UK Judge Rules Apple Must Publish Notices Acknowledging Samsung Did Not Copy iPad

[Macthemaca]

Faith

no, Apple hasn't commited libel...libel is legal finding of a court with a series of specific findings of fact and intent you have to prove. If Samsung thinks it is libel, then they need to bring a case;

and, if you follow this judges ruling, if they don't prove their case, Samsung should publish on their website for 6 months that Apple was not guilty of libel.

this judge is ridiculous! Just imagine if we followed this logic around the nut-jobs who made claims around Obamacare being unconstitutional, etc now that the Supreme Ct has found otherwise.

There seems to just too much faith in a judge's infallibility for my liking

 

[SSDGUY]

Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad.

It was either put it on their website or write it 100 times on the chalkboard after school.

Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad. Will not accuse Samsung of copying the ipad …

 

[Iconoclysm]

Maybe I meant to insult you.

What, so working for Microsoft gives you the privilege of seeing LG's early prototypes and an amazing propensity for defending Apple on MacRumors?

Oh, so maybe I should report it as an insult?

Nah, working in the industry means I spend 8 hours a day on this if not more...therefore bring up the same old Prada ******** doesn't get anyone anywhere.

 

[samcraig]

That's not proof that the OS was designed for various devices. That only indicates a device that was being tested.

Android was always designed to be adaptable for various devices.

You might be confusing it with iOS...

Not back then, (got carried away by your post) since even one year after the iPhone they didn't have a on-screen keyboard working on the touchscreen prototype they demo'ed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIfy-xVXRPU

Yes, I'm aware of the the touch prototype shown in 2008 that barely worked and had little functionality.. oh wait 2008 is one year after the iPhone isn't it?

I posted the video up there already, but here it is again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIfy-xVXRPU

Google in October 2008 demoing a barely working, onscreen keyboard-less, touch prototype.

Shown in 2.007 at the same time that the picture you have posted.

Oh, wait

 

[gkpm]

Bottomline, the iPhone is a fancy Palm when it all comes down to it.

The Palm worked with a pen, I actually have one right here. (still love Graffiti)

 

[Lennholm]

A green phone does not have to look exactly like the iOS icon, which is pretty blatant when you go back to 2008 and look at the Omnia.

And you're saying Samsungs green phone icon looks exactly like the iOS counterpart? It doesn't, the only feature of the iOS icon that is unique and can't be seen in pre-existing icons (in, for example, Windows Mobile) is the striping and Samsung doesn't use that.

 

[w00master]

I've never understood why "fanboys" on both sides care who sues who/who copies who/etc. beyond the typical BS "rah rah! root for your team!" mentality.

At the end of the day, I could care less. I just want what *I* think fits *me* personally.

Can someone honestly explain why this "who wins over who" matters besides the BS "rah rah! Root for your team!" mentality?

I look over at what I own:

Samsung LCD TV --> Awesome Love it.
iMac --> Awesome love it.
XBox 360 --> Awesome love it.
Kindle --> Awesome love it.
iPhone 4 --> Awesome love it.
iPad (gen 3) --> Awesome Love it
PS3 --> Awesome love it.
Galaxy Nexus --> Awesome Love it.

Does it matter to me to the accusation that apple makes that the Nexus copies off of the iPhone? Nope... It's still a great device. Why should I (or any other consumer) care?

Please... fanboys... please explain.

w00master

 

[gkpm]

Android was always designed to be adaptable for various devices.

It is now, but not back then. As I said the onscreen virtual keyboard was a later addition for Android. (you can even look it up on the source tree history and see the import that brought that in)

iOS is very adaptable. It even runs on the AppleTV.

 

[tninety]

Yes, I'm aware of the the touch prototype shown in 2008 that barely worked and had little functionality.. oh wait 2008 is one year after the iPhone isn't it?

I posted the video up there already, but here it is again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIfy-xVXRPU

Google in October 2008 demoing a barely working, onscreen keyboard-less, touch prototype.

The video was uploaded in late 2007. They would have had to get the prototype developed by HTC, port the whole software stack to it, and develop drivers in mere months if it was a straight copy of the iPhone. Troll harder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_avwGFsv60U

Shown where? The Youtube video is from Oct 2008..

What a terrible world we live in, where people reupload things to YouTube for attention.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

The Palm worked with a pen, I actually have one right here. (still love Graffiti)

Same idea.

At least thats Apple rational with everything. Its a square black technology device so its obviously an iPad clone.

 

[w00master]

Before the iPad, tablets sucked.
After the iPad, everyone well... er... copied the iPad.

Image

*Shrugs* All of these devices look similar to me. Just like the iPad looks similar to the previous generation of tablets. *shrugs*

Then again, I could care less. See my post previously.

w00master

 

[JohnDoe98]

I disagree. Perhaps for some arguments (You did say sometimes).

Brick by brick is more common.

Court cases (like this) are tried in this manner. And the summation ties it all together.

Point is - the discussion points listed CAN and were dismantled one by one and the conclusion the same - that if you can dismiss each item as being copied - then you can't come to the conclusion that "everything" was copied.

I'll agree with all that. I was merely pointing out the glass was copied. I'm not aware of any complaint, in a court of law, from Apple regarding others using Corning's glass and tech. So the glass discussion is separate from the rest, but being that as it may, I think we can, or at least should, all agree it was copied.

I don't think Iconoclysm's argument is actually an organic whole, however, I didn't think your comment regarding debating propriety was a propro, which is why I said something about it. What would have been fine would be you asking him to fulfill his burden, i.e. to ask him to demonstrate why his argument can't be scrutinized by looking at each premise independently from one another. Anyway, this is straying off-topic.

 

[unlinked]

the phone icon has ALWAYS been green, even on my first siemens phone with a colored display

and gorilla glass is from a different company all together, so only apple should be allowed to use it? how is that good for the customer exactly?

I love when people use a green phone icon as an example.
I'm pretty sure the first 3 phones I owned had them. Starting 10 years before the iPhone.

 

[Mad-B-One]

Proof positive how bi-polar people are on this forum

If this forum represents a normal distribution compared to the rest of the population (and you can assume that because BPI & BPII are non-specific when it comes to social standard or intelligence), Bipolar I Disorder (the ones who had at least one manic phase) are between 0.4% and 1.6% in the USA and Biopar II Disorder ranges around 0.5% of the population. This is according to the DSM-IV-TR and it states the lifetime prevalence meaning that some people might not have had the symptoms, yet.
So, statistically speaking, yes, there are people on here. Now, what are you trying to convey with that? Are you mixing up Bipolar Disorder with Dissociative Identity Disorder? That is not even under the same group - that would not be mood disorders, but psychotic disorders...

 

[gkpm]

The video was uploaded in late 2007. They would have had to get the prototype developed by HTC, port the whole software stack to it, and develop drivers in mere months if it was a straight copy of the iPhone. Troll harder.

That video is dated November 2007. The iPhone came out in January, that's still 10 months later.

 

[ristlin]

I disagree. Perhaps for some arguments (You did say sometimes).

Brick by brick is more common.

Court cases (like this) are tried in this manner. And the summation ties it all together.

Point is - the discussion points listed CAN and were dismantled one by one and the conclusion the same - that if you can dismiss each item as being copied - then you can't come to the conclusion that "everything" was copied.

Wrong again. A court will likely hold a lawyer in contempt if they go off in tangents.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Actually - that's exactly how you destroy an argument. You pick it apart piece by piece and discredit it so that the entire argument falls apart.

You must not have good debating skills.

You pick it apart into smaller debates, not reduce a point to it's smallest components and try to dismiss it. In fact, you've completely missed the point entirely and aren't even having the debate anymore. Nice work.

 

[tninety]

It is now, but not back then. As I said the onscreen virtual keyboard was a later addition for Android. (you can even look it up on the source tree history and see the import that brought that in)

iOS is very adaptable. It even runs on the AppleTV.

The Apple TV isn't a good example because it's basically an iPhone inside.

Android was developed first for phones with keyboards in one specific form factor because it was rushed to market.

Fundamentally, Android was designed to support a variety of form factors and architectures…

 

[Iconoclysm]

I think its refreshing to see a company as big as apple get some smacked Botty

Apple is the smaller company vs. Samsung. Was that not clear?

----------

I disagree. Perhaps for some arguments (You did say sometimes).

Brick by brick is more common.

Court cases (like this) are tried in this manner. And the summation ties it all together.

Point is - the discussion points listed CAN and were dismantled one by one and the conclusion the same - that if you can dismiss each item as being copied - then you can't come to the conclusion that "everything" was copied.

Great, so you're describing how Samsung can plan for and get away with just about anything it wants when copying its competitors.

 

[pacalis]

They are only "technologically advanced" in fabricating parts. Next to nothing they make is advanced by Samsung, and I have no idea where you're pulling this nonsense from. Specs are also relative, Samsung will take specs over quality and cut corners to make up for it...

Nah, working in the industry means I spend 8 hours a day on this if not more...therefore bring up the same old Prada ******** doesn't get anyone anywhere.

Iconoclysm, you're getting owned faster than I can keep up with the thread.

It certainly seems that you haven't heard of the Galaxy s3 and discount the huge investments in infrastructure and innovation necessary to make all the high-end stuff that Samsung does.

But even counting that, sometimes you're just writing complete garbage.

Like trading specifications over quality? Specifications ARE for quality.

And if Samsung cuts corners in its products, than that really means that we should stay away from Apple because Apple products are made of that stuff.

Are you really sure you work in this industry?

 

[motorazr]

As much as I think these suits have gone on long enough, really ... I will say that as a lifetime apple user who knows his apple products.... I've seen the samsung tab in stores and thought

"Hey look! an iPad! Why are they selling that here? And why is the dock connector on the side..? Oh wait... woooaahhh.. this is the Samsung thing..weird".

..and I honestly think Apple has a point. The original design that was introduced really, really, really resembled the look and feel of an iPad (software not included here), right down to an almost identical dock-connector like cord. Why didn't samsung just use mini usb like everyone else? Why didn't they do anything to make it a little more 'unique' in first impressions?

EDIT: Just for clarification, I understand samsung innovates as a hardware company, and I know they make some of the best components in the world for themselves, apple and others. But with this particular suit, I really do see Apple's point regarding the design similarities in their final product.

 

[w00master]

Apple is the smaller company vs. Samsung. Was that not clear?

----------



Great, so you're describing how Samsung can plan for and get away with just about anything it wants when copying its competitors.

So what? How does this affect you as a consumer?

If samsung (or whoever) comes up with a better product, why should I care who copies whom?

w00master

 

[Mad-B-One]

Exactly, so 20% of the world handsets followed Apple's lead in this regard. You just, despite what you might realize, acknowledged the point.

Oh, I absolutely do! They re-discovered it - but you conveyed that Gorilla Galls is Apple's "idea" but it was just Apple's idea to "use it for phones." There is a distinct difference between those two. That is what I pointed out. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[gkpm]

The Apple TV isn't a good example because it's basically an iPhone inside.

Android was developed first for phones with keyboards in one specific form factor because it was rushed to market.

Fundamentally, Android was designed to support a variety of form factors and architectures…

I don't see an iPhone inside the AppleTV. Different interface , different form factors (TV resolution)... Architectures? Apple probably has a x86 version of iOS working somewhere, it's not that hard.

Android was rushed alright, it didn't get touchscreen keyboards until version 1.5.

 

[samcraig]

It is now, but not back then. As I said the onscreen virtual keyboard was a later addition for Android. (you can even look it up on the source tree history and see the import that brought that in)

iOS is very adaptable. It even runs on the AppleTV.

As I said and you fail to understand. Android was designed to work on multiple devices and form factors. That's irrefutable.

Wrong again. A court will likely hold a lawyer in contempt if they go off in tangents.

Hardly. Happens all the time. And destroying an argument brick by brick isn't going off on tangents.