Samsung loses U.S. trial, owes Apple more than $1 billion in damages

Guest said:
It's amazing how many people here don't have a clue of what actually went down in the court case but feel they deserve an opinion. Regardless of whether you are Apple-hating-zealot (you would be in the minority by the way), they practically created the "smart phone" sector as we know it and the patents garnered from this should be respected. Samsung was shown quite clearly in much of the case to not respect these patents and the law is taking its course.

Apple-hating-zealots (who by the way are benefiting greatly from Apple's leadership in this technology sector) should blame the law if you feel it is wrong and not Apple. Apple is merely trying to protect its intellectual property like every other company (Samsung included) does.

By the way, Apple hardware AND software is very easy to argue as the best. This has been shown in countless reviews and bears itself out in Apple's great success. Apple is the choice of most professionals in media . There OS is highly functional, easy to use, stable and virtually virus free relative to the others. The Mac hardware even runs the competitions' OS better than other hardware. Many still have no need for third-party anti-virus. Try and do that on Windows?!?!. And Apple support is still superior to most.

Fine if you prefer other than Apple but to hate on them is just juvenile at best.
Click to expand...

While some of what you said about Apple is true (well, used to be true at least), I just have one question for you. If Apple is so superior, why are they patenting everything to the point where the competition can't even improve on it. Before you say to "protect their unique ideas", just keep in mind that a small rectangular devices with big screens and round corners isn't unique to iphones. It is unique to the whole smartphone category. I understand you probably live, eat, and breathe apple products (You'd have to to be THIS biased), but I've talked to die-hard apple fans that follow this tech stuff closer than me and not one of them agree with what apple is doing. It's no mystery that apple has terrible ethics.

And what would a company with no ethics do when the competition starts making better products? Apparently sue until they can't.
 
To the guy who came up with all the smart phone pictures of the past. The icons on those things look exactly like the iphone so apple must have copied all off those. Also look up altair and star and see how crude those interfaces were. And watch apples version just years later and see how much they innovated and changed for better and usability and also how they design the icons so common intelligence can guess at the function of an icon without reading a book about it and just pick it up and use. You can hate apple but this is what they brought to the market so du mb a s s es like your self can use computers without reading a os bible for it. Read much lately?
 
You guys have to do some reading. It's particularly sad when fanboys don't read about the case, and just be informed by glorified "tech" blogs and think they know what they're talking about.

We are talking about federal jurors here. They did their job, and they did it right. If you had seen the exhibits of the case, plus the e-mails of Samsung executives where they literally discussed on which features to take from the iPhone and put onto their Galaxy devices, then you'd know. I don't agree with the amount of damages, simply because to me it seems like a lot, but Samsung did knowingly infringe on Apple. And I don't care so much for Samsung paying, but for other OEMs to truly innovate. This ruling, which will undoubtedly be appealed, means manufacturers will produce less but better devices; devices that truly look different.

Won't really argue, just putting the information out there.
 
lawfer said:
You guys have to do some reading. It's particularly sad when fanboys don't read about the case, and just be informed by glorified "tech" blogs and think they know what they're talking about.

We are talking about federal jurors here. They did their job, and they did it right. If you had seen the exhibits of the case, plus the e-mails of Samsung executives where they literally discussed on which features to take from the iPhone and put onto their Galaxy devices, then you'd know. I don't agree with the amount of damages, simply because to me it seems like a lot, but Samsung did knowingly infringe on Apple. And I don't care so much for Samsung paying, but for other OEMs to truly innovate. This ruling, which will undoubtedly be appealed, means manufacturers will produce less but better devices; devices that truly look different.

Won't really argue, just putting the information out there.
Click to expand...

You're probably right that Samsung knowingly infringed. Given the case as it was, the jury probably made the right decision. But what gets me is how the official procedure completely stomped out common sense. Anyone who reads about them can tell that apple's patents are a joke. Sure, eventually the other OEMs will probably come out with something way better than what apple has, and it'll be their turn to patent everything so that apple can't work on that. The point is though that we would get much more innovation if we could continue on the traditional route. Take something good and refine it, but unfortunately that'd be illegal now.
 
Guest said:
Apple didn't invent **** they simply improved upon pre-existing technology.

By 2002 companies like Palm were releasing smartphones, like the TreoSmartphone, which included include wireless web browsing, email access, computer sync, and a third party suite of applications
Click to expand...

But they took the pieces of **** and made them good. It achieved the same thing, but in totally different ways.
Your explanation is liking saying cars copy horses, because they transport you from A to B.

Any improvement Samsung have made isn't very big, as the iPhone was a good product to begin with. Had they added some new, market changing features, then maybe they could have avoided this lawsuit by talking about what they have innovated.

Other than a slight change to the design, this is a copy of years of hardwork from Apple, especially their designers, like Jony Ive.
 
Thank God, Apple does not assemble cars by taking an engine from here and tyres from there and so on. Otherwise, at least in the US, car companies would be required to use, may be, triangular wheels, irregularly shaped seats and steam engines!
 
[LEFT]only way to combat this is just boycott all apple products that's all[/LEFT]
 
@ Guest
"When you make a false claim that GUI was copied from xerox or stolen you have to have the authors or inventors name? Who was the author of GUI? Don't seem to have that fact ha? For if you have that fact we would all realize that Jobs was on that team? So if I invent something while working at a company for peanuts is it me steeling from them when I quit and take what I invented with me? So you can keep your bs propaganda for your self."

Are you telling me Jobs was on the team that invented the GUI? What are you smoking? First the GUI was invented by a team at Stanford Research Institute, led by Douglas Engelbart. Then a more advanced version that uses graphics was developed at Xerox PARC by Alan Kay. Get your facts correct and don't start saying Jobs invented the GUI. What else does job invent? The telephone?

In terms of inventing something while working at a company and then quitting, that's a bit more complicated. If you invented it at the company but have the patent under your name, then you can do whatever you want with even if you quit. A lot of times however it's not under your name so even if you quit, you don't really have the full freedom of using what you invented.
 
@ danhodge
It's true that they made "****" things better. However they did not INVENT those things. They just improve upon it. Just think about the slide to unlock feature. There are several companies that have made and used that in their products but APPLE is the one that say they invented the slice-to-unlock, patent it successfully, and then used it to sue other companies. Wonderful isn't it?
 
Could you imagine what the car industry would be like if they openly sued each other as often as tech companies do? There would be 10 new lawsuits every year.

And you know what? Both of these companies have dirt on their hands but without going into detail, this lawsuit and the settlement were ridiculous and I think this will only make the tech world that much more complicated.
 
danhodge said:
But they took the pieces of **** and made them good. It achieved the same thing, but in totally different ways.
Your explanation is liking saying cars copy horses, because they transport you from A to B.

Any improvement Samsung have made isn't very big, as the iPhone was a good product to begin with. Had they added some new, market changing features, then maybe they could have avoided this lawsuit by talking about what they have innovated.

Other than a slight change to the design, this is a copy of years of hardwork from Apple, especially their designers, like Jony Ive.
Click to expand...

What, do you think Apple just one day released the iphone? no, they started out copying others with minor improvements and built on that. Innovation usually is only recognized after a big release, but its actually a much longer, less glorious process.
 
Let's face it, Samsung did copy the Apple iPhone. Though it is also obvious that U.S. patent law needs to be overhauled. We need to restore the proper balance to give all involved a fair way to interact.
 
Let's face it, Samsung didn't copy the Apple iPhone. That's my, equally valid, opinion, although it'll probably get taken down again by the pro-Apple police.
 
"It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners"

US freedom.... someone should have patent "copy & paste" before
 
dennis777 said:
"It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners"

US freedom.... someone should have patent "copy & paste" before
Click to expand...
I think Apple has a patent for copy and paste on mobile devices actually (totally serious).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
TSMC earns $69.3 billion in 2023 becoming world's largest semiconductor company by revenue
Replies
4
Views
184
Underdog
Underdog
midian182
Samsung loses smartphone market crown for first time since 2010 as Apple steals top spot
Replies
12
Views
304
Plutoisaplanet
Plutoisaplanet
Shawn Knight
MediaTek beat out Apple and Qualcomm to finish 2023 as the top smartphone chip vendor
Replies
5
Views
245
Disiw
D

Latest posts

Back