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

[Iconoclysm]

Think how terrible music would be if it were governed by the world of software patents. I took a year-long course on music history dating back to the earliest known human-made music, and everything to this day is a product of evolutions in music. There were sudden changes in the 20th century, but they only seemed sudden to us because they were adopted from Eastern music and hadn't been heard in Western culture before.

Everyone knows it's a possibility that there could be something completely different than prior art that would be amazing. For example, maybe there's a mode of transportation no one has thought of before that would be amazing. In 2001, the Segway was one such product. But as it's turned out, the market prefers cars and various forms of public transit for the most part. I concede that Apple did something really different in the end product of the iPhone it created in 2007. I remember thinking after the keynote, "Wow that was even better than I was expecting."

But it's also possible Apple created a new category (which I think they themselves have claimed) that is the market thinks is the best way of going about things, whether it's with Apple or not. I am not familiar with patent law, but when you look at cars, they are remarkably similar. When you look at jets from AirBus and Boeing, they are remarkably similar. Many people if you asked them upon landing couldn't tell you if they had been on a Boeing or AirBus plane.

It would be a lot to ask, but perhaps Apple could be happy with having creating a new product category rather than keeping others out of it. In the past when Apple was copied by other companies for their computers, Apple would say the other company just didn't get it and couldn't copy Apple since Apple was not about looking flashy, colorful, etc. It was about integration of hardware and software. And that's still true today. I think the difference in this case is that Apple has had a big share of the market and so they are manic in wanting to keep that and they see other companies as copying them well, rather than poorly when it came to WinTel boxes. With the Mac marketshare, Apple had a sense of resignation already about marketshare to an extent. It's more comfortable to grow from 2-3% upward than it is to arrive to whatever massive marketshare Apple has had with the iPhone and try to keep it. That is a trickier position to be in and would cause stress. It would cause people to say things like "thermonuclear" whereas the Mac situation would cause someone to say "For Apple to win, Microsoft doesn't have to lose." I actually wish iPhones were the Macs of the 90s and early 00s. Apple might innovate more with iTunes and iOS if they weren't so afraid of losing what they've amassed. Instead they're becoming like AOL of the 90s and trying to win on inertia.

Yeah, unless you're the guy that delivered that TED talk....just stop with the comparison of music and software patents. They're really quite different and there's a hell of a lot more on the line.

 

[acron1]

As with most software patents, these included here are ridiculous.

I've bought each version of the iPhone since day one, and was extremely excited about iPhone 5 next month. I can't believe i'm saying this, but this is just so...ugly. I'll have to protest it the only way I really can, and switch to Android. The phone probably won't be as nice, but that's not the most important thing here in the long run.

Good luck...

 

[Renzatic]

Considering Apple's position in the PC OS market and their near bankruptcy, you're defeating your own argument with this example. There is no "oh woe is me" line here, it's about what is right, and Samsung is a dirty player in the industry.

What? 10% of an absolutely massive market. Their practical ownership of the luxury high end segment of said market? Hundreds of millions of Macs sold worldwide? A solid, loyal, if not occasionally slightly rabid fanbase? Yeah. My heart weeps for poor ever abused Apple.

Apple went into near bankruptcy in the 90's due to gross mismanagement in the post pre Jobs era, not because someone else stole all their ideas.

 

[AustinIllini]

Apple went into near bankruptcy in the 90's due to gross mismanagement in the post pre Jobs era, not because someone else stole all their ideas.

Very true. Jobs did exactly what most strategists would do. They had ten times as many products as they actually needed.

 

[Rafterman]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

 

[hot spare]

Does anyone here ever read Groklaw (the PJ-blog)? This is the person which literally ended the SCO-Linux controversy and resulted in the company's bankruptcy.

If you guys are interested in legal debate, you should head over there.

Read this if you have an hour to spend over legal details:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120824175815101

Few interesting things mentioned there: Jury took 21 hours to answer 700 questions. They awarded penalties for items Samsung didn't infringe, then they had to modify it. Apparently the foreman told a court representative that the jurors had reached a decision without needing the instructions.

This is surely going to get stretched.

 

[Peace]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

*cough*

Apple is already doing it.

 

[Reach9]

Why ? Apple introduced it and patented it.

People don't realize the iPhone started this whole smartphone craze. Without Apple i'd hate to see what smartphones looked like.


enter crappy pics of outdated useless comments.

Sorry. I think people realize that the iPhone revolutionized the industry, that's been said numerous times.

What if Apple had patented the mouse, or the keyboard. We wouldn't have any competition from IBM, Microsoft, and there wouldn't be these hardware companies we have today.

Being an industry leader is great, but Samsung should have taken the license then none of this would have happened.

 

[nick_elt]

Looks like someone will actually have to create a R&D team now...

 

[kerryb]

Yes now it is, it was like magic on the original iPhone.

 

[Joe-Diver]

Why ? Apple introduced it and patented it.

People don't realize the iPhone started this whole smartphone craze. Without Apple i'd hate to see what smartphones looked like.


enter crappy pics of outdated useless comments.

2007 wasn't so long ago....and folks have already forgotten what the market looked like:

Smart phones were all Blackberry and clones of them...small screens on top half with mini keyboards on the bottom half.

Enter the iPhone.

Now look at all the smart phones...what do they look like now? How do they behave now?

Steve said when they introduced it that they had patented the crap out of it...he warned all those cloning companies like Samsung....it's taken 5 years but now the legal action is finally starting to come to fruition.

Just because something is essential to the technology and essential to the experience doesn't mean you can freely copy it and make money from it. You have to license it from those who brought it to bear and hold the rightful patent.

 

[nick_elt]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

Dear Samsung,

While it took a few months changing suppliers,

Good luck finding 7 BILLION dollars worth of contracts.

Love

Apple.

samsung actually needs apple more than the other way

 

[jj47]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

That would mean both companies would suffer - Samsung suffering even more. Maybe you should have a think about the implications.

 

[pipa]

I picked up my friends top of the line Samsung phone and saw pixels. Pixels? I haven't seen a pixel on my screen in over a year! I would take a iPhone 3GS then any android phone on the market. It's not just the hardware. It's the entire ecosystem. Thanks Steve! Some people will never get it

 

[sransari]

I get that apple can be a little notorious and rediculous with a lot of their patents, but overall, I have gotta say that I think the jury got this whole thing right...there was just too much evidence against samsung, most notably, samsungs own documentation showing specific adaptations from the iphone into samsungs own phones. I've spent a lot of time using samsungs and there is just so much iOS influence in TouchWiz and in the general look and feel of samsung devices vs other android devices. I believe samsung HAS gained in the smartphone market by blatant copying of apple's features and more importantly, the actual essence of iOS. The patent system is to protect innovation, and encourage others to improve on existing technology, and not to copy it 1-for-1.

This victory for apple was more than just claims against "rectangles and round edges." Apple's main claims against samsung were regarding the specific user experience that could only come from direct copying.

 

[FlameofAnor]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

One small problem.... Apple is one of Samsung's biggest clients. They would cut off their own nose to spite their face. In other words..... lose/lose.

 

[theluggage]

I like how apple cries when other companies don't license their technologies under FRAND but when the tables are turned, apple uses the courts.

Let's try this one more time:

FRAND only applies to patents that are part of industry standards such as mobile network protocols. If you want to connect to the mobile network you have to license these patents. In this case. it turns out that Apple didn't infringe because they bought their mobile network chips from Intel who had already licensed the patents (that's what "exhaustion" means in the jury report).

Despite some of the rubbish being asserted, Apple's patents on things like "pinch to zoom" are not essential features of any mobile device. They're not covered by FRAND and Apple is under no obligation to license them to anybody. I'm not overly impressed that it's possible to patent such things (at least in the US) but until the glorious day when US scraps software patents them's the breaks.

 

[Peace]

Yes now it is, it was like magic on the original iPhone.

Which bring me to an opinion..

I believe eventually Apple patents for various functions of the iPhone are going to have to become FRAND type patents.

 

[SpectatorHere]

I've been looking and I don't think there is a specific "pinch-to-zoom" patent, although please update if you can find it. In the case they referred to 915....
Here's what that is based on.... claim 1 patent 7,844,915:

A machine implemented method for scrolling on a touch-sensitive display of a device comprising:

receiving a user input, the user input is one or more input points applied to the touch-sensitive display that is integrated with the device;
creating an event object in response to the user input;

determining whether the event object invokes a scroll or gesture operation by distinguishing between a single input point applied to the touch-sensitive display that is interpreted as the scroll operation and two or more input points applied to the touch-sensitive display that are interpreted as the gesture operation;

issuing at least one scroll or gesture call based on invoking the scroll or gesture operation;

responding to at least one scroll call, if issued, by scrolling a window having a view associated with the event object based on an amount of a scroll with the scroll stopped at a predetermined position in relation to the user input;
and

responding to at least one gesture call, if issued, by scaling the view associated with the event object based on receiving the two or more input points in the form of the user input.

Finally, here's Jeff Han's Ted talk back in 2006 which would seem to invalidate the patent "pinch-to-zoom." It's funny to listen to the crowd react to multi-touch gestures...they were blown away. I believe this was presented at trial as indication of prior art, but I could be wrong.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html

"Pinch-to-zoom" is just too obvious for anyone to have legal monopoly granted for it, in my opinion. It will be a major hassle to all touch interfaces to have to come up with something else if it's not invalidated.


EDIT: Which isn't to say Samsung wasn't copying Apple in some cases...the S2, overall, is a blatant ripoff, and they should have to pay damages for that. But then the jury said the epic 4g was infringing as well....

 

[Dusky600]

Woooooooooooooot go for the kill apple bury those bastids !!!! Go apple !

 

[kerryb]

feel bad for the guilty

As with most software patents, these included here are ridiculous.

I've bought each version of the iPhone since day one, and was extremely excited about iPhone 5 next month. I can't believe i'm saying this, but this is just so...ugly. I'll have to protest it the only way I really can, and switch to Android. The phone probably won't be as nice, but that's not the most important thing here in the long run.

So you will break a 2 year contract with ATT, Verizon or other to make a statement that Apple was wrong to defend 4 years or R&D from a copy cat company? Who are you helping exactly? It wont be yourself but heck maybe a copy of the iPhone will suit you better.

 

[tann]

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.

I can understand pinch to zoom being patented. There are other ways of doing it (maybe not as intuitively or easily but there are other ways).

 

[Glideslope]

Mr. Choi,

You had the opportunity to stop several times. YOUR ARROGANCE brought this SHAME upon your Company, and the People of S. Korea.

You and your entire executive team should resign immediately in an attempt to save face for your citizens.

 

[MacCurry]

While this verdict was the worst possible outcome for Samsung, they can pick up the pieces rather quickly and switch to Windows 8 where there aren't these patent issues.

This of course spells bad news for Android and Google. If Apple's mounting case against HTC goes ahead -- or if HTC isn't spooked by the Samsung case -- then you all of a sudden see a run for the hills by Android OEMs and a huge loss of marketshare from Android.

While Apple has vindicated itself, I think that in the end, Microsoft and Windows 8 are going to be the big winners.

I agree. If the damages are trebled and if this case isn't tossed out on appeal, Samsung will increase prices on AAPL for all components on future contracts. Everyone will pay more.

OR

Don't be surprised if Samsung approaches AAPL and says that it will dump Android altogether if AAPL decides to drop the case in appeal. Samsung will still make phones, but they'll partner with Microsoft and still sell components to AAPL. That way Samsung effectively kills off Nokia and makes AAPL dependent on its components.

The only significant Android OEMs left will be Motorola, HTC, LG and Sony. All of them too small to affect AAPL.

 

[G51989]

I own a Lumia 900, and yes it's outdated already. However, in about 3 weeks, all of the Android hardware will be "outdated". I really do wonder though, why do Fandroids even read this site?

I'm a Fandroid.....* Realizes I have well over a dozen apple products in my house....all these macs I've been buying for a decade clearly means I hate apple..... *

If it truly is essential, then maybe Apple should be approached to make it licensable? Samsung, in their arrogance, felt that they could copy it freely.

I think Apple wanted 30 dollars per phone for pinch and zoom? Which does nothing? And Apple was willing to pay .2 cents for each phone with Samsungs 3G patents which make the phone....work?