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

Samsung Stepping Up Attacks on 'Free Riding' Apple in Patent Dispute

KingCrimson said:
Right is right. Samsung can't be allowed to get away with IP theft. If they are allowed, then that smashes all IP protections for everyone. People are just latching onto Samsung because they hate Apple.
Click to expand...
Interesting facts for the blind.


Most interesting is the conclusion

This ruling also causes serious damage to Samsung's image, as people without any knowledge of how this Community Design thing works are now assuming that a court has ruled that Samsung is copying Apple's designs - even though no such ruling has taken place. I doubt this reputation damage can be expressed in a monetary value.
Click to expand...

http://www.osnews.com/story/25098/Apple_Scores_Meaningless_Dutch_Court_Victory_Against_Samsung


The Gallery application on Samsung's Android 2.x devices infringes on this patent, and as such, the injunction against the Galaxy S, SII and Ace was granted. The Galaxy Tab 10.1 was exempt, since it runs Android 3.0, which does not infringe on the patent, the judge said.

Samsung has already stated this ruling is pretty much meaningless, since the company is going to replace the Gallery application on all Galaxy smartphones right away. The injunction won't go into effect until mid-October, so they've got more than enough time to change the software.
Click to expand...

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/The_Community_Design_and_you_Thought_the_USPTO_Was_Bad


That's an effect every touch screen phone has, at least every Android touch screen and all the other patents and design claims Apple made were thrown out very quick not only due to the facts that people had them before but cause it was nonsense. Now I love Apple's products, but I can't stand other fans of Apples products acting as if Apple weren't fighting as dirty or dirtier as other major companies. Microsoft is not Microsoft by being a good boy and Apple is not Apple by being a good boy.They are what they are by being smart boys and using all legal (and sometimes illegal) methods to win. The problem they've created for themselves is that what they have that can stick in court Samsung can change with an simple OTA. While what Samsung has can't really be changed, you simply need to stop producing phones.
 
apolloa said:
I guess so s they are the only ones I've read about? As I understand it the Arm CPU's can't run Windows apps, so for the moment they have used Core i5's etc. But if you have a link about some cheaper Windows 8 tab's I would like to have a read?

----------



Now now, we shall have none of that common sense factual evidence on here sir!
Click to expand...

"Cant run Windows apps", lets begin there as the statement itself is quite interesting (e.g., how backward compatibility is presupposed in the very word Windows). To move from there, it can be helpful to answer the question "Does W8 support ARM?"* The answer to that question is quite simply: Yes. So how does the two, seemingly conflictual, statements fit together then? The answer is:

While W8 runs on ARM, applications compiled for x86 will not run. This renders some issues, especially in terms of broken backwards compatibility, when it comes to Windows legacy, and legacy software applications.

So what does this mean then? Well, little, i would say. MSFT has a strong developer community, and key applications will most certainly (for the vast majority of costumers) be found on both platforms (x86 and ARM). Also, if things goes according to plan, Metro (i.e. start) will, in many ways, be the the "core" of the W8 experience (the consumer experience - c.f. the ipad), and this will unify** the two*** quite seamlessly. So yeah, its not likely that we'll see any shortage of apps regardless of which platform we might choose.

As for links, i have none - as W8 is far from golden, and thus no W8 products are sold. There are, however, quite a lot of geeks pushing the software to its limits, running it at 800 mhz processors and such, and this combined with demos of w8 running on ARM makes me quite confident that they can provide a nice experience without need for "the latest" in hardware (i.e. that they will be able to compete on price).

* this question is quite interesting too, as the traditional notion of the stack implies that software run on hardware, but here its rather "hardware running on software", i.e. software is the (more and more) dominant platform (traditionally, intel has been as strong of a platform - if not stronger - than MSFT, and one commonly referred to the pc-platform as such as the "wintel platform")

** im not quite sure how fragmented it will even be to begin with. From what i gathered cross-development on W8 (i.e. ARM and x86) isnt really cross-development at all (rather, just cross-compilation). If so, then there is really nothing to fuzz about. Ok, we know that we will have to get our apps in the app store if we run ARM, but so what (really). Those who need to be able to side-load (developers and enterprises) will be able to side-load. So yeah, really no big deal.

*** also, lets face it. virtually all consumer tablets will be ARM, as x86 really only makes sense (right now) within enterprises and professional work.
 
Last edited:
kdarling said:
He's referring to the single Apple patent that the Netherlands court said Samsung infringed, which has to do with bounceback while flicking between photos.

Samsung said they'd modify their Gallery app before the injunction date so that sales would never have to pause. They still have a little over a week to do so.
Click to expand...

Remember though that this would only apply to products imported after the date set in the ruling, and thus only new devices. That is, we will see that app in existence after the date, and still have no ban. Ironically, Samsung isnt even prohibited from delivering the very same application as just that - an application - as long as they dont bundle it with the device. Not that i expect that to happen as their non-infringing version of camera is good enough as is.
 
Abazigal said:
The reason why windows sold as many copies as it did was because it came bundled with every PC, so each consumer would get a copy regardless of whether they wanted one or not. It would be like a transportation systems monopoly boasting that millions of people use its services everyday. Like we have a choice?

When you consider that everyone who buys an apple product would be getting one entirely of their own volition, rather than have it forced down their throat, then yes, I feel the sales volume would be something to brag about, especially with them costing what they do.
Click to expand...

The reason why iOS sold so many copies as it did was because it came bundled with every iDevice, so each consumer would get a copy regardless of whether they wanted one or not. It would be like a transportation systems monopoly boasting that millions of people use its services everyday. Like we have a choice?

When you consider that everyone who buys a MSFT product would be getting one entirely of their own volition, rather than have it forced down their throat, then yes, I feel the sales volume would be something to brag about, especially with them costing what they do.

See what i did there?

----------
Smoother said:
Interesting facts for the blind.


Most interesting is the conclusion



http://www.osnews.com/story/25098/Apple_Scores_Meaningless_Dutch_Court_Victory_Against_Samsung




http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/The_Community_Design_and_you_Thought_the_USPTO_Was_Bad


That's an effect every touch screen phone has, at least every Android touch screen and all the other patents and design claims Apple made were thrown out very quick not only due to the facts that people had them before but cause it was nonsense. Now I love Apple's products, but I can't stand other fans of Apples products acting as if Apple weren't fighting as dirty or dirtier as other major companies. Microsoft is not Microsoft by being a good boy and Apple is not Apple by being a good boy.They are what they are by being smart boys and using all legal (and sometimes illegal) methods to win. The problem they've created for themselves is that what they have that can stick in court Samsung can change with an simple OTA. While what Samsung has can't really be changed, you simply need to stop producing phones.
Click to expand...

This is the flip-side of different historical paths, which only now is starting to become evident*. Coming from software is what made the iphone so great, but their strength in software is paired with weakness in other areas just as important for the (mobile) industry as such.

Dang. If i cannot write an article about this, someone else should. I guess i can always add it to my pipeline, its just... not really IT research as such. :- )

* ok, sub-par phone capabilities and such aside, that is, but these seem to have had only minor impact on consumer choice anyway so.
 
divinox said:
The reason why iOS sold so many copies as it did was because it came bundled with every iDevice, so each consumer would get a copy regardless of whether they wanted one or not. It would be like a transportation systems monopoly boasting that millions of people use its services everyday. Like we have a choice?

When you consider that everyone who buys a MSFT product would be getting one entirely of their own volition, rather than have it forced down their throat, then yes, I feel the sales volume would be something to brag about, especially with them costing what they do.

See what i did there?
Click to expand...

funny-pictures-cat-sees-what-you-did.jpg
 
Smoother said:
Interesting facts for the blind.


Most interesting is the conclusion



http://www.osnews.com/story/25098/Apple_Scores_Meaningless_Dutch_Court_Victory_Against_Samsung




http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/The_Community_Design_and_you_Thought_the_USPTO_Was_Bad


That's an effect every touch screen phone has, at least every Android touch screen and all the other patents and design claims Apple made were thrown out very quick not only due to the facts that people had them before but cause it was nonsense. Now I love Apple's products, but I can't stand other fans of Apples products acting as if Apple weren't fighting as dirty or dirtier as other major companies. Microsoft is not Microsoft by being a good boy and Apple is not Apple by being a good boy.They are what they are by being smart boys and using all legal (and sometimes illegal) methods to win. The problem they've created for themselves is that what they have that can stick in court Samsung can change with an simple OTA. While what Samsung has can't really be changed, you simply need to stop producing phones.
Click to expand...

That is a one month old article. The ruling has taken place and samsung has already been found a culprit in the hearing.

:)
 
Unfortunately in my opinion Apple have asked for everything they are now getting from Samsung.

The lawsuit based on the shape of a tablet is just a blatant attempt to retain market share. If push comes to shove Samsung can alter the external appearance of their devices, but trying to get a device to function without UMTS would be a major technology challenge.

All so unnecessary and the only thing that will suffer is consumer choice.

I love Apple devices, but the company, that's an entirely different matter these days. A real shame.
 
I'd love to believe that this will all end in more innovation, but so far it seems to portend nothing good for the average consumer:

  • Higher prices.
  • Less common functionality across devices.
  • Oddball design choices to avoid offense.
  • Non-intuitive workarounds for patented gestures.
 
Last edited:
Ryan John said:
Unfortunately in my opinion Apple have asked for everything they are now getting from Samsung.

The lawsuit based on the shape of a tablet is just a blatant attempt to retain market share. If push comes to shove Samsung can alter the external appearance of their devices, but trying to get a device to function without UMTS would be a major technology challenge.

All so unnecessary and the only thing that will suffer is consumer choice.

I love Apple devices, but the company, that's an entirely different matter these days. A real shame.
Click to expand...

There is no lawsuit based on the shape of a tablet.
 
BaldiMac said:
There is no lawsuit based on the shape of a tablet.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you've been in the dark for a few months.
The whole German lawsuit is based on the EU community design registration (i.e, its shape).
If you look at the actual design registration, it is so generic that the shape is the key factor in their registration. It's a frikkin rectangle. :eek:
 
rjohnstone said:
Perhaps you've been in the dark for a few months.
The whole German lawsuit is based on the EU community design registration (i.e, its shape).
If you look at the actual design registration, it is so generic that the shape is the key factor in their registration. It's a frikkin rectangle. :eek:
Click to expand...

Nope. Not in the dark. Just annoyed at the oversimplification of the issues involved that are perpetuated in the forum and lead to uninformed judgements presented as fact. The shape is one aspect of the community design. The design as a whole is considered, not any one design element.
 
kdarling said:
I'd love to believe that this will all end in more innovation, but so far it seems to portend nothing good for the average consumer:

  • Higher prices.
  • Less common functionality across devices.
  • Oddball design choices to avoid offense.
  • Non-intuitive workarounds for patented gestures.
Click to expand...

I'd like to address #2 and #4 from your list - because they are anti-consumer and anti-developer to the T.

To borrow a line from Apple's playbook, "The Customer Doesn't Want to Care/Think/Worry about..."

Not being able to have universal group of gestures works against the consumer and also the developers who have to adjust their experience accordingly.

As you - and others have said - lock up some engineers and 9/10 they will all come to the same/similar solution to many of these "problems" because they make the most sense.

Just a rant...
 
BaldiMac said:
Nope. Not in the dark. Just annoyed at the oversimplification of the issues involved that are perpetuated in the forum and lead to uninformed judgements presented as fact. The shape is one aspect of the community design. The design as a whole is considered, not any one design element.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the"whole" design?
Page 3 and 4.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/61944044/Community-Design-000181607-0001

It's a feature-less rectangular slab.
It doesn't even look like an iPad.
 
Oletros said:
And was is your point stating the obvious? Are you saying that Mercedes or Lexus have won the cars war?
Click to expand...

No, that low marketshare does not necessarily indicate low consumer desire for the product. The people who want to buy Apple products are likely a lot more than the people who actually have Apple products due to the fact that Apple does not play in the mid-low end market.
 
Prallethrin said:
Samsung is in trouble, a situation of their own making I might add, due to violation of Apple's design patents and are taking a hammering (rightfully so) from Apple in courts around the world.
Click to expand...

Actually, Apple has pending cases around the world, but only one conclusive, meaningless victory. An EU judge has come to the conclusion that Apple's community design is so minimalist, it gives up protection by it's very nature. The one case they've won so far was so trivial, it wouldn't even impact sales as the infringement could be fixed before the product went on sale, thereby making the injunction that Apple spent so much on meaningless.
 
benthewraith said:
Actually, Apple has pending cases around the world, but only one conclusive, meaningless victory. An EU judge has come to the conclusion that Apple's community design is so minimalist, it gives up protection by it's very nature. The one case they've won so far was so trivial, it wouldn't even impact sales as the infringement could be fixed before the product went on sale, thereby making the injunction that Apple spent so much on meaningless.
Click to expand...

That was in the Netherlands. Another EU judge, in Germany, ruled in Apple's favor with respect to the community design in granting their request for a preliminary injunction. Which applies to Germany (the largest economy in the EU). In addition to the decision you described. (Both cases being rulings on preliminary injunctions, not final decisions. The actual cases won't be heard for a year or so.)

And then there is Australia, where Samsung has voluntarily delayed the launch of the Tab at Apple's request.

Not quite trivial or meaningless.
 
Why is Apple only suing Samsung? It looks like HTC, LG, and others have all copied the basic iPhone design. Also, why isn't Apple suing Google since that is really where the copying is occuring?
 
BaldiMac said:
That was in the Netherlands. Another EU judge, in Germany, ruled in Apple's favor with respect to the community design in granting their request for a preliminary injunction. Which applies to Germany (the largest economy in the EU). In addition to the decision you described. (Both cases being rulings on preliminary injunctions, not final decisions. The actual cases won't be heard for a year or so.)

And then there is Australia, where Samsung has voluntarily delayed the launch of the Tab at Apple's request.

Not quite trivial or meaningless.
Click to expand...


My understanding is the Germany band is effictly meaningless and fairly easy to get around.
Samsung can not directly prompt or ship the product there. Does not mean that retailers can not get there product from a 3rd party outside the company.
 
Dmunjal said:
Why is Apple only suing Samsung? It looks like HTC, LG, and others have all copied the basic iPhone design. Also, why isn't Apple suing Google since that is really where the copying is occuring?
Click to expand...

the RDF is strong with this one.
 
Dmunjal said:
Why is Apple only suing Samsung? It looks like HTC, LG, and others have all copied the basic iPhone design. Also, why isn't Apple suing Google since that is really where the copying is occuring?
Click to expand...

Because Samsung is the big threat, not HTC or Google.
 
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