Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This is why it's so important to make sure we elect the right presi....

Oh, it was 8-0...

Just thwarting those that would go off the rails on this one.
(not that I disagree with the original premise, or partial premise above, it's just that this isn't the example that should be used...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeanR1
I'm sure somehow this will all be Tim Cooks fault, Apple can't innovate any more, blah blah blah :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: thekeyring
They copyrighted a touch screen rectangle though, I mean come on.

So why is it that Samsung's 'rectangles' use the same dimensions, curved edges, colors, materials, textures and other design elements as Apple's instead of sticking with their own designs? Surely if you reduce the design to a 'touch-screen rectangle' they (or google) could make one that doesn't look like a bootleg iPhone...
 
wow 8-0 decision? i don't think any case in the history of supreme court has an all in favor of one party. 99 percent of the cases has a decision around 5-4 but damn 8-0?
100% of 50% of fake, made up on the fly statistics on the internet are fake.
 
Good artists copy, great artists steal...

Where have I heard that before...

(The irony is too much)

The original quote was actually:
“That great poets imitate and improve, whereas small ones steal and spoil.”

There's nothing great about plagiarism, unless one can't think for oneself.
 
Damaging? Have you seen Apples stock prices? They seem to be doing just fine.
You just can't see they haven't released anything good in the last 3 years, can you. The watch is a joke. The iPhone uses 2012 technology. The new MacBook Pros are a 'a bit thinner' version of the last ones, full of glitches. And now the 6 and 6S have a lot of issues. I know there were problems when Jobs was around, but Cook has a wrong vision for the company.
 
Forgive me if I'm missing the sarcasm. But, in case you are serious, 8-0 (9-0) "per curium" decisions happen often enough.
Per curium does not mean that a decision unanimous. Bush v. Gore was per curium for instance (5-4).

But you're correct that unanimous decisions are common. In recent years, they've been about half of all decisions.
 
You just can't see they haven't released anything good in the last 3 years, can you. The watch is a joke. The iPhone uses 2012 technology. The new MacBook Pros are a 'a bit thinner' version of the last ones, full of glitches. And now the 6 and 6S have a lot of issues. I know there were problems when Jobs was around, but Cook has a wrong vision for the company.

I've not exactly been complimentary about Apple in recent months - the state of the Mac is genuinely concerning. But what exactly is '2012 technology' about the iPhone? Pretty sure aside from the headphone debacle for this generation, they're still widely regarded as the benchmark by which other phones are judged. Class leading camera. Blistering performance. What am I missing?
 
We were all happy with our phones that looked like bricks... then we had smaller bricks... followed by flip phones and we were amazed when cameras were added. Some of the flip phones even could connect to a small bit of the internet with a crappy interface. Then Apple changed everything. EVERYTHING. That's what innovation looks like. It's indistinguishable from magic when first seen.

So Samsung and all of the other companies copy Apple's innovation and extract profits. Big deal? Yes, this is a BIG deal. Too bad that the courts don't see it this way.

Patents exist to protect the costs of research, development, and innovation from companies who come up with a new idea/product and bring it to market. That's very different from patent-trolls who do nothing except file lawsuits. Patent trolls need to be stopped. Manufacturing companies who patent their research in order to make new and exciting products should be protected and should be able to realize the profits from their innovation for a finite period of time.

Just my $.02.
 
I have never seen so much negative publicity for Apple in a year. Yea Tim Cook, I'm blaming this on you.

I'm sure Tim can't wait for 2016 to be over. I can't wait for him to be gone.


So, wait, Tim Cook is responsible for Samsung's alleged infringement of Apple Products up to 2011, and then the Supreme Court's decision to clarify a portion of the law relating to patent law interpretation and remand due to errors of the lower court proceedings? Give me a break. Obama did 9/11?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watabou
I wonder if apple gets to keep the interest on the $399 million they have been sitting on. That alone represents $4 million a year at a paltry 1% interest rate. And I would suspect they are doing way better than that. So if they can string this out a couple of more years they will still win no matter what. And for samsung this is the one good new in an explosive year for them (maybe I should say implosive).
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
I'm sure somehow this will all be Tim Cooks fault, Apple can't innovate any more, blah blah blah :rolleyes:
Aaahyabollah !!
Samsung are not only terrible copycats; their copies are always earlier on the market these days...
Just detrimental.
 
Last edited:
I will let Nelson respond for me.


image.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeanR1
Headline should make it more clear that this doesn't mean no fault on Samsung and no compensation for Apple.

This, the headline on this article is way off. I could be wrong, but its my understanding that the Supreme Court declined to resolve whether the monetary compensation should be based off the price of the entire phone, or the price of the components impacted by the patent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sigma4Life
Per curium does not mean that a decision unanimous. Bush v. Gore was per curium for instance (5-4).

But you're correct that unanimous decisions are common. In recent years, they've been about half of all decisions.

Egads! I misspoke. Thank you, sir, for the clarification.
 
They copyrighted a touch screen rectangle though, I mean come on.
You obviously weren't in the market for a phone when the first iPhone came out?
There was nothing on the market like it when It came out in 2007..
I do like competition but everything after is a copy, same reason I won't buy windoz..
I won't reward copyists ..
With that said the current crop of dopes running Apple are really out of touch..
Like kids inheriting daddy Steve's fortune..running wild in the streets, getting high and spending daddys money.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.