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

Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages

what about the banned? was there no mention of it? Did I miss it? or isn't there one.. I mean.. that was the biggest threat to sammy future phone designs.. the dollar amount isn't that much.. now if there phone have to be redesigned or have pay money to apple for each one.. then that is real pain..
 
Diode said:
When people can copy it forces you to continuously innovate. When you can sue others for copying you - it allows you to become lazy.
Click to expand...

If "people" innovate better than "you", then "you" have to innovate even better. It's a cycle. It's not too hard to understand. You can if you try.
 
craznar said:
Yes - but we are not talking about innovations here.

We are effectively patenting pressing CMD-C or scrolling your mouse wheel.

What we are saying here to aspiring software developers is ... GIVE UP NOW, you can't afford the millions of dollars involved in writing software.
Click to expand...

Exactly, what ever happened to the "non-obvious" type requirements for a patent?

You shouldn't just be able to patent any silly idea that pops into your head and block people from using general features, like a simple shape or gesture. That ultimately holds back progress as people are too worried about patenting or copying ever stupid little thing and not making real progress.
 
I just hope this doesn't force all of Android to be boiled down to complete garbage...

Quite frankly, I like being able to increase my phone's storage capacity as I please, the larger screen size and widgets, etc, etc.

PS.. I'm typing this on my Macbook, so suck it fanboys :p
 
To quote AllThingsD in reference to Samsung's 132-page report comparing the S1 and iPhone, and specifically noting where S1 was inferior relative to the iPhone:

Samsung has been trying to make the case that the arrival of powerful capacitive touchscreens pushed the whole industry toward something like the iPhone. This document helps show how one can have a similarly sized slab of glass and still come up short — as Samsung itself concludes it did, initially.
Click to expand...

Throughout the document there are notes effectively recommending more iPhone like design elements and other notes specifically stating to not make it too obvious that they are copying it. Hence, they knew they were copying iPhone's specific design elements and there are many ways to design a touchscreen UI as should be obvious from the document's own language.
 
viperGTS said:
Excuse my ignorance, but why is Samsung paying for the damages when Android infringed on the software side? Isn't android owned by google? :confused:
Click to expand...

chrmjenkins said:
For a couple of reasons. One, Google wasn't a defendant in the case. And two, Samsung is in control of the implementation of the UI in such a way that it can infringe the patent and trade dress claims in question.
Click to expand...

And three… Samsung and other handset makers are easier targets than Google. This is why Apple sued HTC and got their handset barred from sale. If Apple can scare the handset makers, which they have just done, they will successfully push those handset makers away from Android. This verdict will essentially neuter Android unless Apple licenses those patents.
 
Prepare for the appeals.... :rolleyes:

Sad thing is, a lot of those patents (both sides), never should have been issued.

Now we can basically get a patent for farting because each person's farts are unique. :eek: :p
 
Diode said:
When people can copy it forces you to continuously innovate. When you can sue others for copying you - it allows you to become lazy.
Click to expand...

Wow. I mean... wow. Exactly the opposite of how this works.

lilo777 said:
And the precedent here is that you can use bogus patents to fend off the competition. Both Google and Samsung have order of magnitude more patents than Apple. They might decide to use this precedent to their advantage.
Click to expand...

I tend to respect the decisions of a jury. They had the opportunity (multiple opportunities, actually) to find these patents were "bogus". They didn't, again and again. You or I may disagree with them, but they sat there, listening to the arguments first hand, poring over the evidence, and they came to a conclusion after three days of careful deliberation. We just read blogs and make a knee-jerk call.
 
Democrats and Republicans are not doing a good job of running the country, maybe we should vote to win Apple into the White House to fix the company :D

Apple for President :rolleyes:
Google could be the Vice President.
 
does that mean samsung has to change the ui (therefor get the devices banned) etc or can they keep using it and "only" have to pay the damages?
 
chrisfromalbany said:
what about the banned? was there no mention of it? Did I miss it? or isn't there one.. I mean.. that was the biggest threat to sammy future phone designs.. the dollar amount isn't that much.. now if there phone have to be redesigned or have pay money to apple for each one.. then that is real pain..
Click to expand...

if they don't get this i dont see it stopping anything honestly..
 
belsokar said:
It just means everyone will have to pay to use something invented by (or first patented by) Apple...again, it's all about competition, and apple spends alot of money on R&D so that they can stay ahead of their competition...so now all that money invested is protected, and when someone else uses something they implemented and patented, they get rightfully compensated, thus helping them keep a competitive edge in price...

Samsung has used price (cheap phones) plus copying Apple to get users onboard...they could do that because they never invested in the intellectual property design and implementation...this allowed them to undercut apple's prices, while putting out a product that they could claim was "just as good as" the iPhone...and this is what it all comes down to at the end of the day...a customer walks into a store, and wants to save $99, and the salesman says "Look at this, work and looks just like an iPhone, so why pay more for the iPhone???"...and that's essentially what this has been about...that's not fair competition...
Click to expand...

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

you said Apple INVENTED!!!!! hahahahahahahahahahahahaha..... let me know when you can come up with something no one else ever did. Oh wait pinch to zoom. Hmm not totally sure but maybe. Samsung never needed cheap tricks to steal customers! Good God man!!! You have been TOTALLY blinded by Apple's BS!

Believe it or not, mobile phones existed before the iPhone, the market was quite healthy with tons of choice and no one suing anyone else because or grid icon layouts or squares with round corners. This is all business all right but it has jack s.... to do with Apple protecting or innovating or researching a damn thing, it's all about Apple abusing and using the system to kill it's competition because in fact it can't innovate, or be bothered to, I suppose if they launch a 7" iPad you will state they 'innovated and researched it so deserve to ban all other 7" tablets?"

It's like the iPhone, the only thing Apple has innovated in it is the case. Everything else is made and developed by a supplier, Sharp, Samsung, LG etc. Apple just agreed on the components to use from their suppliers.

PLENTY of FAR cheaper smart phones have existed for YEARS before Apple, Apple are the ones who hiked prices, they are the ones who force suppliers to make special costly deals exclusively for it's phone.

But I digress as Samsung will most likely appeal. Oh man I look forward to when they join up with Google and take Apple on, but I very much doubt this ruling will affect the rest of the world anyway either.
 
babyj said:
Google, HTC and Samsung are already going after Apple.

Why do you think there is even a remote possibility that Intel or Microsoft would? Not going to happen in a million years as they work closely together.
Click to expand...

A lot of the components in an iPhone originate from Samsung. Companies working even closely together are definitely willing to sue each other if there's a cause.
 
Reach9 said:
I knew Apple would win all along

Here is a thought... couldn't Apple patent these features and then give it's competitors such as Samsung and Google rights to use it as long as Apple got a royalty of each device sold? Wouldn't that make Apple even more profitable and still "the innovator for the whole industry"?
Click to expand...

If I remember right, they offered it to Samsung but Samsung refused.
They also offered it to Microsoft, and Microsoft bought the licenses under a no copying agreement. Sorry for no links to the sources, but the article should be here or over at Gizmodo/iMore/9to5mac.
 
I'm not surprised. I think anyone who isn't a Samsung fan shouldn't be surprised.
This verdict sends a clear message.
Good job Apple - in protecting what's yours.
 
viperGTS said:
Excuse my ignorance, but why is Samsung paying for the damages when Android infringed on the software side? Isn't android owned by google? :confused:
Click to expand...

Samsung is the one making money by selling Android phones, not Google (at least not directly). Also, Samsung customized Android to some extent. Apple's attorney actually mentioned an Android device (I forget which one) in his closing argument, along with the Nokia Lumia 900 as an example of a phone that didn't look like an iPhone.
 
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