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's Massive Document Outlining How to Improve Galaxy S by Adopting iPhone Solutions Surfaces
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You guys are so blinded by being fanbois lol...
If a company ISNT looking at other products to improve their own, they will go out of business. This picture proves Samsung was willing to improve their products. Apple doesn't have a patent on buttons...
If a company ISNT looking at other products to improve their own, they will go out of business. This picture proves Samsung was willing to improve their products. Apple doesn't have a patent on buttons...
And yet - no-one can come up with a SINGLE way of making a button bigger without increasing its size.
Until they do ... Samsung's argument is 100% correct on the posted example.
Understood. Samsung better do a damn good job communicating that to the jury though...if nothing else, it looks as though the IPhone was used initially for "inspiration", but this could be very easily misinterpreted....even to the point where someone (not me) could assume certain attributes were copied by accident in the effort in make a product better. I still don't think it bodes well for Samsung.
Apple is fine with Samsung copying them, they just want to get compensated. They would have settled out of court if Samsung would have agreed to pay the amount Apple asked. So it's fine for anyone to copy the industry leader in order to improve their products and revenues, they just have to pay for it.
Obviously, it was subpoened. They certainly didn't just hand it over out of the goodness of their hearts.
Downvote! We're not discussing rounded corners on the device or a big red button, there are more than one slide in that article.
We're discussing that Samsung has copied the overall experience!
Those morons will never stop whining with eyes closed, maybe starting from sometime 2007.
Looks like Samsung is going down, time to sell the stock, oh wait, samsung is privately held. Dammit...
What the hell are you on about.
Why even have a end call button?
How about not having an "END CALL" button. When you remove the phone from your head (perhaps after several seconds or a pre-defined distance) the phone hangs up.
Now say it.
FYI: iPhone came before Samsung, they see what they're doing wrong - make a 132 page (and pretty damning) portfolio of APPLE IDEAS & DESIGNS, and say: "Yeah, we like this - it's better than ours - lets implement it but try to make it less Applish and more Samdungish"
Not saying such memos exist but Apple is the prosecutor and therefore goes first in showing their evidence. This is why there is so much anti-Samsung evidence piling up nowadays.
Samsung will get a chance to defend when Apple chooses to rest.
That green call button looks very familer wonder were I've seen that before or should that read after
During lawsuits there is a process called discovery where they must surrender all documents, e-mails, etc related to the case. Samsung was forced to offer these things to Apple's lawyers for review.
Sure, all companies look at the competition (if you're smart), no problem there at all.
But these documents make it seem as if the solutions are derived directly from the competition (in this case Apple), that is very different from looking at the competition and grabbing some cues.
In other words, it isn't at all clear that the solution is obvious to Samsung.
How long did it take you to write this comment and convince yourself it make sense? So Samsung studies the iPhone, makes recommendations based on the study, applies those changes to their phone (thereby making it to resemble the iPhone) and that is not stealing??
So how about someone in a worst financial situation than you, studies your house and your habits, makes recommendations about how to break and enter when you are not around, and then applies those recommendations thereby improving his financial situation and that of his family. IE, his kids get a better living thanks to Him stealing from what was 'on the market'.
This makes as much sense as what you suggested.
If you need to revise every little detail of what you've developed because another phone, designed by a company that wasn't even in the phone business, is doing better than you, you are doing something seriously wrong.
Posted in Wrong Thread Earlier....
The problem is the timing of it all: Everyone is right, to a degree, when you compare the market of 2007 smartphones to now. Apple sank x amount of billions into R&D for the IPhone, and in the process completely upgraded the standard to which all need to strive for, or they will sink. The courts are stuck now with trying to make a fair decision, while at the same time trying to stop frivolity from clogging the courts until the end of time.
The outcome in the long run I think: Apple wins this suit, awards will be questionable due to the fact that what they created is now industry standard, but no doubt should be awarded something, and this will be their one time shot at any lawsuit of this type (at least pertaining to the IPhone design patents.) I think they can prove their case enough to make all this happen.
Also: A great many items will end up under FRAND because of it...some of which should well be anyway at this point. Everyone will be made an example of, to some degree, as a result of this suit, whether it be good, bad or ugly. The courts are already getting sick of seeing these types of suits get filed....there are tons, this one just carries the biggest profile. The courts will be happy to start setting precedents in order to drive down the amount of these suits
The problem is the timing of it all: Everyone is right, to a degree, when you compare the market of 2007 smartphones to now. Apple sank x amount of billions into R&D for the IPhone, and in the process completely upgraded the standard to which all need to strive for, or they will sink. The courts are stuck now with trying to make a fair decision, while at the same time trying to stop frivolity from clogging the courts until the end of time.
The outcome in the long run I think: Apple wins this suit, awards will be questionable due to the fact that what they created is now industry standard, but no doubt should be awarded something, and this will be their one time shot at any lawsuit of this type (at least pertaining to the IPhone design patents.) I think they can prove their case enough to make all this happen.
Also: A great many items will end up under FRAND because of it...some of which should well be anyway at this point. Everyone will be made an example of, to some degree, as a result of this suit, whether it be good, bad or ugly. The courts are already getting sick of seeing these types of suits get filed....there are tons, this one just carries the biggest profile. The courts will be happy to start setting precedents in order to drive down the amount of these suits
Well - there are only two possibilities there:
1. They didn't try to.
2. They did try and failed.
because the Samsung phones are NOTHING like an iPhone, the iPhone is a masterpiece of engineering, the Samsung is just rubbish thrown together like a build it yourself linux box.
Either way - Apple needs to stop funding lawyer retirement plans, and give their engineers a pay rise with the money.
The fact that the majority of these things are very small refinements lets you know why many Android enthusiasts said in the past that Samsung didn't copy, or even take design cues from, the iPhone.
Reminds me of what Google said about many of the patents and trademarks Apple is using to sue these various companies. About how Google thinks that said patents or trademarks are so basic and necessary for a mobile OS, that Apple shouldn't have been granted a patent or trademark at all.
See signature.
Reminds me of what Google said about many of the patents and trademarks Apple is using to sue these various companies. About how Google thinks that said patents or trademarks are so basic and necessary for a mobile OS, that Apple shouldn't have been granted a patent or trademark at all.
See signature.