Samsung's Appeal of Australian Galaxy Tab Ban Fast-Tracked as Apple Targets Resellers

[jhende7]

I'm not overlooking your argument, I'm saying your argument is bogus in light of everything else Android does.

Again, just because there are a bunch of other non-infringing products doesn't negate that fact that some do. If Honda copies a new internal combustion technique from Toyota for its 2011 Civic engine, is this ok, because the Honda Accord, CRV and Odyssey engines don't use this technology?

It is ? I thought it was the overall experience of the tightly integrated UI, the rich eco-system, the simplistic industrial design and the vast availability of vendor support through its retail and online representatives.

Please. Say in 2007 Apples iPhone was just an iPod with calling functionality, and you could use the click wheel to dial a number. It would have been great looking, with a nice industrial design and it would have had Apples award winning customer support.. and it would have flopped.

The rich ecosystem was a byproduct of the iPhone's success.

But maybe I'm just over thinking it. It's all about the LG/Samsung made touch screen. That's all the iPhone is, just another phone with a Touch screen.

Again, taking what I said completely out of context. The touch screen is a fundamental part of Apples product differentiation, coupled with iOS. Of course a great touch screen is useless if your using it to control DOS.

I didn't ignore the Oracle tidbit, I don't have to reply to each nit pick point you make. The Oracle discussion is a whole other thing and you'd be surprised at how bad that is going for Oracle if you bothered to check up on it beyond some sensationalistic headlines.

Everything I've read seems to think it could go either way. There is some pretty compelling evidence to suggest Google handled the situation in a very underhanded manner. Obviously, innocent until proven guilty though.

And this is what was asked that you point out, which you then just replied you didn't have to.

Slide to unlock, swipe for next, pinch to zoom, capacitive multitouch software keyboard, top menu, dock, android app marketplace inertia based scrolling etc. Understandably, Apple borrowed some of these ideas from other sources (but paid the proper royalties). And admittedly some of this may rest on the shoulders of the manufacturers.

There were no phones that integrated all these interface mechanisms like the iPhone, and slowly but surely Andriod started adding them 1 by 1.

It's quite related. You're saying the iPhone changed Android. I'm saying Android has been like all along, it's been hardware agnostic from the start. The beauty of that is that it enabled OEMs to make SE P800 form factor phones when demand increased for such a beast after the launch of the iPhone. Android was ready to accomodate OEMs with that because Android is a software OS, it doesn't know about underlying hardware except what you tell it it needs to know through its driver API.

As long as it stays away from key iPhone/or iPad technologies. You can't fain ignorance and suggest Google is the innocent supplier of a generic OS. If Samsung or any other OEM wants to make an iPhone knock off and Google obliges, then those to parties share responsibility from any fallout.

 

[lukarak]

We have always been shameless about stealing ideas

- Steve Jobs, 1955-2011

Exactly. Ideas. Which they developed and implemented into a product working their ass off. Not a sure bet copy of an existing product, like Android (Rim at first, then iphoneOS), or Samsung with their specific UI.

 

[KnightWRX]

Again, just because there are a bunch of other non-infringing products doesn't negate that fact that some do. If Honda copies a new internal combustion technique from Toyota for its 2011 Civic engine, is this ok, because the Honda Accord, CRV and Odyssey engines don't use this technology?

I'm not saying all Android products are non-infringing, I'm saying Android as a whole is not a "blatant copy" of iOS.

Thus if you want to claim copying, you better be darn ready to point out what you're talking about. You've made it clear in your case : Android copied the capacitative touch screen input from iOS. Which is proven false by the fact that it doesn't implement Apple patented gestures (Apple holds patents for a few gestures) and those gestures it does implement in a way similar to iOS usually come from the previous years of research on multi-touch technology (including the fabled pinch and zoom).

I really don't want to get into a nit picking match with you. Just pointing out that Android is more than what you make it sound like and it's history is much richer than what you allude to. If you don't want to get educated about it because you might discover it's not as blatant a rip off of iOS as you thought it was, that's your perogative, I'd rather just keep my open mind.

 

[jhende7]

Why ? Apple never proved anything in a court of law to get the injunction, they only filed and asked for it, saying there was a dispute over patents.

Read kdarling's post about it. So why would others need to prove anything in a court of law if Apple didn't have to ?

I apologize, I simply meant that the ensuing sentancing would have to go through the proper channels.

Of course other parties are free to file for an injunction. Of course they would have to offer something compelling to the judge...and so far that hasn't happened.

Not quite clear what your trying to argue here? Do you somehow think Apple bullied the judge into filling the injunction? I mean I love a good argument, but I refrain from debating with conspiracy theorists.

 

[Oletros]

Slide to unlock, swipe for next, pinch to zoom, capacitive multitouch software keyboard, top menu, dock, android app marketplace inertia based scrolling etc. Understandably, Apple borrowed some of these ideas from other sources (but paid the proper royalties). And admittedly some of this may rest on the shoulders of the manufacturers.

And you know that Apple pays royalties for all those needed and Android has copied all those features from Apple and no from the same place Apple has borrowed the idea the same way you knew how Android looked before the iPhone were presented, no?

Have you noted that Android "steal" the things from Apple and Apple "borrow" the ideas from others?

----------

Not a sure bet copy of an existing product, like Android (Rim at first, then iphoneOS)

Someone can debunk this crap about first BB and then iPhone a thousand times and always will be someone that still tries to show it as reality

 

[vitzr]

I'm sorry, but the banning of these products anywhere is ridiculous. Is Apple that scared of the Galaxy Tab? If the iPad is as amazing and great as all would have you believe, then shouldn't it outsell anything else on it's own merits? I'm sorry, but stifling the competition like this is so borderline fascist its insane. Oh, and I own an iMac, iPad 2, and a Samsung Galaxy S2 phone....

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you! I could not agree more.

Facts:
I own and enjoy a massive amount of new Apple gear.
I have been a frequent continual customer since system 7.
Make no mistake I am a big Apple fan: Of their Products.

NOT of their current Business Practices.

I seriously doubt there is one person here who would not agree that Apple is wildly successful with really great products. So.... Why is it, that they have to act like flippin idiots and launch into various law suits, outright war, and misc smaller conflicts?

Yes, yes, I know, if indeed the product ideas and intellectual property is being stolen they have every right to do what they are doing.

That said, if they were hurting, if their sales were tanking because Google / Android / Samsung et al were really hurting them, and leading with overwhelming sales success then I would take a different position. But... Hello ? Apple? Anybody home? You are extremely successful, you have the best products in nearly every single case. You have mind share, market share, and one of the best reputations around... what more do you need?

I see absolutely no reason that Apple couldn't just let this crap go, and focus on what they do best. Apple can blow away the competition and barely be winded. But NO! They've got to act this way.

I am very passionate about Apple and a huge shareholder, if I wasn't I would not be writing this. Yet most of that pales in comparison to their arrogant, narrow minded, juvenile behavior. / Rant

 

[jhende7]

I'm not saying all Android products are non-infringing, I'm saying Android as a whole is not a "blatant copy" of iOS.

Thus if you want to claim copying, you better be darn ready to point out what you're talking about. You've made it clear in your case : Android copied the capacitative touch screen input from iOS. Which is proven false by the fact that it doesn't implement Apple patented gestures (Apple holds patents for a few gestures) and those gestures it does implement in a way similar to iOS usually come from the previous years of research on multi-touch technology (including the fabled pinch and zoom).

I really don't want to get into a nit picking match with you. Just pointing out that Android is more than what you make it sound like and it's history is much richer than what you allude to. If you don't want to get educated about it because you might discover it's not as blatant a rip off of iOS as you thought it was, that's your perogative, I'd rather just keep my open mind.

It was never by intention to have a back and fourth and do a feature for feature comparison to prove anything specific. Usually in cases like these, the simplest of evidence is what wins over the judge and jury.

A Samsung lawyer not being able to distinguish between a tab and an iPad will have a much more lasting effect on a judge or jury then arguing semantics over multi-touch.

----------

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you! I could not agree more.

Facts:
I own and enjoy a massive amount of new Apple gear.
I have been a frequent continual customer since system 7.
Make no mistake I am a big Apple fan: Of their Products.

NOT of their current Business Practices.

I seriously doubt there is one person here who would not agree that Apple is wildly successful with really great products. So.... Why is it, that they have to act like flippin idiots and launch into various law suits, outright war, and misc smaller conflicts?

Yes, yes, I know, if indeed the product ideas and intellectual property is being stolen they have every right to do what they are doing.

That said, if they were hurting, if their sales were tanking because Google / Android / Samsung et al were really hurting them, and leading with overwhelming sales success then I would take a different position. But... Hello ? Apple? Anybody home? You are extremely successful, you have the best products in nearly every single case. You have mind share, market share, and one of the best reputations around... what more do you need?

I see absolutely no reason that Apple couldn't just let this crap go, and focus on what they do best. Apple can blow away the competition and barely be winded. But NO! They've got to act this way.

I am very passionate about Apple and a huge shareholder, if I wasn't I would not be writing this. Yet most of that pales in comparison to their arrogant, narrow minded, juvenile behavior. / Rant

As a shareholder you should be extremely happy. A pushover company that lets others piggyback on its innovation is not long for this world.

 

[lukarak]

This stuff always gets people very heated eh! Personally I think its a shame this patent was allowed to go through simply because of all hassle and arguments and lawsuits its going to cause, its almost like the patent office is trying to make more money for their lawyer collegues.... "sigh"

Anyway, to close this copying argument once and for all may I present the LG Prada:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_PRADA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dobph0G46o

Announced December 2006 (before the iPhone) with a lovely big touchscreen for people to prod with their fingers and large colourful buttons buttons so you dont miss with your big fat fingers

My point being, theres not many good ways of making a touchscreen usable and several different companies came to the same conclusions without copying/stealing each other, so its pathetic that all these lawsuits have come about TBH, all the manufacturers (including apple) should be given a slap and told to behave and allow free sale of all devices across the globe in a free economy

Well, a month apart spaced announcements doesn't mean that much. It's not like Apple copied the whole phone from LG after LG announced it, as Google and Samsung did. Android changed from a RIM copy (then the market leader) to an iPhoneOS (the new inovation leader) copy. It might be that it was the other way around, LG learnt about it from some Apple leak, but since LG's phone was an order of magnitude less sophisticated, it was announced before.

 

[skoorbevad]

If everybody wants to get all ridiculous about Android "copying" iOS, you need to further clarify what you mean. What was copied?

A grid of icons you could click and launch an application from, on multiple pages?
Android didn't copy this from Apple. Palm was doing this for a decade before the iPhone was a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye. Nobody making the uneducated "Android copied iOS hurrrr" argument is running to defend PalmOS from Apple in this regard.

And as an addition to the point above, the fact that Android has clickable icons as just one facet of the primary user interface differs sharply from the Palm/WinMo and indeed iOS competitors.

Third party software?
Again, Palm and Nokia had been doing this for the better part of a decade, and Windows Mobile, for as awful of a product as that was, for a couple years prior.

Sleek design?
Can you really patent that? Is it something that should be patented? What about the tablet manufacturers dating back as far as 2003 that had tablets with a remarkably similar design to the iPad? Where is the defense here?


WHAT was copied from Apple? I've yet to see a cohesive argument here beyond what boils down to "they just did!" I'm willing to bet that if the iPhone were a product with mediocre sales numbers, nobody would be making a big deal out of this.

I've owned plenty of iOS devices and given them fair shakes, and I currently use Android devices. I don't see how a reasonable observer of the two platforms and mobile technology in general could make a claim that "Android copied Apple" and be serious about it.

What about other features of Android that seem to trickle their way into iOS releases -- or the iOS jailbreak community, for example? Why are these being ignored by everyone who wants to say that Apple is completely original and doesn't copy ideas?

 

[thenerdal]

If everybody wants to get all ridiculous about Android "copying" iOS, you need to further clarify what you mean. What was copied?

A grid of icons you could click and launch an application from, on multiple pages?
Android didn't copy this from Apple. Palm was doing this for a decade before the iPhone was a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye. Nobody making the uneducated "Android copied iOS hurrrr" argument is running to defend PalmOS from Apple in this regard.

Third party software?
Again, Palm and Nokia had been doing this for the better part of a decade, and Windows Mobile, for as awful of a product as that was, for a couple years prior.

Sleek design?
Can you really patent that? Is it something that should be patented? What about the tablet manufacturers dating back as far as 2003 that had tablets with a remarkably similar design to the iPad? Where is the defense here?


WHAT was copied from Apple? I've yet to see a cohesive argument here beyond what boils down to "they just did!" I'm willing to bet that if the iPhone were a product with mediocre sales numbers, nobody would be making a big deal out of this.

This. I too want to know what was copied from Apple.

 

[Oletros]

Android changed from a RIM copy (then the market leader) to an iPhoneOS (the new inovation leader) copy.

You can repeat the times you want, it won't be more real than now. Android didn't changed, it was hardware agnostic from the start

 

[lukarak]

Someone can debunk this crap about first BB and then iPhone a thousand times and always will be someone that still tries to show it as reality

Because it is reality.

The only thing usually tried to disprove it is the touch based early model, which also had a much more RIMesque look.

 

[thenerdal]

Looks like Apple is scared: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...duce-customers-court-told-20110929-1kyl5.html

 

[vitzr]

As a shareholder you should be extremely happy. A pushover company that lets others piggyback on its innovation is not long for this world.

I do not disagree with you.

I am absolutely blown away at the wealth I have accumulated having began purchasing substantial amounts of Apple stock way back when it was under $20 per share. So I am, indeed grateful for that aspect of Apple operations.

The current reason for my ire, is the fact that there is a limit to just how heavy handed they need to be. I am, and have always, looked forward towards the future. The way they are throwing their weight around, I am concerned about it's effect on the industry.

It is not an unrealistic thought to imagine that Apple could quite possibly crush Google and others. Competition is the very core of our free enterprise system as I'm sure everyone is aware of. I am not here to insult anyone, or overreact. I'm simply sharing my thoughts regarding the turn Apple has taken in recent times. There is a difference between defending your position, and going all out to ban others products from being sold.

Who knows where this will go, I'm simply concerned.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Again, just because there are a bunch of other non-infringing products doesn't negate that fact that some do. If Honda copies a new internal combustion technique from Toyota for its 2011 Civic engine, is this ok, because the Honda Accord, CRV and Odyssey engines don't use this technology?.

VVTL-i and iVTEC are the same techology used on both the K20 series and 2ZZ series engines respectively. Both are variable valve with lift technologies just branded differently. Also all engines use the same basic ideas for their engines (pistons, rings, valvles, cams, etc.)

 

[Oletros]

Because it is reality.

The only thing usually tried to disprove it is the touch based early model, which also had a much more RIMesque look.

If you say that the touch only is RIMesque you're more biased that what you showed.

And no, Android didn't change from one type to another

 

[LagunaSol]

Android didn't copy this from Apple. Palm was doing this for a decade before the iPhone was a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye.

Um, apparently you've never heard of a little Apple device called the Newton?

Sleek design? Can you really patent that? Is it something that should be patented?

Hmm, maybe Hyundai should just clone the exterior design of the Porsche Carrera and sell it for $20k? I mean, you can't really protect something as abstract as a design, right?



No one is saying Samsung can't create a device that has a "sleek design." What Apple (and apparently the courts, thus far) is saying is Samsung should create their own "sleek design" and not just copy that of others.

It's the Asian manufacturers' complete industrial design ineptitude you Android fans should be upset about. Not the fact that Apple is seeking legal protection for its own work.

But hey, whatever. Some people are content with lame knockoffs and stolen American IP given away for free to Asian companies in the name of advertising dollars. What are you gonna do.

 

[thenerdal]

No one is saying Samsung can't create a device that has a "sleek design." What Apple (and apparently the courts, thus far) is saying is Samsung should create their own "sleek design" and not just copy that of others.

It's the Asian manufacturers' complete industrial design ineptitude you Android fans should be upset about. Not the fact that Apple is seeking legal protection for its own work.

But hey, whatever. Some people are content with lame knockoffs and stolen American IP given away for free to Asian companies in the name of advertising dollars. What are you gonna do.

It's a pretty generic design. It's like saying TVs with similar bezels are copying each other. In reality, that's all the tablet design is. It's just a screen. Samsung's Galaxy Tab doesn't even have the same screen aspect ratio.

 

[LagunaSol]

The current reason for my ire, is the fact that there is a limit to just how heavy handed they need to be. I am, and have always, looked forward towards the future. The way they are throwing their weight around, I am concerned about it's effect on the industry.

So as an AAPL investor (which I also am) and an American (which I also am), you have no distaste or alarm for a company ripping off Apple's (and others') IP, giving it away for free (under the banner of "Open Source") to Asian manufactures, who then ape Apple's industrial design work (add insult to injury) to flood the market with cheap (or expensive) knockoffs, diverting American profits to Korea and Taiwan, all in the interest of pimping its customers to advertisers?

Really?

What you call heavy-handed tactics I call justifiable (and necessary) self-defense.

It is not an unrealistic thought to imagine that Apple could quite possibly crush Google and others. Competition is the very core of our free enterprise system as I'm sure everyone is aware of.

If Google can't stand on its own merits, it deserves to be crushed.

I guess my concept of "competition" is different from yours.

Remember how Billy Gates ripped off the Mac OS and created Windows? How did all that turn out for the technology world in general? Were we all winners?

It's a pretty generic design. It's like saying TVs with similar bezels are copying each other. In reality, that's all the tablet design is. It's just a screen. Samsung's Galaxy Tab doesn't even have the same screen aspect ratio.

Again, read the legal documentation. This silly chestnut that Apple is simply trying to copyright a rounded triangle is good for chuckles and virtual high-fives on Engadget and other Fandroid-dominated websites, but it has nothing to do with the actual case at large.

 

[thenerdal]

Again, read the legal documentation. This silly chestnut that Apple is simply trying to copyright a rounded triangle is good for chuckles and virtual high-fives on Engadget and other Fandroid-dominated websites, but it has nothing to do with the actual case at large.

I wasn't talking about the case. I was replying to you on what you said.

 

[something3153]

Again, read the legal documentation. This silly chestnut that Apple is simply trying to copyright a rounded triangle is good for chuckles and virtual high-fives on Engadget and other Fandroid-dominated websites, but it has nothing to do with the actual case at large.

It's also, as I understand, about black bezels, flat glass (both of which were on laptops long before the iPad), and identical bezel width on all four sides. All completely unprecedented, of course.

 

[Judas1]

Apple tards, "Clearly whales copied fish because the fins look alike!"
Me, "Hey tards, maybe fins are just the best way to maneuver in water."
Apple tards, "But squids can do it without fins, how come these whales developed fins. Of course they copied."
Me, "Its hopeless."

 

[LagunaSol]

I wasn't talking about the case. I was replying to you on what you said.

I was talking about the court case, which is what this entire thread is about.

 

[divinox]

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you! I could not agree more.

Facts:
I own and enjoy a massive amount of new Apple gear.
I have been a frequent continual customer since system 7.
Make no mistake I am a big Apple fan: Of their Products.

NOT of their current Business Practices.

I seriously doubt there is one person here who would not agree that Apple is wildly successful with really great products. So.... Why is it, that they have to act like flippin idiots and launch into various law suits, outright war, and misc smaller conflicts?

Yes, yes, I know, if indeed the product ideas and intellectual property is being stolen they have every right to do what they are doing.

That said, if they were hurting, if their sales were tanking because Google / Android / Samsung et al were really hurting them, and leading with overwhelming sales success then I would take a different position. But... Hello ? Apple? Anybody home? You are extremely successful, you have the best products in nearly every single case. You have mind share, market share, and one of the best reputations around... what more do you need?

I see absolutely no reason that Apple couldn't just let this crap go, and focus on what they do best. Apple can blow away the competition and barely be winded. But NO! They've got to act this way.

I am very passionate about Apple and a huge shareholder, if I wasn't I would not be writing this. Yet most of that pales in comparison to their arrogant, narrow minded, juvenile behavior. / Rant

Worst thing, i think its holding back business. Granted, it may not mean much now. But what if the cool wears off? Apple makes many good, if not great, products and i would gladly pay the premium for each one of them if they changed their ways. Instead, i sit here more or less refusing to give them a single dime out of mere principle. (Ok, I'm using macs for work, but those doesn't come out of my own pocket, so yeah).

If only Apple would a) treat developers better b) treat aware consumers better and c) be less of a bitch. Oh well, can't get it all - can we?

 

[thenerdal]

I was talking about the court case, which is what this entire thread is about.

You were replying to this guy who talked about design: https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=13737090#post13737090

I was replying to you about that reply. Replyception.