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

European Commission Opens Investigation into Samsung's Patent Threats Against Apple

guch20 said:
I'll try this again. I think maybe there's a language barrier between us
Click to expand...

Yeas, there is a language barrier because you don't read what I have written si I gave up.



guch20 said:
Call me crazy, but it sure sounds like they're saying Samsung (and by extension, Android) is in a world of hurt after just a few preliminary hearings, with many more hearings to come.
Click to expand...


1. The first link doesn't have any "experts" opinion and doesn't say that Samsung is in trouble in the full trial. It only says that "may" influence other trials. And the author even has forgotten that the infringing phones has been selling and won't stop being selling.
2. The second link is Florian Mueller, a well known Microsoft payed boy always spreading FUD over open source. The same German "expert" that didn't knew how German an European laws worked and the same "expert" that said that because Apple have to pay Nokia this is a win for Apple because ALL Android manufacturers would have to pay to Nokia licenses fee when they have been paying them for years.

Call me crazy, but when the Dutch judge says that is better for Apple not to present in the full trial some patents because is likely that they will be invalidated because of prior art it doesn't means that there will be a world of hurt.
 
Oletros said:
Blah blah blah I lost but just can't face it blah blah blah
Click to expand...

So a patent expert only counts when it's one who agrees with you, right? Got it.

Oh, and you failed to acknowledge my points.

Did the Dutch and Australian courts find that Samsung had copied something from Apple, whether in a preliminary case or otherwise? Yes.

Did they threaten or enforce a ban on Samsung products due to such findings? Yes.

Those were my only points, and you can't argue them. I win. Suck it up and move on, cuz I'm tired of banging my head against the wall talking to you. I'm so done with this thread.
 
guch20 said:
So a patent expert only counts when it's one who agrees with you, right? Got it.
Click to expand...

No, a patent expert only count when it hasn't proven wrong a lot of times and he is known for being an anti open source activist paid by Microsoft. And another time that you DON'T read what I have written but what you want to see.

A patent expert that counts? Nilay Patel from Engadget and The Verge, someone not paid by any company
 
Smart people!

You know what Samsung needs? They need to hire smart people, their lawyers are idiots and their design engineers (smartphone dept.) doesn't know anything.
 
Threads like this make me realize how circular life is on a Mac forum, specially when it comes to all this patent garbage that's been going around as of late.

I mean it's not like we haven't discussed the issue 15 times already. But there's always someone new popping up, saying some company copied Apple, then say innovative over and over again like the word's being retired next year, and they want to get full use out of it beforehand.

Want to know the plain and simple truth of it all, people? Why Android and iOS are so similar? Well, to be fair, Google probably were inspired by some bits and pieces here and there. But did they outright copy Apple? Not really. Anyone that's used Android for more than 5 minutes (I've used it for roughly half an hour, which makes me CERT-O-FIED), knows that there are quite a few differences between the two.

Yeah. They both have icons you stab your finger at. They both also display these icons on a screen. Sometimes, these icons are arrayed in a grid. But do these similarities point towards outright copying. No. See, they both have their genesis in old stylus driven PDA UIs. This is why they're both so similar.

IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT!

Want a breakdown of the situation? Well, here's what's been summed up a thousand times before in a thousand other threads.

1. There is so much prior art, it's obvious that iOS wasn't developed in a vacuum.

2. You don't know anything about patents. Most of the patents being disputed are over deep level APIs that don't pertain to anything you'd care about.

3. Some don't, obviously. These are the patents that have already been successfully defended by Apple.

4. A preliminary injunction does not correlate to guilt. The key word is preliminary here, people.

5. You probably don't know much about patents. Your expertise begins and ends at patent related news headlines. So chances are good that...

6. If you've used the phrase "Well, if X innovated more...", you're probably an idiot.

7. If you say "X copied Apple", I will punch you. In the arm. Hard. It will leave a small bruise that would be a firm reminder of your shame if you weren't so damn stupid.

Okay. More patent BS. I think after this thread, I'm gonna ignore them from here on out. There are more interesting discussions going on here to pay attention to.

edit: And yeah, this thread is more Samsung related than it is Android related. Truthfully, the same arguments pertain to both. I mean they're so similar the exact same things could be said for either one of them. I just went with Google because by this point, all patent threads are a haze of talking heads to me.
 
Last edited:
tinman0 said:
Erm, no.

The Dutch court was a preliminary hearing for the case. The preliminary hearing could only uphold 1 patent of 10 at the preliminary hearing. They then let the whole case pass to a full hearing.

However, here is the point, and I'll repeat it, as it does seem to get lost - The Preliminary Hearing upheld 1 complaint without the need for a full hearing.

They did NOT however strike out the other 9 points of contention, they merely passed that for the full hearing.

The key word here is PRELIMINARY.

So far from Samsung being in the clear, Samsung have so blatantly violated 1 patent that the PRELIMINARY court hearing found it valid. And the experts reckon that if the PRELIMINARY hearing is striking out claims, then Samsung is probably going to be in a world of hurt when it comes to the FULL HEARING.

HTH
Click to expand...


You completely do not understand what that means.
The preliminary hearing does not have the power to stop something from going to a full hearing then trail. But it does have the power to grant a temp injunction. It stated that 9 of the 10 claims have a very low likely hood of holding up in court at all and the 10th it was pretty easy to get around so it gave them some time to do it. It pretty much means Apple does not have a case. I believe it even declared some of Apple patents invalid (aka Apple should never of been granted them)
 
Renzatic said:
I think Tinman believes a preliminary hearing is sorta like practice court.
Click to expand...

A preliminary hearing is exactly that - preliminary.

Am I arguing with people who don't understand the word "preliminary"?

The preliminary hearing was able to hold up 1 of 10 counts, that's not good for the other side - it means that the patent (or whatever the case maybe) was so obvious in the "Preliminary" hearing that the court could come to an early decision.
 
tinman0 said:
A preliminary hearing is exactly that - preliminary.

Am I arguing with people who don't understand the word "preliminary"?

The preliminary hearing was able to hold up 1 of 10 counts, that's not good for the other side - it means that the patent (or whatever the case maybe) was so obvious in the "Preliminary" hearing that the court could come to an early decision.
Click to expand...

No you are the one who does not understand what it is. The 1 count it held up is no longer an issue. Samsung already fixed it so it is not going on.

The preliminary hearing was there to try to get an injunction against Samsung. It invalidated some of the patents.
Other patents it saw a very low chance of them holding up in court.
And the 1 it did hold up it was pretty well known Samsung could get around it very quickly hence giving them time to fix it.

Since Apple more of less lost 9 of its 10 counts it will not go any farther as it knows it has a very low if any chance of winning.

You are the one who is have very poor and no understanding of what a preliminary hearing is and what the results are.
 
Renzatic said:
Threads like this make me realize how circular life is on a Mac forum, specially when it comes to all this patent garbage that's been going around as of late.

I mean it's not like we haven't discussed the issue 15 times already. But there's always someone new popping up, saying some company copied Apple, then say innovative over and over again like the word's being retired next year, and they want to get full use out of it beforehand.

Want to know the plain and simple truth of it all, people? Why Android and iOS are so similar? Well, to be fair, Google probably were inspired by some bits and pieces here and there. But did they outright copy Apple? Not really. Anyone that's used Android for more than 5 minutes (I've used it for roughly half an hour, which makes me CERT-O-FIED), knows that there are quite a few differences between the two.

Yeah. They both have icons you stab your finger at. They both also display these icons on a screen. Sometimes, these icons are arrayed in a grid. But do these similarities point towards outright copying. No. See, they both have their genesis in old stylus driven PDA UIs. This is why they're both so similar.

IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT!

Want a breakdown of the situation? Well, here's what's been summed up a thousand times before in a thousand other threads.

1. There is so much prior art, it's obvious that iOS wasn't developed in a vacuum.

2. You don't know anything about patents. Most of the patents being disputed are over deep level APIs that don't pertain to anything you'd care about.

3. Some don't, obviously. These are the patents that have already been successfully defended by Apple.

4. A preliminary injunction does not correlate to guilt. The key word is preliminary here, people.

5. You probably don't know much about patents. Your expertise begins and ends at patent related news headlines. So chances are good that...

6. If you've used the phrase "Well, if X innovated more...", you're probably an idiot.

7. If you say "X copied Apple", I will punch you. In the arm. Hard. It will leave a small bruise that would be a firm reminder of your shame if you weren't so damn stupid.

Okay. More patent BS. I think after this thread, I'm gonna ignore them from here on out. There are more interesting discussions going on here to pay attention to.

edit: And yeah, this thread is more Samsung related than it is Android related. Truthfully, the same arguments pertain to both. I mean they're so similar the exact same things could be said for either one of them. I just went with Google because by this point, all patent threads are a haze of talking heads to me.
Click to expand...

everyone should be forced to read this before posting in these threads.
 
tinman0 said:
A preliminary hearing is exactly that - preliminary.

Am I arguing with people who don't understand the word "preliminary"?

The preliminary hearing was able to hold up 1 of 10 counts, that's not good for the other side - it means that the patent (or whatever the case maybe) was so obvious in the "Preliminary" hearing that the court could come to an early decision.
Click to expand...

pre·lim·i·nar·y/priˈliməˌnerē/
Noun:
An action or event preceding or preparing for something fuller or more important.

...which is exactly what it is. Here's basically (real basically) how the system goes.

Apple goes before a judge.

"Judge. I believe that X is infringing upon Y amount of our patents. Here is a document of the infringements for you to peruse. We wish to keep Y's product off store shelves, with the intent to permanently bar said product if it is, in fact, infringing".

Judge gives the documentation a good glance, sees that it has merit based upon his initial glance (prima facie) and grants a temporary injunction. Nothing is conclusive by this point. It just has the potential to be conclusive.

People start screaming "well X shouldn't copy. They should INNOVATE", which makes me want punch them.

From this point, the preliminary stage begins. X's lawyers start going over the document of infringing items. They argue pros and cons, talk to Apple's lawyers, call each other stupid, and eat expensive power brunches. They'll both bring their case before a mediator or judge, who decides that, 1, 2, and 3 are null and void, and you idiot lawyers shouldn't waste my time with this crap. 4, 5, and 6, though, may potentially be infringing based on the evidence at hand. He'll then decide to pass on the case entirely, have it argued in minutiae in court, or let them settle the dispute amongst themselves.

Once again, Nothing is conclusive by this point. But it has more potential to be conclusive, because Apple has shown they have a strong enough case to possibly have it stand in court.

If no one settles, then they go to court. It takes days, weeks, months, and eventually a judge decides on the outcome.

So just because one patent survived the preliminary hearing, doesn't mean it's completely damning. It just has enough evidence behind it to maybe, possibly, have a chance of succeeding in court.


divinox said:
everyone should be forced to read this before posting in these threads.
Click to expand...

It should damn well be sticked by this point. :p
 
Last edited:
Renzatic said:
TWant to know the plain and simple truth of it all, people? Why Android and iOS are so similar? Well, to be fair, Google probably were inspired by some bits and pieces here and there. But did they outright copy Apple? Not really..
Click to expand...

It is very specifically NOT as simple as that.

Android in general, and Samsung in particular, infringed upon a whole boatload of Apple's patents and copyrights. Like '"scroll and bounce back", multitouch, and the functionality that highlights and opens phone numbers and links in electronic messages. Plus too many more to mention.

Secondly, the standard for infringement isn't "can you tell the difference" It's whether or not the patent is valid and infringed. And more than a few courts have ruled that Samsung has infringed, at least to the extent that they are willing to issue injunctions banning the sale of the Samsung products. And now the EU is investigating Samsung's shoddy behavior in relation to its FRAND-encumbered patents.

The opinions of a bunch of computer nerds don't mean squat in an ip case. The LAW and the facts are what counts.
 
vrDrew said:
It is very specifically NOT as simple as that.

Android in general, and Samsung in particular, infringed upon a whole boatload of Apple's patents and copyrights. Like '"scroll and bounce back", multitouch, and the functionality that highlights and opens phone numbers and links in electronic messages. Plus too many more to mention.
Click to expand...

...which should go to show you how ridiculous the patent system is. Other than scroll and bounce back (which is awesome...I love seeing if I can manage to push stuff all the way off the screen), all of those patents are either what you'd call natural ergonomic, or have tons of prior art.

I mean multitouch screens? Good God. Seriously? Like that hasn't been worked on by dozens of companies since at least the turn of the century. Just because Apple was one of the first companies to implement it well in candybar phone form doesn't give them exclusive rights to it.

And how many of those patents have been invalidated by this point? If all of those you mentioned were validated in court, we wouldn't be seeing anything but iPhones on store shelves these days.

The opinions of a bunch of computer nerds don't mean squat in an ip case. The LAW and the facts are what counts.
Click to expand...

Yeah. You and yours keep saying stuff like that, but in the end, the ass backwards software patent system has cost Apple about as much as it's gained them. Just because they're big and rich doesn't mean they're immune to the same game they're playing on everyone else. Apple has been successfully sued for patent infringements tons of times already. They have to pay out licensing fees for BS patents, just like everyone else.

The only problem is some people here want to make it into a bad guy vs. good guy situation, instead of seeing it for what it really is. Which is a bunch of people running around trying to patent air, so they can have exclusive rights to charge out the ass for it.
 
People seem to want this to be a iOS vs Android war, but really it isn't.

Theres a difference between inspiring and blatently-copying.

iOS inspired Android a lot, but no one denies it and to be honest it hasn't really damaged Apple at all, and Android inspired iOS a lot, and its worked out great too!

Inspiration is great, nothing wrong with it. However its when you get down to blatantly copying.

Samsung are BLATANTLY Copying, they are copying the UI and design directly (and doing a **** job at it)

Im disguised with seeing Samsungs phone's (that aren't banned yet) being advertised, they are ugly. The only Samsung phones that actually look nice are the Nexus Series, but thats because LG designed them
 
About time too, bloody copy cats, Samsung have really gone down in my perception as a company and I doubt I will buy a samsung product again! not content with blatant money grabbing rip off's they produce, but suing apple in a tit for tat battle just makes them even worse.
 
Burger Thing said:
Why? It's just like ... his opinion, man :p
Click to expand...

that's just ... your opinion, man.

----------
vrDrew said:
It is very specifically NOT as simple as that.

Android in general, and Samsung in particular, infringed upon a whole boatload of Apple's patents and copyrights. Like '"scroll and bounce back", multitouch, and the functionality that highlights and opens phone numbers and links in electronic messages. Plus too many more to mention.

Secondly, the standard for infringement isn't "can you tell the difference" It's whether or not the patent is valid and infringed. And more than a few courts have ruled that Samsung has infringed, at least to the extent that they are willing to issue injunctions banning the sale of the Samsung products. And now the EU is investigating Samsung's shoddy behavior in relation to its FRAND-encumbered patents.

The opinions of a bunch of computer nerds don't mean squat in an ip case. The LAW and the facts are what counts.
Click to expand...

1) Boatload and you mentioned 3 things. Great.
2) One of those two things, Apple has no patent on - i.e. Multi-touch (They have multi-touch patents, not a patent on multi-touch).
3) "The functionality that highlights...", like i had in my pre-iphone devices? Good luck having that upheld in court.

So... your boatload thus far comes down to rubber-band scrolling. Yeah. Awesome man. Keep them coming.

p.s.

a) as for more than a few, which countries are you counting?
b) an injunction is not "banning sales", its banning entity X from importing good Y. Thats why you can still buy a Galaxy Tab in germany, injunction aside.

----------
boomish said:
About time too, bloody copy cats, Samsung have really gone down in my perception as a company and I doubt I will buy a samsung product again! not content with blatant money grabbing rip off's they produce, but suing apple in a tit for tat battle just makes them even worse.
Click to expand...

Everytime you buy an Apple product you are buying samsung products. Congratulations!

----------
Therbo said:
People seem to want this to be a iOS vs Android war, but really it isn't.

Theres a difference between inspiring and blatently-copying.

iOS inspired Android a lot, but no one denies it and to be honest it hasn't really damaged Apple at all, and Android inspired iOS a lot, and its worked out great too!

Inspiration is great, nothing wrong with it. However its when you get down to blatantly copying.

Samsung are BLATANTLY Copying, they are copying the UI and design directly (and doing a **** job at it)

Im disguised with seeing Samsungs phone's (that aren't banned yet) being advertised, they are ugly. The only Samsung phones that actually look nice are the Nexus Series, but thats because LG designed them
Click to expand...

Thats confusing. On the one hand they are "blatantly copying", on the other they are "copying poorly". Which one is it? The only logical answer is none.

p.s. Apple stole the iOS UI from PARC.

----------
Renzatic said:
...which should go to show you how ridiculous the patent system is. Other than scroll and bounce back (which is awesome...I love seeing if I can manage to push stuff all the way off the screen), all of those patents are either what you'd call natural ergonomic, or have tons of prior art.

I mean multitouch screens? Good God. Seriously? Like that hasn't been worked on by dozens of companies since at least the turn of the century. Just because Apple was one of the first companies to implement it well in candybar phone form doesn't give them exclusive rights to it.

And how many of those patents have been invalidated by this point? If all of those you mentioned were validated in court, we wouldn't be seeing anything but iPhones on store shelves these days.



Yeah. You and yours keep saying stuff like that, but in the end, the ass backwards software patent system has cost Apple about as much as it's gained them. Just because they're big and rich doesn't mean they're immune to the same game they're playing on everyone else. Apple has been successfully sued for patent infringements tons of times already. They have to pay out licensing fees for BS patents, just like everyone else.

The only problem is some people here want to make it into a bad guy vs. good guy situation, instead of seeing it for what it really is. Which is a bunch of people running around trying to patent air, so they can have exclusive rights to charge out the ass for it.
Click to expand...

Is it just me or did Android implement a sort of "scroll and tilt" effect in ICS? Cant say that i found it very attractive but if it stops the whining, hey - good job!
 
Renzatic said:
Threads like this make me realize how circular life is on a Mac forum, specially when it comes to all this patent garbage that's been going around as of late.

I mean it's not like we haven't discussed the issue 15 times already. But there's always someone new popping up, saying some company copied Apple, then say innovative over and over again like the word's being retired next year, and they want to get full use out of it beforehand.

Want to know the plain and simple truth of it all, people? Why Android and iOS are so similar? Well, to be fair, Google probably were inspired by some bits and pieces here and there. But did they outright copy Apple? Not really. Anyone that's used Android for more than 5 minutes (I've used it for roughly half an hour, which makes me CERT-O-FIED), knows that there are quite a few differences between the two.

Yeah. They both have icons you stab your finger at. They both also display these icons on a screen. Sometimes, these icons are arrayed in a grid. But do these similarities point towards outright copying. No. See, they both have their genesis in old stylus driven PDA UIs. This is why they're both so similar.

IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT!

Want a breakdown of the situation? Well, here's what's been summed up a thousand times before in a thousand other threads.

1. There is so much prior art, it's obvious that iOS wasn't developed in a vacuum.

2. You don't know anything about patents. Most of the patents being disputed are over deep level APIs that don't pertain to anything you'd care about.

3. Some don't, obviously. These are the patents that have already been successfully defended by Apple.

4. A preliminary injunction does not correlate to guilt. The key word is preliminary here, people.

5. You probably don't know much about patents. Your expertise begins and ends at patent related news headlines. So chances are good that...

6. If you've used the phrase "Well, if X innovated more...", you're probably an idiot.

7. If you say "X copied Apple", I will punch you. In the arm. Hard. It will leave a small bruise that would be a firm reminder of your shame if you weren't so damn stupid.

Okay. More patent BS. I think after this thread, I'm gonna ignore them from here on out. There are more interesting discussions going on here to pay attention to.

edit: And yeah, this thread is more Samsung related than it is Android related. Truthfully, the same arguments pertain to both. I mean they're so similar the exact same things could be said for either one of them. I just went with Google because by this point, all patent threads are a haze of talking heads to me.
Click to expand...

Can this be stickied? That way we all can read this post when another round of patent lawsuits will come our way.
 
thenerdal said:
That's not pretty for Apple... at all. Maybe it will finally convince them this whole patent thing is stupid.

I doubt it though.
Click to expand...

It's not pretty for Motorola - they just got an injunction awarded to them to enforce a FRAND patent!

Motorola just overplayed their hand, and now the EC will be widening it's investigation to them as well.

You don't get injunctions on FRAND patents unless you like paying authorities like the EC large amounts of cash in fines as it is anti-competitive, which is what Apple have been saying all along about the behaviour of Google, Samsung and Motorola.

----------
Renzatic said:
pre·lim·i·nar·y/priˈliməˌnerē/
Noun:
An action or event preceding or preparing for something fuller or more important.

...which is exactly what it is. Here's basically (real basically) how the system goes.
Click to expand...

There's a very good comment, I think it's on Planet of the Apes, where an ape makes a point about a human being able to talk. It goes along the lines, that just because they can talk does not mean they are intelligent.

I suggest that now you understand the word "preliminary" you absorb those words into proper thought. :)
 
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