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

vrDrew said:
There are numerous claims made by Apple in its suit against Samsung.

But I thought you might like to compare the original Apple iOS icons for various smartphone functions with the ones Samsung chose to "create" for its Touchwiz interface:

Image

I don't see how any reasonable person could look at those icons and NOT see that Samsung blatantly copied Apple's copyrights.
Click to expand...

I'll give you that those icons look WAY too much alike, save for a few points.


Did they HAVE to make the "Phone" icon green? Would people not be able to understand a Phone icon with a blue background?
Click to expand...

What, like everyone else in the world does? That visual language has been around for quite a while on phones, websites, applications, etc.


Did they HAVE to use a yellow legal pad to represent a notepad?
Click to expand...

It looks just like the yellow note pads we take notes with in our office. How would you represent a notepad? Make it white?


Did they have to use the exact same pair of musical notes
Click to expand...

Apple doesn't have the exclusive rights to eighth notes....

superimposed on a CD to represent music?
Click to expand...

...but it does look a little too similar when taking that into account, I'll give you that! ;)

Some of the others are a bit embarrassing.
 
ckurt25 said:
So if someone invents a ligthsaber they can't patent it? How about a time machine made from a Delorian? Wait... Star Trek had those communicators, right? Should all cell phone patents be thrown out?

This was either brilliant by Samsung or pretty stupid. Personally I think it's a bit of a reach but if they win this argument I think it'll signal a flood of patents being thrown out.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous rant. If someone invents the technology to create a working light saber then yes it can be patented, George Lucas has not shown any sign of knowing how such a technology would look so it would be a new unique invention. The design is another story, and that's what this debate is about. Same reasoning goes for the Delorean and Star Trek.

aeaglex07 said:
so this is the predicament we are in: Samsung attorneys are citing fictional props from a film as prior art. Too bad they are only props and not legitimately developed and marketed devices.
Click to expand...

To bad that's entirely irrelevant to this case since this is about the design concepts, not the working technology.


Rhyso said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

And the mobile phone was also copied from the film industry ... Did anything happen? Nop. Steve and his suites will pull that one out of the hat thus invalidating the idea of looking into the film industry by Shamsung.
Click to expand...

No, nothing happened, no one was able to claim their copies as their own and sue competitors for doing the same thing.
 
dashiel said:
The precedent of using movies/television as prior art would invalidate so many patents. It’s ridiculously easy to dream up the future and create mock-ups.
Click to expand...

It is weird how many people here think this is some sort of genius move. It is silly and reeks of desperation. It is not a legally solid argument.

I don't think a lot of people here or the Samsung Lawyers understand the concept of prior art.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Agreed! Shamsung sux.
 
Makos62 said:
Yes, it is rectangular, but that is where it ends. Samsung has even copied the bezel (which 2001 movie model has none). It does appear more like the iPad and not very lick the 2001 model.
Click to expand...

No bezel makes for lots of unintentional presses. With finger-based touch-interaction you really dont want those.
 
There's 17 minutes of footage missing from the original film. Maybe Samsung will dig that up and see a make believe tablet in there too.
 
Matariel said:
It proves that Apple did not invent the idea, even the fictional Kubrick design is good enough to establish prior art, and is thus cannot be protected by patent.
Click to expand...

Let's get a few points straight (for the record).

1) Prior art *can* exist in literature and film decades prior to an item actually being possible to make. Prior art is a defense against *patents*.

2) A "patent" and a "design patent" are two, *vastly* different legal constructs.

3) Design patents have more in common with trademarks, trade dress and copyrights than they do with patents.

4) Prior art is not a defense against trademark or trade dress claims any more than the claims often seen in these threads that "a black border with rounded corners is the only way to do a tablet!", despite better than a decade of prior examples of windows-based tablet PCs with greatly differing visuals and configurations. (Seriously, someone posted a picture of an HP tablet PC with a multiple shades of gray, plastic bezel and rounded edges (not just corners) as proof that the iPad was the *only* way to design a table. :confused:)

The 'tablets' shown in 2001 don't demonstrate even a single tablet-like quality. They are never interacted with, much less picked up or even moved. I'm not a lawyer, but it's a bit of a stretch to think that a TV embedded in a desktop is going to prove much of anything here other than that at some point someone thought portable displays would be possible.
 
I can't recall if in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, but were there large rectangular flat screens hanging on the wall showing stuff? If so does that mean, there goes the Flat Screen HDTV! Wonder if it is LED Backlit or Plasma? Does it have internet built in? :cool:

There goes Samsung TV market! :rolleyes:
/
/
/
 
Lennholm said:
Ridiculous rant. If someone invents the technology to create a working light saber then yes it can be patented, George Lucas has not shown any sign of knowing how such a technology would look so it would be a new unique invention. The design is another story, and that's what this debate is about. Same reasoning goes for the Delorean and Star Trek.



To bad that's entirely irrelevant to this case since this is about the design concepts, not the working technology.
Click to expand...

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.
 
The Beatles said:
where was the interface, they didn't even interact with it. the judge should throw this out and make the lawyers by everyone pizza.
Click to expand...

For the last goddamn time, the lawsuit has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SOFTWARE.
The patent is based on the physical form of the device ONLY.
 
Rot'nApple said:
I can't recall if in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, but were there large rectangular flat screens hanging on the wall showing stuff? If so does that mean, there goes the Flat Screen HDTV! Wonder if it is LED Backlit or Plasma? Does it have internet built in? :cool:

There goes Samsung TV market! :rolleyes:
/
/
/
Click to expand...

Yea, but the remotes were cabled, they used tiny pull cables in a thick umbilical cord.
 
Apple's "patent" is *way* too broad

Samsung is right - how can you patent a hand-held tablet that is roughly rectangular (or even a specific form-factor) and allows touchscreen interaction? The idea is obvious and has been familiar in popular culture for many years.

It's silly to try to patent something this broad.
 
Rot'nApple said:
I can't recall if in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, but were there large rectangular flat screens hanging on the wall showing stuff? If so does that mean, there goes the Flat Screen HDTV! Wonder if it is LED Backlit or Plasma? Does it have internet built in? :cool:

There goes Samsung TV market! :rolleyes:
/
/
/
Click to expand...

You are confusing design and how it is done.

Apple is making a case on design. Samsung is showing the design is generic. How is another story. LCD, LED TV have a long list of patents in the how part.
 
These patents are too general and should not have been given to Apple.
Imagine if one TV manufacturer sued every other TV manufacturer cause the sets looked similar? (i.e. Square/rectangle box with a tube/LCD/Plasma display.)

Update patent regulations and stop these senseless lawsuits.
 
delonh92 said:
Really samsung. Their is so much ways you can make a tablet look different.
BB playbook, Asus transformer. Acer Iconia, Toshiba Thrive. All are different designs.
Click to expand...

dtr-dt360.png
hp-tablet-pc-laptop1.jpg

So true.
 
jhwalker said:
Samsung is right - how can you patent a hand-held tablet that is roughly rectangular (or even a specific form-factor) and allows touchscreen interaction? The idea is obvious and has been familiar in popular culture for many years.

It's silly to try to patent something this broad.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Electrovaya should sue Apple (circa 2005)
200391433844_sc1000.jpg


Electrovaya%20Scribbler%20SC4000.jpg


Sahara1.jpg


Saharas%20in%20Color.jpg


Rounded corners. All this predating the iPad. c'mon now Apple...
 
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...

and the concept of tablets predates the ipad. what about star trek the next generation and their padd's?
 
For you knee-jerk Apple defenders, ask yourself why you hate Samsung so much. Why do you think Apple is entitled to a tablet monopoly?
 
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