Slickdeals is community-supported.  We may get paid by brands for deals, including promoted items.
Forum Thread

Samsung vs. Apple - Verdict has come down..

18,933 670 August 24, 2012 at 04:17 PM in Chat (2)
http://gizmodo.com/5937762/samsun...g-updating

Samsung got wrecked:

* Jury finds Samsung infringement of Apple utility, design patents for some (though not all) products
* Jury upholds Apple utility, design patents
* Jury upholds Apple trade dress '983
* Jury finds Samsung "diluted" Apple's registered iPhone, iPhone 3 and "Combination iPhone" trade dress on some products, not on others
* No Apple infringement of Samsung utility patents
* Jury found Samsung violated antitrust law by monopolizing markets related to the UMTS standard

Damages owed by Samsung:
* $2.3 billion and counting

(Full disclosure: above info stolen from live.cnet.com/Event/Apple_vs_Samsung_verdict)
Add a Comment
Reply

134 Comments

View Forum Thread

Your comment cannot be blank.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Mar 2011
L8: Grand Teacher
> bubble2 3,596 Posts
351 Reputation
gunnerusa
08-28-2012 at 07:54 AM.
08-28-2012 at 07:54 AM.
Quote from Landers :
You do realize that most of the world is filled with total idiots right? Just because you can see and understand, doesn't mean the avg person does. Trust me, people are farking stupid.
Patents don't exist to protect a company's brand. They exist to serve the public by giving limited protection for legitimate inventions. Don't listen to me. Listen to this old fashioned scrap of paper I found that Steve Jobs banned from all Apple devices:

Quote :
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
Reply
Joined Jan 2006
Piece of work
> bubble2 18,933 Posts
670 Reputation
Original Poster
Landers
08-28-2012 at 08:01 AM.
08-28-2012 at 08:01 AM.
Quote from gunnerusa :
Patents don't exist to protect a company's brand. They exist to serve the public by giving limited protection for legitimate inventions. Don't listen to me. Listen to this old fashioned scrap of paper I found that Steve Jobs banned from all Apple devices:
So your issue shouldn't be with Apple. They were granted the patent, they have the right to try and protect them. End of story. If you believe they shouldn't have been granted the patent, take it up with the patent office. It's not Apple's fault.
Reply
Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
08-28-2012 at 08:04 AM.
08-28-2012 at 08:04 AM.
Quote from Landers :
So your issue shouldn't be with Apple. They were granted the patent, they have the right to try and protect them. End of story. If you believe they shouldn't have been granted the patent, take it up with the patent office. It's not Apple's fault.
i think we need patent reform… allowing patents on DNA and on plant seeds etc…. NOTHING that "grows" plants animals bacteria etc should be patentable
Reply
Joined Mar 2011
L8: Grand Teacher
> bubble2 3,596 Posts
351 Reputation
gunnerusa
08-28-2012 at 08:48 AM.
08-28-2012 at 08:48 AM.
Quote from Landers :
So your issue shouldn't be with Apple. They were granted the patent, they have the right to try and protect them. End of story. If you believe they shouldn't have been granted the patent, take it up with the patent office. It's not Apple's fault.
That's true, but is there another company out there aggressively trying to strangle a market by litigation like this? I wonder if there's a long term danger to Apple that the company hasn't considered. Of course, the source could be biased, but if you enter "apple patent" into Google, the third result that comes up is "apple patent troll."
Reply
Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
08-28-2012 at 08:53 AM.
08-28-2012 at 08:53 AM.
Quote from gunnerusa :
That's true, but is there another company out there aggressively trying to strangle a market by litigation like this? I wonder if there's a long term danger to Apple that the company hasn't considered. Of course, the source could be biased, but if you enter "apple patent" into Google, the third result that comes up is "apple patent troll."
have you heard of monster cable
Reply
Joined Dec 2007
L8: Grand Teacher
> bubble2 3,619 Posts
273 Reputation
Kabn
08-28-2012 at 09:36 AM.
08-28-2012 at 09:36 AM.
Quote from Landers :
So your issue shouldn't be with Apple. They were granted the patent, they have the right to try and protect them. End of story. If you believe they shouldn't have been granted the patent, take it up with the patent office. It's not Apple's fault.
blame falls on the patent office, Apple, and the jury: the patent office for issuing these patents (a few of which are simply ridiculous), Apple for making the decision to file the initial infringing lawsuit (just because you own a vague patent doesn't mean you have to take legal action), and the jury for not doing their due diligence in determining the validity of these idiotic patents.

"nobody else can develop a grid-based, icon-driven mobile OS without paying us, even though that existed almost a decade before we released our product." what a crock. kudos to Google/Microsoft/Nokia/other developers for using universal, well-known, best-practice principals to design competing products. too bad Apple apparently sees any sort of competition as lawsuit-worthy.
Reply
Last edited by Kabn August 28, 2012 at 09:57 AM.
Joined May 2004
Warning free 10 years!
> bubble2 24,862 Posts
1,948 Reputation
Ram|bunc|tious
08-28-2012 at 10:28 AM.
08-28-2012 at 10:28 AM.
Quote from Hawk2007 :
google south korean fan death.

Fans left on overnight will apparently kill the occupants of a bedroom.
Wait ... is this proven? Does it only kill Sorth Koreans or anyone with a fan on? I have a ceiling fan in my room ... OMG both my kids have fans in their rooms constantly spewing circular death! Reaper
Reply

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
08-28-2012 at 10:43 AM.
08-28-2012 at 10:43 AM.
Quote from Kabn :
blame falls on the patent office, Apple, and the jury: the patent office for issuing these patents (a few of which are simply ridiculous), Apple for making the decision to file the initial infringing lawsuit (just because you own a vague patent doesn't mean you have to take legal action), and the jury for not doing their due diligence in determining the validity of these idiotic patents.

"nobody else can develop a grid-based, icon-driven mobile OS without paying us, even though that existed almost a decade before we released our product." what a crock. kudos to Google/Microsoft/Nokia/other developers for using universal, well-known, best-practice principals to design competing products. too bad Apple apparently sees any sort of competition as lawsuit-worthy.
you do realise that the grid based listing of tv shows is patented? so newspapers and the like have to pay royalties to print the evening tv schedual (do they still do that?)

Quote from Ram|bunc|tious :
Wait ... is this proven? Does it only kill Sorth Koreans or anyone with a fan on? I have a ceiling fan in my room ... OMG both my kids have fans in their rooms constantly spewing circular death! Reaper
have ot leave the doors and windows closed as well IIRC
Reply
Last edited by HeyLookItsMe August 28, 2012 at 10:43 AM.
Joined Dec 2007
L8: Grand Teacher
> bubble2 3,619 Posts
273 Reputation
Kabn
08-28-2012 at 10:54 AM.
08-28-2012 at 10:54 AM.
Quote from HeyLookItsMe :
you do realise that the grid based listing of tv shows is patented? so newspapers and the like have to pay royalties to print the evening tv schedual (do they still do that?)
my points are:
  1. i don't believe that either should be protected by a patent since they are so vague/fundamental.
  2. even if it were worthy of a patent, in the case of Apple, there was prior art which should have caused their application to be denied.
Reply
Joined Jul 2006
CDI gave me free netflix!
> bubble2 51,186 Posts
11,206 Reputation
dzap
08-28-2012 at 11:07 AM.
08-28-2012 at 11:07 AM.
Quote from Ryu-bom :
whats a fan death?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_death

South Koreans actually believe this shit even with all the technological advancements they've made.

I really don't understand Korean people...
Reply
Last edited by dzap August 28, 2012 at 11:32 AM.
Joined Dec 2006
L10: Grand Master
> bubble2 22,541 Posts
1,011 Reputation
Hawk2007
08-28-2012 at 11:20 AM.
08-28-2012 at 11:20 AM.
Quote from Ram|bunc|tious :
Wait ... is this proven? Does it only kill Sorth Koreans or anyone with a fan on? I have a ceiling fan in my room ... OMG both my kids have fans in their rooms constantly spewing circular death! Reaper

If you don't have any Korean ancestors, you're quite safe.
Reply
Joined Feb 2007
L7: Teacher
> bubble2 2,547 Posts
294 Reputation
cdog90260
08-28-2012 at 11:24 AM.
08-28-2012 at 11:24 AM.
Quote from Landers :
You do realize that most of the world is filled with total idiots right? Just because you can see and understand, doesn't mean the avg person does. Trust me, people are farking stupid.
anyone can distinguish between apple and other, since apple has had the same sized phones for years. You really believe that people cant figure out between an apple and samsung phone? really?

Quote from Landers :
So your issue shouldn't be with Apple. They were granted the patent, they have the right to try and protect them. End of story. If you believe they shouldn't have been granted the patent, take it up with the patent office. It's not Apple's fault.
this is like saying we shouldnt blame banks for tearing up the economy and ripping off the citizens, it was clinton who repealed glass steagall...
Reply
Last edited by cdog90260 August 28, 2012 at 11:25 AM.
Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
08-28-2012 at 11:38 AM.
08-28-2012 at 11:38 AM.
Quote from Kabn :
my points are:
  1. i don't believe that either should be protected by a patent since they are so vague/fundamental.
  2. even if it were worthy of a patent, in the case of Apple, there was prior art which should have caused their application to be denied.
but companies should be allowed to protect their brand sometimes they overstep but
Reply
Joined Nov 2003
The original gay....
> bubble2 8,038 Posts
649 Reputation
HeyLookItsMe
08-28-2012 at 11:56 AM.
08-28-2012 at 11:56 AM.
Quote from gunnerusa :
Patents don't exist to protect a company's brand. They exist to serve the public by giving limited protection for legitimate inventions. Don't listen to me. Listen to this old fashioned scrap of paper I found that Steve Jobs banned from all Apple devices:
these are the patents Samsung was found to have violated:

Utility Patent 163: Enlarging documents by tapping the screen
You know when you double tap text that is too small and it enlarges? Or when you double tap and the text centers?

Utility Patent 381: 'Bounce-back' feature when scrolling beyond the edge of a page. This is also known as the rubber band patent.
When you scroll to the bottom of an app and it bounces you are using one of Apple's patents. Samsung violated this patent with 21 phone models.

Utility Patent 915: Distinguishes between single-touch and multi-touch gestures. An example of this would be pinch to zoom.
Your iPhone is smart enough to know when you are using one finger and when you are using two fingers. This is a patent owned by Apple and Samsung violated it with 21 phone models.

Design Patent 087: Ornamental design of the iPhone (white color)
Apple has patented the fundamental design and shape of the iPhone. This means that its rectangular shape and form belong to Apple.
Samsung violated this design patent with 12 phone models.


Design Patent 677: Ornamental design of the iPhone (black color)
In addition to patenting the shape and color of the white iPhone, Apple also patented the shape and color of its black iPhone.

Design Patent 305: Rounded square icons on interface
Samsung's phone icons copied Apple's with 13 phone models. They were the same in their design and shape.
Reply
Last edited by HeyLookItsMe August 28, 2012 at 12:00 PM.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Feb 2005
L6: Expert
> bubble2 1,446 Posts
196 Reputation
Putz1103
08-28-2012 at 12:28 PM.
08-28-2012 at 12:28 PM.
Quote from HeyLookItsMe :
these are the patents Samsung was found to have violated:

Utility Patent 163: Enlarging documents by tapping the screen
You know when you double tap text that is too small and it enlarges? Or when you double tap and the text centers?

Utility Patent 381: 'Bounce-back' feature when scrolling beyond the edge of a page. This is also known as the rubber band patent.
When you scroll to the bottom of an app and it bounces you are using one of Apple's patents. Samsung violated this patent with 21 phone models.

Utility Patent 915: Distinguishes between single-touch and multi-touch gestures. An example of this would be pinch to zoom.
Your iPhone is smart enough to know when you are using one finger and when you are using two fingers. This is a patent owned by Apple and Samsung violated it with 21 phone models.

Design Patent 087: Ornamental design of the iPhone (white color)
Apple has patented the fundamental design and shape of the iPhone. This means that its rectangular shape and form belong to Apple.
Samsung violated this design patent with 12 phone models.


Design Patent 677: Ornamental design of the iPhone (black color)
In addition to patenting the shape and color of the white iPhone, Apple also patented the shape and color of its black iPhone.

Design Patent 305: Rounded square icons on interface
Samsung's phone icons copied Apple's with 13 phone models. They were the same in their design and shape.
The first and second utility patents I can understand being patents, but I would also see that as an android infringement, not specific to samsung. The multitouch crap should not be a patent. You can see that as far back as "minority report", "star trek: the next generation" and I'm sure others. That should not be an apple patent. The design patent is too grotesquely vague, but that is apple's and the patent office's fault. The rounded square icons I would call an android infringement, not specifically samsung.

That is my thoughts on the whole case. But then again I hate apple with a passion. But that's just me.
Reply
Page 8 of 9
Start the Conversation
 
Link Copied

The link has been copied to the clipboard.