Because before 2007 all phones used resistive touch screens. You can not have multi-touch on such screen. Capacitive screens allow to detect multiple touches at once. It has nothing to do with Apple inventions.
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.
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because before 2007 all phones used resistive touch screens. You can not have multi-touch on such screen. Capacitive screens allow to detect multiple touches at once. It has nothing to do with Apple inventions.
Can't wait to read the armchair lawyers explain why the jury must have not looked at the facts presented because there is no way that Apple should have won this case. Apple did not invent the black rectange with rounded corners. 
I would love to be a fly on the wall in the Google broadroom when the judge read the verdict.
I would love to be a fly on the wall in the Google broadroom when the judge read the verdict.
That makes no sense. Apple alone created the modern smartphone and tablet markets. If others tried to innovate instead of copying apple we would be better off.
They also participate in more than 10 times more markets than Apple, and also control technology development. Apple is (mostly) a technology integrator.
This is all just competition in the new tech arena...courts
What happens is that whoever lost would appeal. The appeal process will take years considering the amount of briefs that will be filed.
Apple will use this as leverage negotiating for Samsung settlement. If a settlement is not reached, the appellate court is very likely to reduce the verdict substantially and Apple and/or Samsung will choose whether to seek review by the Supreme Court.
I highly doubt you will see any change in how these companies operate.
What happens is that whoever lost would appeal. The appeal process will take years considering the amount of briefs that will be filed.
Apple will use this as leverage negotiating for Samsung settlement. If a settlement is not reached, the appellate court is very likely to reduce the verdict substantially and Apple and/or Samsung will choose whether to seek review by the Supreme Court.
I highly doubt you will see any change in how these companies operate.
I have to say, the Android fanboy tears are especially delicious today.
Honestly, this seems to be pretty reasonable. Apple's insanely generic iPad design patent didn't fly, and Samsung learns that they have to abide by US patent law if they want to do business here. Anyone can see how heavily Samsung copies Apple in everything from their store layouts to wall chargers, but it's not severe enough to put the company out of business. All in all, I think $1B is a very good deal for all the mileage Samsung has gotten out of its dubious practices, especially with how damning some of the evidence was (side by sides, that SG1 doc, etc).
Honestly, this seems to be pretty reasonable. Apple's insanely generic iPad design patent didn't fly, and Samsung learns that they have to abide by US patent law if they want to do business here. Anyone can see how heavily Samsung copies Apple in everything from their store layouts to wall chargers, but it's not severe enough to put the company out of business. All in all, I think $1B is a very good deal for all the mileage Samsung has gotten out of its dubious practices, especially with how damning some of the evidence was (side by sides, that SG1 doc, etc).
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if the Supreme court is the highest court in the land. I believe there isn't a jury but a group of judges with extensive experience and knowledge and they decide what the final ruling will be. Why don't they just jump the gun and immediately go the the supreme court? Why waste time on jurors that can be influenced and fanangled with. This court seemed like a test of who has the best lawyers but ultimately the Supreme court should have the know how and knowledge to decide correctly and I doubt the majority will disagree with a Supreme court ruling.
Xerox did not have commercial product! Crucial difference. Read Steve's biography for example and see how he got to see Ethernet connected Altos and object programming style.
Wrong. Please don't lump in the Big Pharma world with IT or other industries. Without patents, large corporations will blindly rip off small firms left and right. Big Pharma is an example where modifications to drugs keep them continuously in their control is a problem.
Information Technology over the next 20 years won't remotely resemble today's solutions. No comparison.
It's different with Samsung - they are a component supplier and nothing more, whilst it's more of a partnership with Intel and Microsoft (ie they work together). Apple could theoretically switch to another supplier though there would be issues getting production lines up to speed.
Absolutely 100% agree. Samsung, HTC and other handset makers will end up shifting to Windows 8. Why do you think Apple and Microsoft have entered into a cross-licensing patent deal and signed an "anti-copy" agreement between the two companies? They saw this coming and are setting the stage to divide the entire market up between these two companies.
Apple and Microsoft already have a back room deal in place.
This is a myth. If you knew your history or did some digging you would find that Apple obtained permission ahead of the Xerox PARC visit. In addition, Apple provided compensation in exchange for the various Xerox PARC ideas such as the GUI. They then made improvements upon it.
Someone at Samsung should be fired, I mean they should have opened with the Chewbacca Defense and this thing would have been over http://youtu.be/4eCRMOBOqpU
So what awesome project is Apple going to fund with this new found new money.
So what awesome project is Apple going to fund with this new found new money.
There are resistive screens with multitouch...
Only having a screen that can detect multiple points doesn't immediately let you use it will all the functions you see today. Someone has to come up with the functions as well.
It appears that I stand corrected with the attorneys that represented Apple in this case.
As far as this being a US company versus a foreign one is irrelevant. Samsung clearly copied from Apple.
The Supreme Court hears cases regarding constitutionality. It does not hear civil cases such as this. There is no constitutional argument here.
Samsung can only continue to use the infring UIs if they license from Apple. Damages are about past infringement not future.
An appeal is not a new trial. It has to be based on issues relating to how the trial was conducted or verdict arrived at, or the amount of the damages, and not every thing at trial is appealable. Also no jury is present at appeal. It's decided by a judge or panel of judges.