This thread is zany. I've yet to see a thread on MacRumors with more nonsensical vitriol than this one.
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.
Facebook, Google and Other Silicon Valley Companies Side with Samsung in Patent Case
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unbiased? The person who headed the jury had a grudge against Samsung over a patent. That's hardly unbiased.
You do realize all companies steal from each other..... just use google, and put int for example Apple steals ideas...
and...
http://mashable.com/2012/10/27/apple-stolen-ideas/
there are so many examples!!!!!! Why do people act like apple invented everything? they are just as guilty for "borrowing" ideas....
when it comes to "let the person who has not sinned throw the first stone" no teach company has the moral high ground.
True, though I really see no difference between fanboys getting emotional over tech companies than fans of Sport teams. I mean, 20 people playing on a soccer field and one side losing OR winning can literally cause massive riots. I'd emotional fanboy letter any day.
Facebook, Google, eBay, HP, Dell and other Silicon Valley companies weighed in on the ongoing Samsung and Apple patent case, siding with the Korean company in a "friend of the court" briefing filed on July 1 to the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals...
They argue that any company could then be opened up to patent infringement cases for insignificant features like a specific user interface creation that only appears on a single screen of an app, therefore stifling innovation.
A reminder of the previous court ruling:
Although the design patents covered only minor features of those complex electronic devices, the panel rejected Samsung’s argument that damages must be limited to the profits made from those infringing features.
It instead concluded that the relevant statute, 35 U.S.C. § 289, “explicitly authorizes the award of total profit from the article of manufacture bearing the patented design.”
Viewing the smartphone as a single “article of manufacture,” the panel held that the statute required it to award the total profit where the “innards of Samsung’s smartphones were not sold separately from their shells as distinct articles of manufacture to ordinary purchasers.”
And here's a reminder of why the "friends of the court" filed this brief:It instead concluded that the relevant statute, 35 U.S.C. § 289, “explicitly authorizes the award of total profit from the article of manufacture bearing the patented design.”
Viewing the smartphone as a single “article of manufacture,” the panel held that the statute required it to award the total profit where the “innards of Samsung’s smartphones were not sold separately from their shells as distinct articles of manufacture to ordinary purchasers.”
Creator of the Android operating system. Immediately threw away their designs for the "Google phone" and Android OS after then CEO and Apple board member, Eric Schmidt, saw the designs for the first iPhone and iOS. Google's business model revolves around commoditizing the hard work of others in order to offer "free" products and services, which are then made profitable through the surreptitious harvesting and monetization of their users' personal data. Google is Apple's primary competitor and are waging a proxy war with Apple via companies like Samsung.
Social network which is essentially a walled dungeon, doing everything possible to keep its users' attention and activities within those walls, while manipulating those same users' behaviors and monetizing their personal information to sell advertising. Long and consistent track record of infringing on its users' privacy, and progressively modifying its privacy policies to chip away at protections for said users. Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been quoted as saying that "privacy is dead". He infamously texted a friend while at Harvard, boasting about how he had acquired reams of personal information from college students in the nascent version of Facebook. When asked why they would share this with him he replied, "They trust me. Dumb ****s." Facebook is unhappy with privacy protections baked into Apple's products and ecosystem, and is feeling the burn from Tim Cooks' numerous public warnings about companies who profit from selling their users' personal data.
HP & Dell
Former leaders of the PC hardware industry, achieved their initial success via a price-focused race to the bottom that killed quality and innovation (along with profits), downsizing tens of thousands of workers and putting numerous companies with superior products out of business. Now that they've won this race to the bottom, the entire PC industry is in a sad state of decline, desperately vying for customers' attention in large part by shamelessly copying Apple's successful product designs (albeit with low quality materials and software.) Both companies have a vested interest in continuing to copy Apple's hard work while fighting the threat of costly patent infringement lawsuits.
But you're still defending them. I agree that some of the responses in this thread are over the top, but it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that someone shouldn't defend Apple when doing the same for other companies.
I'm not familiar with you so I'm not directing this next bit at you- but I often find that many of the people who post snarky and sarcastic comments about Apple fanboys defending Apple are the first to religiously and passionately defend Samsung and Google- almost as if they're searching the forums for people that criticize those companies. I wish people would be more honest about their own allegiances before attacking someone else for theirs.
Remember that time when Apple needed NAND memory to create a monopoly of the MP3 player market and the only supplier that catered to Apple was Samsung via price fixing which effectively gave Apple the lowest price on NAND while all other competing manufacturers were cut out and couldn't compete as NAND memory was gobbled up almost entirely by Apple?
Because that happened (among other things). But I don't ever recall anyone on Mac Rumors throwing a fit about 'slimy' or 'scummy' practices.
In other words, the lot of you in this thread have made it very clear that the vitriol is warranted as long as its not Apple.
So, why the bias?
It's a strawman.. If Samsung took inspiration from a 1950's floor standing speaker for their computer instead of very closely imitate the appearence of their competitors computer, I don't think people would have issues with that here.
There's nothing slimy or scummy about Apple using their considerable buying power to negotiate favorable pricing and secure inventory for required components. It's not as if they bought out all the NAND chips and dumped them in a warehouse to keep the supply away from competitors. They secured these components to ensure they could meet demand for their highly successful products.
This in no way compares to the outright slimy and scummy business practices of Samsung, which have been clearly demonstrated not only in the smartphone business but also in PCs, TVs, refrigerators, vacuum cleaners, etc.
The majority of your posts about Apple are negative, and I've seen you post more positive things about Apple's competitors than Apple itself.
And there's nothing wrong with that, but it suggests that you might have the opposite bias. Generally, someone who focuses on the positive aspects of a company likes that company, and someone who focuses on the negative aspects dislikes the company.
Samsung got fined for price fixing, and Apple played a part in this.
Please stop being an apologist for Apple.
I just showed this thread to some people at work who couldn't care less about Apple or Samsung. They're owners of various devices. Now with that being said, I showed 8 different people, and every single one of them asked (in their own way), are these people being serious? One lady actually said she now understands what people mean when they use the word iSheep. Normal people laugh at the nuttiness of fanboys.
It is completely relevant if you plan on calling other people out on their own biases.
Since you continually point out that others are Apple fanbois and appologists, it's very relevant..
they seem to have lots of iPods left over.....having to release all new products....with a paint job
sorry could not resist....
So, criticism of negative aspects of a certain product, device, service or company can only be validated by a 'fan' of said item because YOU think it can be validated that way?
Please stop diverting attention and stick to the subject at hand.
That's ridiculous and false.
The only thing I can imagine is the threat that Apple Pay poses to ebay's scummy PayPal service.
they seem to have lots of iPods left over.....having to release all new products....with a paint job
Source? Unlike Samsung and other sleazy companies Apple doesn't inflate its stats by pumping the supply chain with unwanted product so they can publish a bogus number of "shipped" products. Apple is widely recognized for their operational efficiency. They don't have stale inventory just lying around.
Here's what I'm saying- when almost all you do is criticize, it makes your claims of "bias" tenuous at best.
And the comment you liked above about the person showing this thread to their coworkers certainly doesn't stick to the "subject at hand", so I'm going to ignore that.
question : is he correct in his assertions though? Cause there are a lot of apologists on MR.
So its okay to label someone a hater..... but incorrect to point out an apologist?
Hater and apologists are both as bad as each other.
my concern is that anyone who voices a structured and objective point of view, are quickly labelled a hater.....you can respect a company and be a fan without kissing its ass.