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

Jury Finds Both Apple and Samsung Guilty of Patent Infringement, Samsung to Pay $119.6 Million, Apple to Pay $158,400

Apple deserve this one.

Patents like the slide to unlock are a huge drain on R&D resource and need to be protected. Just glad the jury see it that way too.

Go innovation....
 
Well, at least they both get what they deserved.

You would think someone would learn something from this don't you.

But they will be back in court..
 
mejsric said:
Its not about the money as Tim Cook said.

Knowing Samsung is convicted copycat again is a win.
Click to expand...

Honestly I think he's just fighting a battle that Steve Jobs started. Apple should focus its resources on innovation and no litigation.
 
iMember said:
Apple accidentally copied Samsung and Samsung intentionally copied Apple..that's all you need to know

I'm sure that was just another pathetic scheme by Shamesung just like they did with their standards patents
Click to expand...

Or apple could just ask the president to veto and wipe clean any adverse ruling or ban against apple.
 
Samsung ... innovation ... LOL. Getting popcorn ready for when Apple goes after Google directly.
 
Renzatic said:
Same with identifying text as something else, a'la phone numbers. Those were two patents Apple had on trial, and two patents that are just SO obvious and have SO much prior art...gaw.

I know, it's the implementation. But how does Apple know Samsung lifted their implementation directly? They wouldn't be able to do that unless they had access to the iOS source code.
Click to expand...

You're trivializing the difficulty of pattern matching in raw user written text. Apple's 647 patent is an API to match structured data, specifically dates, addresses, and contact info. If you've ever tried to do this you'd know just how hard it is to do accurately. By using an API you can shield developers from the intricacies and enable this functionality across the entire OS. That is what they were found to infringe upon.

Web links and phone numbers are easy, they follow a predictable pattern and use a similar format all around the world. Matching an address to tie to maps is a real challenge, with all the different formats and ways they can be written you can't use the normal techniques such as regular expressions to find matches.

I implore anyone who thinks this task is trivial to try it. You'll see exactly what I'm talking about and why this is a big deal.
 
Piggie said:
Still think it's funny some views on here.

From the dawn of time when the 1st Ape like man picked up the 1st animal bone and used it as a tool to hit and break something open, another ape seeing this, perhaps having an idea to sharpen one edge against a rock to make it better, yet another ape seeing this and wrapping an animal skin around the handle to make it easier to hold...........

Humans have been looking at what others do, seeing what works, what does not, and trying it for themselves, coping an idea, a concept, changing it, for better or worse.

And yet NOW.... 2 million years later?

We are supposed to suddenly stop it.

Ohh look one company has made a thin computer with a touch screen. (Only because the tech had been made available from others to assemble such a device) and it's popular with consumers who want to buy it.

From that moment on and for the rest of time, no other human, for generations to come may make a similar device.

Can you imagine what the world would be like now if that mentality had existed in the past?

Sure, I'm not saying make a 100% exact clone that's been deliberately made to fool the buyer, and by that I mean like a fake rolex a fake nike t-shirt. fake BlueRay movies.

Items make and branded to look like the real thing and fool the buyer into thinking they are getting the real thing when they have paid for a copy.

That of course is wrong. I think most would agree if it's done to fool.

But that's never ever happened here. We are talking about similar items and general concepts.

And they even more crazy thing is. From people here who argue strongly in favor of this over control is how much worse their lives and everyone else's lives (other than the giant corporations that would grow to over dominance) you be if this were the case.
Click to expand...
At least three thumbs up from me on this one!!! Perfectly said.

I don't understand these people that go on a rant for one company or another. Is anyone forcing them to buy product X? After having a IPHONE 4, I much prefer my SAMSUNG S4. SO WHAT? That is my choice. The products are clearly labeled, buy what you like. Haven't found a real alternative for my MACs though... :rolleyes:

By the way: For a company that just makes crap (according to this forum) they sure sell a lot of stuff! Must be a lot of really stupid consumers out there. ;-)
 
Last edited:
BvizioN said:
It was available from JB community before Google implemented on Android. And what control panel are you on about?
Click to expand...

Notifications on Android have been around since 2008 in 1.6 Donut.
http://www.objc.io/issue-11/android-notifications.html

That means for the jailbreak community to have it first, it would have had to have been available in ios2. Ive searched but cant find anything, please feel free to correct me with a link though.
 
Renzatic said:
There is such a thing as accidental infringement, which when you consider the patents covered and the damages rewarded, is probably what the jury classified them as. Willful infringement would've carried a much heavier burden with it.

And it's not so much "if they were not unique whatsoever, why did Samsung infringe on them" and more "if they were not unique whatsoever, why did Apple get a patent for them"? I mean one of them is a patent for autocorrect, for god sakes. How is it that in this day and age, with there being so much prior art for it, can anyone get a patent on that? And the universal search interface? It's ridiculous, and so very obvious to see how someone could accidentally infringe upon that.

Neither one of these are unique to the iPhone. Hell, they're not even unique to Apple platforms. Copernic Desktop does almost exactly what the universal search patent covers, and it came out in 97-98 or so.
Click to expand...

Apple does not have a patent on autocorrecting, neither do they have one on universal search. They have patents on implementations of them. So if Samsung wants to implement the way Apple did it, they have to pay. If not, they should do their own auto correct and universal search.

And you are still incorrect in thinking that something non unique shouldn't be patented. Uniqueness has nothing to do with the patent system. People patent all sorts of obvious stuff, and not just in USA.
 
I at least give Macrumos credit for having a fair title to this article. Most websites are not recognizing upfront that Apple also infringed even if the penalty was so small.
I hope that Apple can recognize that they can't compete in the courtroom and that releasing better product is the way to battle the competition. Apple's wasted the last 2 years while Android increased it's market share. It was like they couldn't innovate and go to court at the same time.
 
Dave.UK said:
Thanks Oletros. Ive just read that Notifications were available on the initial 1.0 Android release - So two releases prior to cupcake.
Click to expand...

I asked Bigboss, the creator of SBSetting and he said that he release it on July 2008, more less.

And SBSetting was the first JB app that shown a pull down menu and the reason I jailbroke my 3GS :D
 
Piggie said:
Still think it's funny some views on here.

From the dawn of time when the 1st Ape like man picked up the 1st animal bone and used it as a tool to hit and break something open, another ape seeing this, perhaps having an idea to sharpen one edge against a rock to make it better, yet another ape seeing this and wrapping an animal skin around the handle to make it easier to hold...........

Humans have been looking at what others do, seeing what works, what does not, and trying it for themselves, coping an idea, a concept, changing it, for better or worse.

And yet NOW.... 2 million years later?

We are supposed to suddenly stop it.
Click to expand...

Yes, basically remove the capital from the current economic system, and then patents don't mean anything. All ideas can be free like they were millions of years ago.

But in a capitalist society your reasoning is wrong.

The one ape that sharpened the knife didn't make a factory and start selling sharpened knives. All apes were free to copy it because everything was free back then. Nobody paid for a knife, nobody paid for the skin around it. Today, an idea can make you king of the apes, so ideas cost money to copy.

As someone who makes his living from new ideas, I oppose a system where everyone can copy and use everything they want. Ideas, regardless of how obvious, cost time to create. And to the outsider, that cost is not obvious. You may think that an idea is easy to come by but maybe the guy spent 2 years for that.
 
Last edited:
epic-retouching said:
lol Oletros, this must be a very bad day for you huh?
Click to expand...

I'm so devastated with the news that the only thing I can do is

Beer+20100924+239Chimay_Blue.JPG


4a8796ecd4cd85b367a1943df6f9f8cc.0.jpg


It is the saddest day of my life :D:D
 
Oletros said:
Ah, the only thing that counts is the amount awarded?

$300 million is enough to call someone copycat?
Click to expand...

Yes, 150 thousand could only be from the most slightest of infringement.

Apple paid 100 times more than that to settle a clock face infringement

So how bad could this Samsung infringement be, relatively speaking.
 
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