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.
Samsung Demands Another Retrial, Says 'No Reasonable Jury' Could Have Sided With Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Samsung should look at all the evidence as if the tables were turned and Apple actually copied them. They should decide how much money they would realistically demand. If their number is as much or more than they are being ordered to pay, they should humbly pay every cent and give Apple the apology they deserve, and then Samsung should decide never to spit on creativity the way they did when they threw it all out the window after the iPhone came out.
I think they were going to curve the edges, maybe not the extent that Samsung has but I read that they were going to. They probably saw how it was on Samsung’s and had second thoughts. I’ve used both an S7 Edge and an S8 and the curved edges are more of a nuisance than anything. Apple are probably glad Samsung has them because they would’ve saw for themelsves how many drawbacks there are to it. Samsung are now stuck with them because it’s become so part of their design now that many actually like purely because of the looks.
Last edited:
I think Samsung is just banking on the hope that any "reasonable jury" in 2018 would think all smartphones have always looked like rectangular black slabs, whereas in 2009 it was much more obvious Samsung rippled off the design.
Actually, Samsung does know how to think for themselves, after all Apple copied a lot of their design and features with the iPhone X. It is what these companies do and then they complain when the other person does it.
That being said, I am looking at the two pictures and I am having a hard time figuring out what Samsung copied that wasn't already part of prior art. Yes, they both are rectangular and have rounded corners, but similar devices had been seen for many years prior in science fiction movies that were rectangular and had rounded corners, which makes this something that can't be patented. The home button is in the same general location, but there is a distinct difference in shape and size, there is also a menu button and a back button on the Samsung design, something Apple didn't have (and still doesn't, but really needs). The frame and Bezels are distinctly different. Even the position of the speaker grill is different.
While many say Samsung should just pay the dollar amount, which for Samsung or Apple would be less than pocket change, Samsung is working to ensure that companies can create items without the fear of being sued by a company larger than them and that is why they keep appealing the case, this really has little to do with the money.
Now what would be even better is if we could return to what patents were really all about in the first place. For those that are unaware, originally a patent was issued for a certain amount of time, during which no company could copy or make derivative works from it. The patent would also include all of the specifications to build said object, after that amount of time, it would then be fair game for any company to duplicate and improve upon, said improvements could then be patented once again and the cycle would repeat. This system was put in place to ensure that each company/person could make a reasonable profit, but then to also encourage innovation after they made such a profit.
[doublepost=1528751956][/doublepost]
Again, this isn't really about the money for Samsung, if it were, I am sure they would just pay it, they want to make sure that one rogue company doesn't find ways to patent something so simple and obvious as a rectangle with rounded corners, especially when prior art already shows this type of device as a rectangle with rounded corners, which means it wasn't even Apple's idea to begin with.
VirneTx has just as much of an open and shut case against Apple but for some reason people here don’t want them to pay VirneTx...
I’m sure they would have already if they could. Why would anyone wanna pay their enemy money?
This is iOS vs Android, none of the screenshots look similar. The Samsung phones look identical to the first iPhone, same body, same shape, same app icon designs, same colours, and they have documents saying to copy the iPhone. You can keep peddling this useless link though, its fun.
Of course that ignores the fact that most of the ways to design a phone do not involve copying Apple as intentionally and extensively as Samsung did.
And I disagree that the design aspects are so limited, whether as to overall shape, the design and shape of icons, the presence / absence and number of hardware buttons, the presence / absence of software menu bars with pop-up sub-menus, location of speakers, location of camera lenses and flashes, touch ID, face ID, etc. Even animojis. Most other makers manage to avoid outright infringement while exploiting the expectations in the marketplace Apple has created.
The thing is though that wasn't a fine, it's the minimum amount of tax owed to Ireland. Ireland were merely forced to tax Apple the going rate as previously they offered illegal state aid in exchange for jobs.
Apple is as slippery and nasty as anyone when it comes to paying up and doing the right thing. These companies have to be forced to pay their dues. These are the tactics used by tricksters and frauds not respectable companies. Never assume Apple and Sammy are respectable, they're right at the bottom with Amazon. Mom n' Pop stores look like income tax saints compared to these crooks.
The difference is Xerox let him because they wanted the tech out there and the internal process could not do it.
And they have no basis for doing so. It's an utter copy, just like the entire Android OS.
Companies are already doing that, and Apple is fighting those companies. The problem here is that Samsung got actual design documents of the iPhone and copied many elements from it. We're not just talking "rectangles with rounded corners" here. They blatantly copied the entire device and thought a few tiny differences here and there would be enough to keep Apple from caring.
How can you say Apple's claims are ridiculous? Look at the pictures. That Galaxy didn't exist before the iPhone and then Samsung produced something that looks like that? There is a PDF outlining how to copy the iPhone.
And you state so confidently "no one" has lost sales because of this? LOL!! The whole idea of Samsung copying Apple was to steal sales from their competition, which surely happened with every Galaxy sold.
including the internals ? Just because one company does TouchID one way, doesn't mean its the only way to get the same result.
Did you read the article? It has nothing to do with who won, but how much is the bounty for winning?
“The verdict isn’t valid because any reasonable jury would’ve found in our favor.”
I wonder if any criminal appeals have been won on this basis. Jerks.
I wonder if any criminal appeals have been won on this basis. Jerks.
This, in fact, has been their precise strategy from the start. Jerks.
Until a jury awards Apple something on the order of $57 in damages, Samsung is going to bleat about this ... despite the fact that it's patently obvious to even the most casual of observers that they blatantly copied Apple and had no shame about doing so.
And I know they said $28 million ... which is laughable on its face (hence my hyperbolic $57 suggestion above). And since when has a guilty party been able to strong arm a court into telling it how much in damages it should award?
Apple need Samsung to make those components. If Apple could get them from somewhere else they would.
[doublepost=1528753483][/doublepost]This thing is getting ridiculous now. Is this just going to go on and on and on forever.
