Contacts were fine on other phones too
4) Not really any apps for phones in the manner it is today since iPhone
5) Touch screens sucked (not as good sorry!) as iPhone's screen
6) Ecosystems (phones to PC/Mac sync, share, etc) sucked before iPhone
7) PDA's before iPhone. iPhones gave you a computer in your pocket.
8) All phones didn't have the "obvious factor" before iPhone.

My last point is my biggest. Due to the fact that each phone back then had something you wanted or needed or liked, or whatever. But they did not ALL have it. A Palm was good for "X", while a BlackBerry was good for "Y", etc. Each phone did not excel at everything. The iPhone (and iOS) pretty much changed that whole thing. You now had the ability to run applications on a small device that was designed to work on such a small device. NOT a dumbed down version of a full blown app. Not a add on like "web browsing" but, an application designed to show you the web on a small device. The "obvious" being that it worked right for what your using it for. No other phone really had that. Which exception to certain features "PDA" like, which worked fine for what it was needed for. Limits of hardware and of course software made each phone good at somethings not, great for everything. Hence why blackberries are going out, and so to with Nokia's old Symbian OS in favor of Windows Mobile. You had good parts, not a great product. iPhones changed that DRAMATICALLY.

Before the iPhone, you didn't have the choices you have now. Now, ever phone maker wants to be like the iPhone. And give you everything the iPhone can give you. Whether they are doing it better or worse is up to the buyer. But, so long as they don't "copy" a patented idea from Apple. They are free to do what they wish to provide the best experience they can with there product.
Click to expand...

Are you making stuff up? "There "droid" was supposed to be for BlackBerries next OS for their phone was it not?", I've never heard anything like that, where did you get that information?
Also, internet certainly sucked on the first iPhone since it was limited to EDGE. As for HTML5 capabilities, this was just a natural evolution, phones had been getting increasingly more capable at dealing with normal HTML even before the iPhone, the only reason no one had reached all the way at that point was technical limitations.
 
The Man said:
Fun thing is, Microsoft already gets money from their patents used in Google Android. Who's to say the patents aren't the same kind as Apple's? Nobody is questioning this. The only difference is, MS licenses, yet Apple doesn't. Or these companies just don't want to pay to Apple in order to leverage their position as supplier and competitor.
Click to expand...

IIRC in a previous case (no idea which one - there have been so many) it did come to light that Apple had offered to license a patent to Samsung, which sounds fair enough...except they wanted something like $15 per patent and handset (in comparison to Microsofts $3 - $6 royalty which covers all the patents per handset). Microsoft now makes around $400 million a year from Android. Apple could very easily do the same if they were more realistic about the royalty rate.

I wouldnt actually be very surprised if we dont see a 'Google vs Apple patent dispute' soon as Google will get access to Motorola's 17,000 mobile phone related patents - you can guarantee there will be a few things that the iPhone violates so maybe Google can use them to finally put a deal down that is something along the lines of 'we license all our affecting patents to you if you license all your affecting patents to us'.
 
djphat2000 said:
I'm going to take a stab at this and say "virtually everything"?
Not saying I "know" for sure on this. But, before the iPhone. The best thing you could have that was close to it, was what Palm Treo? Or some Nokia Symbian OS? I'm guessing, as again I could be wrong. But, in any event. I don't remember Google having any kind of OS before the droid. There "droid" was supposed to be for BlackBerries next OS for their phone was it not?
Which wasn't really that close to what iOS was and currently is.

From what I remember (help me if I am wrong):
1) Internet sucked on every phone till iPhone
2) Mail was great on blackberry's
3) Contacts were fine on other phones too
4) Not really any apps for phones in the manner it is today since iPhone
5) Touch screens sucked (not as good sorry!) as iPhone's screen
6) Ecosystems (phones to PC/Mac sync, share, etc) sucked before iPhone
7) PDA's before iPhone. iPhones gave you a computer in your pocket.
8) All phones didn't have the "obvious factor" before iPhone.

My last point is my biggest. Due to the fact that each phone back then had something you wanted or needed or liked, or whatever. But they did not ALL have it. A Palm was good for "X", while a BlackBerry was good for "Y", etc. Each phone did not excel at everything. The iPhone (and iOS) pretty much changed that whole thing. You now had the ability to run applications on a small device that was designed to work on such a small device. NOT a dumbed down version of a full blown app. Not a add on like "web browsing" but, an application designed to show you the web on a small device. The "obvious" being that it worked right for what your using it for. No other phone really had that. Which exception to certain features "PDA" like, which worked fine for what it was needed for. Limits of hardware and of course software made each phone good at somethings not, great for everything. Hence why blackberries are going out, and so to with Nokia's old Symbian OS in favor of Windows Mobile. You had good parts, not a great product. iPhones changed that DRAMATICALLY.

Before the iPhone, you didn't have the choices you have now. Now, ever phone maker wants to be like the iPhone. And give you everything the iPhone can give you. Whether they are doing it better or worse is up to the buyer. But, so long as they don't "copy" a patented idea from Apple. They are free to do what they wish to provide the best experience they can with there product.
Click to expand...
That's a large exaggeration. I think it's a stupid way of thinking.

It is true that Apple was very successful at marketing smartphones and raising awareness and interest in them. Good for them. But the same thing applies to virtually every other product.

The first company that invented flat-screen TVs. Should it be the only company allowed to produce them? It raised interest and awareness, and other companies started producing flat screen TVs. Nobody is saying that other companies stole the idea.

Social networks. Websites like MySpace created interest in that market. Now Facebook is the main competitor.

So Apple raised interest in the smartphone market and other companies can be thankful, I can't argue with that. But again, this happens all the time with other things.

But coming back to phones. Remember the first iPhone?

It had no MMS. It had no 3G so the internet was slow (that's for your "Internet sucked on every phone till iPhone", which is simply untrue). There was no App Store ("Not really any apps for phones in the manner it is today since iPhone"). Those holes were filled over time, but we have to remember, the phone was lacking functionality.

I think you're looking at what iPhone is now and pretending that it could do all that at the beginning. iPhone was evolving, and other phones were evolving too.

Google copied "virtually everything"? I think "virtually nothing".
 
This circle of lawsuits is going from bad to farce.
These companies damage only themselves.

The lawyers must be laughing all the way to the bank:rolleyes:
 
robanga said:
I have both an iPhone 4S and an HTC One X and the latter has just the standard ICS voice dictation and search from voice to the search engine. Is this the IP they are talking about?
Click to expand...

Yes. Basically, Judge Koh agreed with Apple's claims that:

  • The ICS Search Box widget internally infringes on Siri's search heuristics. But that's not enough for an injunction.

  • Siri drives iPhone sales and they are irreparably hurt by the Nexus having that internally infringing search box. This is what the injunction is about.

Now, leaving aside the question as to whether or not Siri drives sales, it doesn't seem fair to grant an injunction over a possible internal patent infringement.

Buyers do not look at how something is implemented internally, so any code method similarity is not a factor in their purchase.
 
The Mercurian said:
This circle of lawsuits is going from bad to farce.
These companies damage only themselves.

The lawyers must be laughing all the way to the bank:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm sure each corporation retains their own panel of lawyers, litigation has always been the tool to define fair competition.
 
Bezetos said:
That's a large exaggeration. I think it's a stupid way of thinking.

It is true that Apple was very successful at marketing smartphones and raising awareness and interest in them. Good for them. But the same thing applies to virtually every other product.

The first company that invented flat-screen TVs. Should it be the only company allowed to produce them? It raised interest and awareness, and other companies started producing flat screen TVs. Nobody is saying that other companies stole the idea.

Social networks. Websites like MySpace created interest in that market. Now Facebook is the main competitor.

So Apple raised interest in the smartphone market and other companies can be thankful, I can't argue with that. But again, this happens all the time with other things.

But coming back to phones. Remember the first iPhone?

It had no MMS. It had no 3G so the internet was slow (that's for your "Internet sucked on every phone till iPhone", which is simply untrue). There was no App Store ("Not really any apps for phones in the manner it is today since iPhone"). Those holes were filled over time, but we have to remember, the phone was lacking functionality.

I think you're looking at what iPhone is now and pretending that it could do all that at the beginning. iPhone was evolving, and other phones were evolving too.

Google copied "virtually everything"? I think "virtually nothing".
Click to expand...

Well said, that reminds me of my 2005 Pocket PC From HP running windows mobile,

It had mobile video service
turn by turn voice GPS
TV Out
media card readers for Compact Flash ( oh my god lol )
16 Bit Color Screen
Touch Screen, with included pen
MMS
Very good mobile browser.
Pretty good games if you were patient lol.

I mean, it did weigh a TON, was thick, and ate batterys like I eat Peanuts at a Bar.

But, it pretty much did everything the iPhone did, actually. It did more than than iPhone. And it did everything faster, and did it better,.

The iPhone was simple an easy to use consumer package, that they marketed very well, it didn't bring anything new to the tablet as far as I was concered. Still the iPhone series are great phones.
 
MacRumors said:
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]

Quote:
"Apple has made a clear showing that, in the absence of a preliminary injunction, it is likely to lose substantial market share in the smartphone market and to lose substantial downstream sales of future smartphone purchases and tag-along products," Judge Koh said in Friday's ruling.

Just days after Apple won an injunction barring U.S. sales of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1, Reuters reports that the same judge has issued a second preliminary injunction that would bar sales of Samsung's Galaxy Nexus smartphone.The new Galaxy Nexus injunction is a much more significant victory for Apple, as evidenced by the $95 million bond Apple will need to post in order for the injunction to take effect.
Click to expand...

Well we all know how devastating it was when the initial flurry of "Droid X, and other Androids" were introduced by Verizon, just prior to Apples release of the iPhone 4.

Pre-orders collapsed to just a few hundred, Apple had to rent wherehouse space to store the thousands of unsold iPhones that had been manufacturered in anticipation of high demand, and the total loss to Apple ran nearly a billion dollars.

Apple was embarrased by the front page news of how Android totally dominated, and now Apple is on the verge of closing it's doors.

I am so happy that this injunction will buy Apple some time to reach out to the venture capitalists for a loan to keep them in business.

Oh, the horrors of it all... Damn You Samsung!
 
What an absolute joke. One thing to destroy competition through great marketing and ease of use.

It's quite another to win through suing the competition.

Folks, this is bad news for Apple and Samsung fans alike, the less competition there is the less innovation (just look at the iPod line).
 
I have an iPhone and iPad and I think Apple is alright, but I really don't like their lawsuits against nearly every competitor. As a consumer, it's bad for me. I don't care if Apple's patents are being infringed upon (software patents btw...), I don't care if the devices look the same; I am not an Apple executive.

I care about competition in the market, which forces Apple, my preferred mobile phone manufacturer, to continually improve their product and stay alive with the competition. All these lawsuits and sale bans are ultimately bad for us consumers.

The GNex is a great phone and I honestly considered the unlocked GSM version when it came out. I had a factory locked ATT iPhone on Tmobile, and I hated the Gevey SIM. But I dealt with it and got my iP4 factory unlocked by ATT. I would consider it worthy competition. In terms of Google versus Apple, it was flagship phone against flagship phone. I know the GNex is manufactured by Samsung, but it's still Google's stock Android device.

I mean there is so much variability in ideas when it comes to a smartphone's operating system. The further down the road we go, I feel the more software patents will be infringed upon as things begin to mesh together.

Just my .02
 
ixodes said:
Well we all know how devastating it was when the initial flurry of "Droid X, and other Androids" were introduced by Verizon, just prior to Apples release of the iPhone 4.

Pre-orders collapsed to just a few hundred, Apple had to rent wherehouse space to store the thousands of unsold iPhones that had been manufacturered in anticipation of high demand, and the total loss to Apple ran nearly a billion dollars.

Apple was embarrased by the front page news of how Android totally dominated, and now Apple is on the verge of closing it's doors.

I am so happy that this injunction will buy Apple some time to reach out to the venture capitalists for a loan to keep them in business.

Oh, the horrors of it all... Damn You Samsung!
Click to expand...

well played. ;)
 
iEvolution said:
What an absolute joke. One thing to destroy competition through great marketing and ease of use.

It's quite another to win through suing the competition.

Folks, this is bad news for Apple and Samsung fans alike, the less competition there is the less innovation (just look at the iPod line).
Click to expand...

The judgement in favor of an injunction is itself an act of fairness to stop an act that may infringe on the rights of another, until the dispute is resolved.
 
thewap said:
interesting. Will have to read up on that. Applying film and print rights logic is my mistake.

So in other words performance of an other's intellectual property only needs approval if you change the music's format, so how does the royalty system work in this scenario?
Click to expand...

Whenever music is performed publically a royalty fee is collected from the organizer and this is then distributed to the various copyright holders of the music that was performed. This always takes place, even if the one performing the music is the copyright holder himself/herself and regardless of if the music is an original or derived version.
I'm not sure exactly how the copyright holder is compensated when a re-recording of the work is sold to consumers, but I would think small royalties are collected from the publisher for each copy just as it would be even when the performing artist on the recording is the same as the copyright holder.
 
Lennholm said:
Are you making stuff up? "There "droid" was supposed to be for BlackBerries next OS for their phone was it not?", I've never heard anything like that, where did you get that information?
Also, internet certainly sucked on the first iPhone since it was limited to EDGE. As for HTML5 capabilities, this was just a natural evolution, phones had been getting increasingly more capable at dealing with normal HTML even before the iPhone, the only reason no one had reached all the way at that point was technical limitations.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone#Early_years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)

I did say "correct me if I am wrong" but, in any event. I believe I remember hearing that was to be the case. The next OS for Blackberry was going to be an early Android OS. Again, that could have been speculation or worked on, I don't know for 100% certainly. But, in either event. Apple came out with the iPhone first.

The web ROCKED on the iPhone. That was not in question. If your going to limit its abilities to just the fact that it ran on an EDGE network, well so did pretty much every other phone out there (or speed range for there respective networks). There wasn't anything like it before. Hence the praise it received from reviewers, and of course paramount to its success at the time, and since.

Even when Flash became an issue that was attempted to be fixed by including it with Googles Android OS (application to be downloaded to phone). It's not been pretty apparent that Steve Jobs rant proved to be 100% correct. That Flash sucked on mobile devices. Hence why Adobe is not going to support it after this August. And everything will move to HTML5 as the standard for replacement that currently uses Flash on the web.

So, I'm not making stuff up. If I am not sure, I'll say so. But, when I am I'll back that up. If I am wrong, I'll accept it and add that to my collective knowledge on any subject. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back