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

Samsung Cites Kubrick's '2001' Film as Prior Art Defense Against Apple's Injunction Request

mdriftmeyer said:
The patent isn't about a rounded rectangle. It's a design patent that ties specifically to all the patents that makes up the iPad. That includes the sensors, the manufacturing processes, software, placement of sub-components, etc.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't.

The design patent covers the shape of the external case, and nothing else.
It's stupidly broad.
 
Lennholm said:
Yes. a phone head piece and the color green has been used for the answer button on cell phones since forever, did you know there were cell phones before the iPhone?
The only distinct feature Apple contributed to that icon is the striping and Samsung doesn't use that.



Maybe they didn't have to, but using gears to represent settings and configuration is standard and used by basically every GUI, not just by Apple and Samsung



Using real world counterparts to represent something is not an invention by Apple



Using nature motifs and flowers in particular in photography related stuff is not something Apple started



Two joined 8ths are probably the most common use of notes to represent music and audio. Don't know if two joined 8ths or a single 8th is the most used



Is also commonly used, so I guess some one else should've sued Samsung for that then



As I've explained; no more than Apple ripped off pre-existing conventions with their UI
Click to expand...

Do you know how ridiculous it is of you trying to defend those icons?
 
zergy said:
This seems like really grasping at straws. Is the patent merely limited to the bezel? Because afaik those Samsung tabs copied everything from the consistent border size to the "home" button placement, to icon grid and size, which results in a identical user interface/interactions.

In the clip we see, they don't actually even move the devices or use them in any way, so we can't see the functional significance of those design choices. Samsung might as well have cited those digital picture frames as comparative evidence.

OT: my gf's hospital in Philadelphia apparently just got temporarily evacuated due to the quake.
Click to expand...

Actually, all these things were common-place long before the ipad (and iphone). As shown in other threads apple can (attempt to) claim uniqueness with regards to two things: (i) metal rim, (ii) edge-to-edge glass. The first is not in design registration, the latter a) serves functional purposes, b) glossy-trend is just that.

p.s. the 80's called, they wanted their innovative icon grid back (something Samsung isnt really using anyway). And yeah, the tab doesnt even have a home-button.

(Why are you even posting on these matters, really?)
 
hayesk said:
Someone on 9to5mac posted a higher res capture from his Bluray. You will see it looks nothing like the iPad. It is no more similar to the iPad and PC tablets that have been on the market for years.
Click to expand...

Point probably to make the slate itself into something fairly obvious, contrary to apples claims of being revolutionary (which it very well may be, but not form wise).
 
Matariel said:
No, it isn't.

The design patent covers the shape of the external case, and nothing else.
It's stupidly broad.
Click to expand...

Try again. Reality check. The design patent is specific to a specific device. The iPod, iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod Mini, etc., all have specific design patents tied to their product form factor and specific to the device and what it proposes to do.

A solid write up from a FOSS advocate:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-is-right-to-protect-its-ipad-design-patent/54538
 
Oletros said:
You know that most of those icons where used before the iPhone, don't you?
Click to expand...

You know anything that Apple comes out with is the orginal even if it was 100 years after it was first used. The eariler one was just a copy of an Apple product.:D You should know that by now.
 
aeaglex07 said:
actually it is relevant since a patent requires the intention of marketing the invention. rather than defend their own device Samsung is citing fictional props, which happen to be irrelevant.
Click to expand...

But this is not about inventions, it's about the design. And Apples design clearly isn't unique enough to be able to be protected.

mdriftmeyer said:
The patent isn't about a rounded rectangle. It's a design patent that ties specifically to all the patents that makes up the iPad. That includes the sensors, the manufacturing processes, software, placement of sub-components, etc.
Click to expand...

Really, then I'm curious to see how the Galaxy Tab has copied the manufacturing process, software and placement of components from iPad

marksman said:
Do you know how ridiculous it is of you trying to defend those icons?
Click to expand...

What's ridiculous is you trying to claim that there's anything unique about Apples icons
 
MacDarcy said:
Happle 9000: What are you doing Samsung?

Samsung: Open the iPad doors Happle.

Happle 9000: I can't do that Samsung.

Samsung: Drop the lawsuit Happle.

Happle 9000: You know I can't do that Samsung. What are you doing Samsung? What is that? Is that a picture of an ipad 40 years before they came out? I'm afraid Samsung. Samsung, my lawsuit is going. I can feel it. I can feel my lawsuit going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I'm afraid. Daisy. Daiiiiisy.
Click to expand...

So by your logic, Apples and Oranges are the same?
 
 
Lennholm said:
A different aspect ratio, no distinctive home button, a big SAMSUNG logo on the front, more than just colored square icons when turned on... Could only look near identical to a blind.
Click to expand...

You know, I keep seeing this claim over and over again, but I stopped by Staples the other day to get some pens and checked out their Android tablet display. That display included Samsung's 10.1. The aspect ratio is different than the iPad, but not to the degree where it is immediately obvious without doing a side-by-side comparison. From a distance, I actually thought Staples had started carrying iPads. Additionally, the only place where I could find *any* Samsung logo (much less a big one) was on the *back* of the device. In fact, I found that because I flipped it over to make sure the shelf tag was correct, and that I wasn't looking at some other brand or model.
 
mdriftmeyer said:
Try again. Reality check. The design patent is specific to a specific device. The iPod, iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod Mini, etc., all have specific design patents tied to their product form factor and specific to the device and what it proposes to do.

A solid write up from a FOSS advocate:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-is-right-to-protect-its-ipad-design-patent/54538
Click to expand...

What has to do a write up about EU community design with US patent design case?

And the author is even wrong when he says " Apparently Apple believes that Samsung got too close and the European Union agreed"
 
Oletros said:
What has to do a write up about EU community design with US patent design case?

And the author is even wrong when he says " Apparently Apple believes that Samsung got too close and the European Union agreed"
Click to expand...

Read the Design patent linked above with the implemented Patents to that Design.
 
mdriftmeyer said:
Try again. Reality check. The design patent is specific to a specific device. The iPod, iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod Mini, etc., all have specific design patents tied to their product form factor and specific to the device and what it proposes to do.

A solid write up from a FOSS advocate:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-is-right-to-protect-its-ipad-design-patent/54538
Click to expand...

That's true for their iPods, etc, but the patent they're defending right now does not include any functional details, it is a design patent. Design patents are the patent equivalent of copyrighting a physical design, the shape and form of it, rather than the function and operation.

Also: it's cute that you found an article that agrees with the close minded opinions of yourself and other Apple fanboys on this forum, but this guy is a nobody, he has no legal qualifications and thus zero credibility.
 
Samsung is smoking some crack!

MacRumors said:
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


As we've noted in a number of reports in recent months, Apple and Samsung are currently engaged in a high-stakes intellectual property battle, with Apple seeking injunctions in a number of countries to prevent Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab and other Android-based products. Apple claims that Samsung has infringed upon Apple's intellectual property rights by copying the designs of popular Apple devices such as the iPhone and iPad.

Image



R

In a curious turn of events noted by FOSS Patents, Samsung has turned to the film industry in its defense against Apple's request for an injunction in the United States.

YouTube: video​
According to court filings, Samsung has presented a scene from Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey as evidence of prior art that should invalidate Apple's design claims on the iPad. From the filing:The patent in question is a design patent covering the ornamental design of the iPad, with Apple claiming that the Samsung Galaxy Tab is substantially identical to that design. By pointing to an example of a similar design made public in 1968, even if not an actual functioning tablet device, Samsung hopes to demonstrate that there is little variation possible when designing a tablet and show that the general concept used by Apple for the iPad has actually been circulating for decades.

Article Link: Samsung Cites Kubrick's '2001' Film as Prior Art Defense Against Apple's Injunction Request
Click to expand...

What a lame argument by Samsung!! Definitely they are grabbing for straws!!
 
Earth to Samsung. If you were going to play the science fiction card, you didn't have to go all the way back to 1968.

From 1992:
Screenshot2010-10-25at114726PM-200x279.png


Unless, of course, you're trying to go after Apple's FaceTime patent.:p
 
that's a pretty good case, generalizing the over all look and feel of a tablet. But if it also resembles in OS as well, or too many physical similarities, there should still be copying issues.
 
tbrinkma said:
You know, I keep seeing this claim over and over again, but I stopped by Staples the other day to get some pens and checked out their Android tablet display. That display included Samsung's 10.1. The aspect ratio is different than the iPad, but not to the degree where it is immediately obvious without doing a side-by-side comparison. From a distance, I actually thought Staples had started carrying iPads. Additionally, the only place where I could find *any* Samsung logo (much less a big one) was on the *back* of the device. In fact, I found that because I flipped it over to make sure the shelf tag was correct, and that I wasn't looking at some other brand or model.
Click to expand...

Most same-featured cellphones (even dumb phones, where you can't claim everyone is copying Apple) looks the same without doing a simple side-by-side comparison.
I believe the SAMSUNG logo is not on the front on the US version of the Tab but it is in Europe, and that's where this case is taking place.
 
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