Did Samsung Copy Apple and the iPhone? What's the view of this community?

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by gwelmarten, Sep 17, 2012.

  1. gwelmarten macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Location:
    England!
    #1
    Hi All,

    I've always being an Apple supporter in the case of Apple VS Samsung. I've posted my opinion before about this, expressing with image comparrisons how I think Samsung copied Apple, and I'm amazed at how some people are able to view a comparrison (such as between the Galaxy Packaging and the iPhone packaging) and say there's no similarity. I also opened a thread yesterday (here) discussing how Samsung were wasting processing power and not even trying to make good products - just throwing power at them in the hope it would solve problems and give them something to market.

    However, all along I've being surprised at the discussions I have had with people - people who support Samsung and say Apple are being pernickety (to me that is like saying Apple should just lie down and let people make exact clones or rip off their innovations). Which is surprising to me - as this is MacRumors - a site where you'd expect the majority of people to be Apple fans (or at least interested in Apple).

    So, here's my question. Do the community feel that Samsung copied Apple and that the verdict for $1.05Billion in Apple's favour is right? Or do they feel the other way?

    Please show your opinion in the poll above.

    Sam
     
  2. matttye macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    Lincoln, England
    #2
    Yes, they copied, and yes the verdict was right based on current laws.

    However, I'm with Wozniak and think that all companies should just share their patents with each other. Imagine the best features from every smartphone rolled into one.
     
  3. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #3
    Without the protection of patent system, very few companies would invest as much as they do in R&D - something that even the Founders understood over two hundred years ago...
     
  4. Renzatic, Sep 17, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2012

    Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #4
    Thomas Jefferson would like to have a word with you.

    To quote:

    About 3/4ths of the people on this board, along with 99% of the tech industry, should heed these words. Shamefully, doing so would mean they can't sue each other for extra spending cash, so I doubt the status quo will change anytime soon.
     
  5. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #5
    Patent infringement is not about literal copying, direct copying or even indirect copying. The verdict really isn't about copying.

    ----------

    That's a bold face lie. Companies would invest as much in R&D, except they'd do it to differentiate themselves. Taking an idea from a patent and getting a product to market is a long endeavour. Once a "patent" is released, companies would have quite some time on the market with their exclusive to get enough of a reward out of it while the "infringers" scramble to get something working through reverse engineering (since with no patents, there are no published claims to explain how it's done).
     

Share This Page