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

Samsung Executive Calls Apple vs. Samsung Ruling 'Worst Scenario for Us'

I find it amazing that Samsung is really as "shocked" as they say they are. These mega corps do this type of thing all the time. Samsung knew they were infringing the entire time. And prior to infringing, lawyers and execs sat down and figured out the risk/benefit for when (not if) they get sued. this is common practice. Samsung knew it was coming. And if they get away with paying only a billion dollars, then the benefit was a lot more then the risk. Now, if a ton of key products wind up getting banned, I'm not really sure how they handle it in the short term. But I'm sure they do. They almost certainly had to play out this exact scenario many times before they ever went to court.
 
ArchAndroid said:
On the other hand, what if Samsung just began to neglect selling certain phones in certain configurations in the United States?

If Samsung are aware that the laws in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, China or Australia wouldn't uphold such a result, you may see a full fat version released on these shores and a watered down version Stateside.
Click to expand...

So what you mean is, if USA doesn't behave like Samsung want they'll take their things and go elsewhere?

That's quite a strange attitude for a company..
 
sulpfiction said:
I find it amazing that Samsung is really as "shocked" as they say they are. These mega corps do this type of thing all the time. Samsung knew they were infringing the entire time. And prior to infringing, lawyers and execs sat down and figured out the risk/benefit for when (not if) they get sued. this is common practice. Samsung knew it was coming. And if they get away with paying only a billion dollars, then the benefit was a lot more then the risk. Now, if a ton of key products wind up getting banned, I'm not really sure how they handle it in the short term. But I'm sure they do. They almost certainly had to play out this exact scenario many times before they ever went to court.
Click to expand...

They can stop it all by licensing apple patents which they are infringing upon.

3 billion in fees plus possibly having their infringing products banned in the states - time for Samsung to end this.
 
iEvolution said:
I think Samsung deserved what they got a billion dollar fine and from what I understand this is much more than Apple offered them in the first place to legally use these patents.

The fine should be enough, injunctions will just further limit consumer options.
Click to expand...

The point of a patent infringement lawsuit is to get restitution for another company profiting off of the company's intellectual property. To basically take those unfairly earned profits away. If injunctions aren't enforced, then the other company can keep on profiting. That isn't exactly just.
 
iEvolution said:
...neither of those devices were multi-touch compatible screens. Nor were they what tablets are today.
Click to expand...

Therefore those features were not essential to selling tens of millions of useful small tablet devices (PalmPilots, et.al.) or a few dozen smartphones (Nokia N800, et.al.). Therefore someone might deserve a patent for the innovation of introducing those enhanced features, well beyond the essentials, to the market.
 
MkNuII said:
So what you mean is, if USA doesn't behave like Samsung want they'll take their things and go elsewhere?

That's quite a strange attitude for a company..
Click to expand...

:confused:
No, I didn't imply that at all. I explicitly said that they may opt to remove/alter features for US versions of their phones.
 
wikus said:
Damn near all the patents Apple got are frivolous. Its disgusting seeing how they got patents on such loose and obvious pseudo technologies, the whole system is broken.
Click to expand...

Because you are a patent attorney, programmer, engineer or… how about none of the above?

----------
iEvolution said:
What does that have to do with anything? The fact a basic essential navigation tool can be patent is silly how does the iphone's popularity relate to ANYTHING I said?
Click to expand...

And how many times did you lament the absence of this "basic essential navigation tool" before 2007? If it's so basic and essential, you must have been thinking damn, I wish that Treo had pinch-and-zoom. NOT!
 
AZREOSpecialist said:
When was the last time you pinched-and-zoomed prior to 2007?
Click to expand...

That's the thing with prior art. Apple popularizing pinch to zoom doesn't matter. If some other product used it, then any patent for it is null and void.

I'm fairly certain MS showed off a similar concept for enlarging pictures on the Surface about a year or so before the iPhone first arrived.
 
Wow, I couldn't read all the posts - some people get it and some don't.

If companies can't copy Apple's implementation that will hurt innovation and the customers? If I posted that, read it and really thought about it I would delete those kinds of comments to keep from looking silly. But that is just me.
 
ahireasu said:
Why do i have this feeling that it was not apple's innovation but just that apple went and patent it?
Click to expand...

No idea why someone would think that.

Apple > created the idea > created the technology > patented it > sold it in a product.

Doesn't get simplier than that.
 
tomegun said:
If companies can't copy Apple's implementation that will hurt innovation and the customers? If I posted that, read it and really thought about it I would delete those kinds of comments to keep from looking silly. But that is just me.
Click to expand...

No one can copy Apple's implementation. That's theirs and theirs alone. But do you think Apple should have exclusive rights to concepts like pinch and tap to zoom?

jj47 said:
Apple > created the idea > created the technology > patented it > sold it in a product.
Click to expand...

Did Apple create Siri? They did use it in their products, but the technology and ideas were developed outside of Apple.
 
MkNuII said:
So what you mean is, if USA doesn't behave like Samsung want they'll take their things and go elsewhere?

That's quite a strange attitude for a company..
Click to expand...

I think the OP means that at least for the software patent infringments it would be easy for Samsung to have a different implementation for the US and the full-featured version available only in countries where software patents are invalid (most of the rest of the world).
 
sulpfiction said:
I find it amazing that Samsung is really as "shocked" as they say they are. These mega corps do this type of thing all the time.
Click to expand...

Not amazing at all. Just group think gone bad. Lots of corporate executive meeting rooms are filled with their own form of reality distortion field. They mistake their own delusions for brilliant thinking and decision making. Books have been written on this subject (some by Noble-laureates).

Learn this and apply to your own life.
 
Renzatic said:
That's the thing with prior art. Apple popularizing pinch to zoom doesn't matter. If some other product used it, then any patent for it is null and void.

I'm fairly certain MS showed off a similar concept for enlarging pictures on the Surface about a year or so before the iPhone first arrived.
Click to expand...

Read your post again

The Surface isnt even in shops yet...
 
catchatyou said:
I hope that this is a warning to all Android manufacturers, Apple means business. I hope that Samsung will take the path that Microsoft did and actually innovate instead of blatantly copying.

The best scenario for consumers is to have a choice, and if everyone's copying Apple, the consumers don't have much choice.
Click to expand...
The thing is, Samsung is the most blatant of them all. Google themselves had warned it of the similarities to Apple's designs but Samsung wouldn't listen. Most other manufacturers are fine IMO.

iEvolution said:
The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.
Click to expand...
Excuse me while you take 5 years to invent a rear view mirror, patent it, and I copy it in a manner of months, and call your invention obvious :rolleyes:

Cheffy Dave said:
You wouldn't stop copying :apple: products, you refused all licensing agreements to pay :apple: for their intellectual properties,backed by patents, duly procured, you lost, now pay the Piper, end of story:cool:
Click to expand...
This. I cannot believe people still give Samsung the slack. They are not babies. They are, in many respects, the largest consumer electronics company on the face of the Earth.
 
jj47 said:
No idea why someone would think that.

Apple > created the idea > created the technology > patented it > sold it in a product.

Doesn't get simplier than that.
Click to expand...

Didnt they buy a company that had created this idea? Doesnt really matter cos its still theirs afterwards.
 
ArchAndroid said:
On the other hand, what if Samsung just began to neglect selling certain phones in certain configurations in the United States?

If Samsung are aware that the laws in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, China or Australia wouldn't uphold such a result, you may see a full fat version released on these shores and a watered down version Stateside.
Click to expand...

Well, because Samsung was able to make somewhere between 800 million and 2.8 billion in the meantime in profit off of 8 billion in revenue by ignoring the law and infringing on Apple's patents and trade dresses.

We of course don't quite know for sure how much profit Samsung made, because they did their best to obscure things in the trial.
 
Last edited:
Warning shot across Google's bow...as well as the rest of the copycat manufacturers. Only one precedent has been set. They can either voluntarily change their UIs or Apple will start hunting them down one by one.
 
License it then - DON'T STEAL IT!

chinesedemo said:
Complete nonsense, pinch to zoom is the most practical and logical method of employing zoom on a mobile device. The fact that it is something that is there is a patent for is scary. This entire case was nonsensical at best.
Click to expand...

May be practical and logical NOW THAT APPLE MADE IT SO. Hello . . . Paying reasonable fees to the Patent Owner for something you want to "logically" use is OK. Letting OTHERS research and develop and then STEALING IT for your own is WRONG to the tune of 1 Billion Dollars. Willfully doing so will cost you 3 Billion Dollars.

It's about time the courts got something RIGHT!
 
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