DroidForums.net is the original Verizon Android Forum! Registered Users do not see these ads. Please Register - It's Free!
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: Samsung Dealt 3 Blows in Apple Case: Banned in Australia, Looks Bad in U.S. & More

  1. Droid Sensei
    kodiak799's Avatar
    Member #
    39354
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,704
    Liked
    399 times
    Phone
    HTC Rezound
    #21
    A bit OT, but this is too funny:

    Update 2: Dutch Court Sides With Apple, Samsung Says It Has A Workaround | mocoNews
    The Advertising Standards Agency ruled that Motorola could no longer call its Atrix the “world’s most powerful smartphone” in advertisements in the UK: that honor, it said, goes to Samsung for the Galaxy S II i9100. Ironically, if the Dutch ruling holds up, Samsung won’t be able to sell the world’s fastest device on these shores.
  2. Senior Droid
    GBH2's Avatar
    Member #
    2381
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    228
    Liked
    17 times
    Phone
    Motorola Droid
    #22
    Quote Originally Posted by czerdrill View Post
    Agree. While there might not be a million and one ways to make a tablet, samsungs offerings look like direct ripoffs both in presentation and advertising. Its not really a question of whether or not ppl buy ipads and then get home and realize they actually bought a galaxy tab. Our resident armchair patent lawyers don't seem to get that...but glad the courts see past the "is it fair" crap and go with what's right.

    But yeah as long as I get my nexus I'm happy haha
    I agree with you, for the most part.

    I don't think the US court decision is a surprise - but it is not the end of the matter.

    I haven't read the Apple patent that is involved here but I do think that Apple has a tendency to "over reach". Although the standard of proof to invalidate the issued Apple patent is high, it is still a possibility.

    I do think that with the great and innovative products that they make Samsung was stupid to make these products so close in resemblance to Apple products without clear evidence that Apple did not hold the "rights" to the specific design in question or that the patent to the specific Apple design in question is clearly invalid based on strong prior art.
  3. Droid Sensei
    tjk629's Avatar
    Member #
    24029
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,046
    Liked
    198 times
    Phone
    Samsung Galaxy S4
    #23
    Apple products are the most recognizable items in the world. EVERYONE of all ages know what they look like.

    I wish someone would go to a mall or something and have an iPad/Galaxy 10.1 and iPhone 4/Unlocked Galaxy S II. Go up and ask random people to pick the iPhone/pad. Well over 90% of people will know the difference.

    The idea that someone would mistaken them is hard for me to grasp. If they did I wouldn't be surprised if they think everything is an iPhone/pad. Hell I've seem people call random MP3 players iPods before. We got my niece a sansa clip for Christmas one year. She opened and screamed "OMG an iPod". WELL I guess Apple should sue SanDisk for making products that confuse people.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the iPhone/iPad influenced Samsungs designs for their products. But influencing and copying are two different things. I could easily make an argument that the iPhone shares a lot of striking similarities with PalmOS and my TX.
  4. Droid Sensei
    czerdrill's Avatar
    Member #
    22335
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,850
    Liked
    103 times
    Phone
    OG Droid UD 3.0 -- GB :)
    #24
    Quote Originally Posted by kodiak799 View Post
    Maybe, but an preliminary injunction is not a ruling of fact. There seems to be some disagreement on the Supreme Court over whether an substantial issue of invalidity is still grounds for denying a preliminary injunction, because even a substantial challenge does not mean the plaintiff won't win. These judges are not ruling on the validity of the patent, but merely whether undue harm results lacking clear evidence of invalidity.

    I always assumed there was more to it than Apple patenting a rectangle, but a judge holding them up side-by-side for comparison would appear to indicate otherwise.

    Also don't read too much into the lack of challenge of other manufacturers. Samsung is rapidly gaining on Apple's smartphone share, and you don't sue all potential infringers at once. You try to get a favorable judgement and use to leverage license agreements with other potential infringers. I think Apple targeted Samsung because of additional claims with the icons and UI - i.e. the most likely target to get a favorable judgement on.

    Looks like the ruling in Australia has to do with "touchscreen technology and other features". Samsung could very well be infringing on the architecture Apple patented (but otherwise I doubt touchscreen interface is patentable, Apple wasn't even the first). As a key supplier, Samsung could very well have stolen or piggy-backed some underlying Apple engineering or software to power various functionality.

    In the Netherlands, they've apparently modified banned phones and are set to release them. According to Reuters, the patent at issue was a method of scrolling through photos!

    Apple Gains Patent Ground On Samsung As Sides Square Up On U.S. Soil | paidContent
    "
    Patent blogger Florian Mueller points out that the patent in question that was exercised in the case is one registered to the late Steve Jobs (among others) and concerns “heuristic touchscreen” technology.
    The generality of the patent, he speculates, could be applied to a number of other tablets, not just Samsung’s, and the fact that the Australian court has chosen to support it means that Apple may now have the legal ammunition to go after other competitors looking to launch products in Australia."


    Anyway, it seems like all the hub-bug over Samsung getting taken to the woodshed for "copying the look" has been a little off-target.
    Not a ruling of fact, no. But this was a prima facie ruling, so clearly the judge sees something that shows that Apple may have a point. I think its a safe bet that Samsung needs to come with some other defense other then showing Stanley Kubrik films. Its interesting to note that the whole "Apple photoshopped" crap was completely irrelevant as I knew it would be. Those stories were simply forum fodder and ways for sites to get hits. Only the courts have all the evidence, and prima facie it appears that Samsung is in fact infringing on the patents:

    "Despite the force of Samsung's submissions I have found that Apple has established a prima facie case of infringement of claims of both (its) patent(s)," Justice Annabelle Bennett told the court.
    "That is, it has established a probability, not necessarily in a mathematical sense, that it will, on the present evidence, succeed at trial."

    To me that says that Samsung better have an ace in the hole to win this thing. A prima facie injunction in a patent case will be difficult to overcome.

    AFP: Apple victory as Australia bans Samsung tablet
    Google Interview Q&A

    Apple CEO, Verizon COO
  5. Droid Sensei
    kodiak799's Avatar
    Member #
    39354
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,704
    Liked
    399 times
    Phone
    HTC Rezound
    #25
    Quote Originally Posted by czerdrill View Post
    Not a ruling of fact, no. But this was a prima facie ruling, so clearly the judge sees something that shows that Apple may have a point. I think its a safe bet that Samsung needs to come with some other defense other then showing Stanley Kubrik films.
    I thought the finding had nothing to do with design, but technical features of the touchscreen heuristics and scrolling through the photo gallery, the latter of which they supposedly already have a work around.
  6. Droid Sensei
    czerdrill's Avatar
    Member #
    22335
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,850
    Liked
    103 times
    Phone
    OG Droid UD 3.0 -- GB :)
    #26
    Quote Originally Posted by kodiak799 View Post
    I thought the finding had nothing to do with design, but technical features of the touchscreen heuristics and scrolling through the photo gallery, the latter of which they supposedly already have a work around.
    Yes as far as i know it is the software patents and not the design or trade dress that this injunction was based on (the one in Australia). The US case was found on design. I'm not familiar enough with the actual patents to know whether its an easy fix or not though...
    Google Interview Q&A

    Apple CEO, Verizon COO
  7. Droid Sensei
    kodiak799's Avatar
    Member #
    39354
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,704
    Liked
    399 times
    Phone
    HTC Rezound
    #27
    Quote Originally Posted by czerdrill View Post
    Yes as far as i know it is the software patents and not the design or trade dress that this injunction was based on (the one in Australia). The US case was found on design. I'm not familiar enough with the actual patents to know whether its an easy fix or not though...
    That all sounds correct. The US judge denied a temporary injunction on the design, but we'll have to see what the ultimate ruling is. I think it would be borderline criminal for them to pay on the design patent, but the patent arena is one of the more screwed-up parts of US law, with the issue probably lying more on the side of issuance being too lax.

    I think they could be in trouble on the heuristics. The gallery browsing wouldn't seem to be that tough, maybe, and they supposedly have a work around already. The latter is almost as petty as the design deal, but the touchscreen heuristics I would call a pretty major breach of intellectual property, if indeed there has been a breach. And all tech companies do that, trying to change the architecture or code just enough to circumvent the patent. Of course, Apple's lawyers are very good - they'd have to be to patent a freaking rectangle.
  8. Droid Sensei
    czerdrill's Avatar
    Member #
    22335
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,850
    Liked
    103 times
    Phone
    OG Droid UD 3.0 -- GB :)
    #28
    Quote Originally Posted by kodiak799 View Post
    That all sounds correct. The US judge denied a temporary injunction on the design, but we'll have to see what the ultimate ruling is. I think it would be borderline criminal for them to pay on the design patent, but the patent arena is one of the more screwed-up parts of US law, with the issue probably lying more on the side of issuance being too lax.

    I think they could be in trouble on the heuristics. The gallery browsing wouldn't seem to be that tough, maybe, and they supposedly have a work around already. The latter is almost as petty as the design deal, but the touchscreen heuristics I would call a pretty major breach of intellectual property, if indeed there has been a breach. And all tech companies do that, trying to change the architecture or code just enough to circumvent the patent. Of course, Apple's lawyers are very good - they'd have to be to patent a freaking rectangle.
    I agree 100% that if they lose on design that would suck. Not because Samsung didn't copy the design, because I think they did, but because a patent was even granted in the first place hah.

    At the end of the day, both sides will have to go by what the courts rule, although I don't think the fight is anywhere near over.
    Google Interview Q&A

    Apple CEO, Verizon COO
  9. Master Droid
    mrZoSo's Avatar
    Member #
    13807
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    GA from Philly PA
    Posts
    412
    Liked
    2 times
    Phone
    Moto Droid, Galaxy Nexus
    #29
    judge Koh held both tablets above her head and asked Samsung attorney Kathleen Sullivan if she was able to distinguish one from the other. “Not at this distance,” Sullivan replied, reinforcing Apple’s claim that Samsung’s tablet is a “copycat” device.
    This is ridiculous to me! That's like taking anything that looks similar, gadgets, cars, trucks, whatever, and when it gets so at a certain distance and beyond, you can't distinguish which 'brand' is which. LAME

    She indicated that Apple must first establish the validity of the patents in question.
    This would be a good place to start.

    I'm not saying Samsung is innocent or guilty, but if they are violating patents, then so be it and justice be done, then move on.
    One thing for sure though, Apple is just plain out going crazy with law suits. That just tells me they are sort of running scared and losing profits. But hey, that's what competition is about.

    Just my 2¢
    mrZoSo
  10. Droid Sensei
    czerdrill's Avatar
    Member #
    22335
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,850
    Liked
    103 times
    Phone
    OG Droid UD 3.0 -- GB :)
    #30
    Quote Originally Posted by mrZoSo View Post
    This is ridiculous to me! That's like taking anything that looks similar, gadgets, cars, trucks, whatever, and when it gets so at a certain distance and beyond, you can't distinguish which 'brand' is which. LAME


    This would be a good place to start.

    I'm not saying Samsung is innocent or guilty, but if they are violating patents, then so be it and justice be done, then move on.
    One thing for sure though, Apple is just plain out going crazy with law suits. That just tells me they are sort of running scared and losing profits. But hey, that's what competition is about.

    Just my 2¢
    Scared, maybe. Losing profits? No way
    Google Interview Q&A

    Apple CEO, Verizon COO
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Apple Wins Injunction, Galaxy Tab 10.1 Banned In Australia
    By WoZzY in forum Droid Forums Member News Depot
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-13-2011, 01:11 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-2011, 01:11 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-11-2011, 02:05 PM
  4. Apple May Have Resized Photos Again in Samsung Case
    By dgstorm in forum Android News
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 08-21-2011, 04:28 PM
  5. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-06-2011, 06:01 PM

Search tags for this page

android banned from australia

,

applecases+for sch-i500

,

doids ban from us

,

droid

,

droid three case

,

galaxy tab 10.1 case

,

samsung dealt3

,

wordfeud cheat

,

www.scsmi.net

Click on a term to search our site for related topics.
Find us on Google+