Is anyone following the Apple v Samsung battle?
-
Yes Trevor, you are right about Apple relying on Samsung for various components. But I imagine when lawyers and the like got into the mix as they so often do when they get the smell of cash, things took a turn for the worse. I won't voice my opinion on lawyers in general as I want to keep my blood pressure normal
I am an Apple user and I DO find their knot tying frustrating but there are a number of ways I have circumvented this on both the computer and iPhone. If fact a small industry has built up offering some Apple users a freer usage experience. Its a real cat and mouse game and quite enjoyable to watch. I just wish Apple would have a two tier OS, one which totally hand-holds and another that allows more 3rd parties to get involved. Not doing this could yet be Apple's downfall.
I also think that we will be seeing a lot more startups widening the computing horizons over the next few years. Wasn't Apple a garage startup back in the day? When it comes down to it, Apple is a great innovation company not a true inventive company. What have they invented that is truly ground breaking ..... nothing I can think of. Steve and Co. took existing good ideas and improved them, nothing more from what I can see.
Okay, I want a retina MBP but its really just a higher resolution lappie, all be it a nice one.
Companies like Lenovo with its ThinkPad X1 Carbon and ThinkPad X Series Convertible Tablets are widening the goalposts.
X1 Carbon
X Series Convertible
I imagine with a few years we will be smiling at 'has been' retina display as we get truly immersed in interactive 3D on our laptops. In fact its here but the glasses have to go!
-
I'm not sure about this but I believe the basic premise of patents has changed over the last few decades. There was a time when it was assumed that patent infringement meant that you couldn't copy another company's (or individual's) methods but if you could achieve the same ends by a different route you were okay. So, for instance, you couldn't use another company's code but if you could write new code to achieve a similar result you were in the clear. Apparently not so now. Apple didn't 'invent' round corners and Samsung isn't in any way trying to confuse their customers into thinking they're buying an iPhone so why is there a case? Most of my original Palm Pilots had rounded corners and they preceded the iPhone by years.
I wish copyright and patent laws were much tighter and were restricted to something you could prove was unique to you, invented by you, not in common use before you and the patent only applied to your particular means of achieving that particular end. 'Occupy Wall Street' is an example. The man who claimed a copyright on that slogan didn't invent it, create it, nor was his use of it unique in any way. But he was allowed to proceed with a copyright claim just because no one else had yet copyrighted the phrase. Imagine if this patent logic was common to the earlier part of the century - one company would have a patent on the steering wheel in cars and no other company could introduce a competing version if it was a round disc at the end of a column. And so on.
Not a good idea.
-
Thought you might like to see an image of the next ipad.
Though larger , do notice that it is still rectangular, still thin, still has rounded corners and users can continue to use the 'pinch to zoom' geature.
Hang on a minute.
This pic is from a 1983 book - The Joy of Computers - Peter Laurie.
Didn't apple invented all of these design features and the pinch gesture ?
-
What scares me is that the jury didn't question the nebulous concept's that Apple claims is theirs. Once of the patents for the Macbook is 'a rectangular plane with a wedge shape'. This constitutes their reason for a patent and anyone copying this will be sued. It's scary.
While the ruling is sad for anyone trying to bring a unique product to market I'm more concerned with the intelligence of the jury that does not question the judge or laws that allow for these types of insane copyright patents.
-
@unknownuser said:
This morning more than 30 trucks filled with 5-cent coins arrived at Apple’s headquarters in California. Initially, the security company that protects the facility said the trucks were in the wrong place, but minutes later, Tim Cook (Apple CEO) received a call from Samsung CEO explaining that they will pay $1 billion dollars for the fine recently ruled against the South Korean company in this way.
the funny part is that the signed document does not specify a single payment method, so Samsung is entitled to send the creators of the iPhone their billion dollars in the way they deem best.
This dirty but genius geek troll play is a new headache to Apple executives as they will need to put in long hours counting all that money, to check if it is all there and to try to deposit it crossing fingers to hope a bank will accept all the coins.
Lee Kun-hee, Chairman of Samsung Electronics, told the media that his company is not going to be intimidated by a group of “geeks with style” and that if they want to play dirty, they also know how to do it.
You can use your coins to buy refreshments at the little machine for life or melt the coins to make computers, that’s not my problem, I already paid them and fulfilled the law.
A total of 20 billion coins, delivery hope to finish this week.
Let’s see how Apple will respond to this.
This belongs to jokes thread though.
-
@unknownuser said:
@unknownuser said:
This morning more than 30 trucks filled with 5-cent coins arrived at Apple’s headquarters in California. Initially, the security company that protects the facility said the trucks were in the wrong place, but minutes later, Tim Cook (Apple CEO) received a call from Samsung CEO explaining that they will pay $1 billion dollars for the fine recently ruled against the South Korean company in this way.
the funny part is that the signed document does not specify a single payment method, so Samsung is entitled to send the creators of the iPhone their billion dollars in the way they deem best.
This dirty but genius geek troll play is a new headache to Apple executives as they will need to put in long hours counting all that money, to check if it is all there and to try to deposit it crossing fingers to hope a bank will accept all the coins.
Lee Kun-hee, Chairman of Samsung Electronics, told the media that his company is not going to be intimidated by a group of “geeks with style” and that if they want to play dirty, they also know how to do it.
You can use your coins to buy refreshments at the little machine for life or melt the coins to make computers, that’s not my problem, I already paid them and fulfilled the law.
A total of 20 billion coins, delivery hope to finish this week.
Let’s see how Apple will respond to this.
This belongs to jokes thread though.
iCount
-
Which one of those coins is your "5 cents worth" ?
-
"A nickel weighs 5g. It would take 2,755 18-wheeler trucks (max legal tare 80,000 lbs) to carry the money."
I remember story some years ago where a person paid a fine by writing the payment amount and bank account details on a cow, then stuck an appropriate postage stamp on the cow and delivered it the the fine office. Seemingly it was a legal method of payment at the time! In those days cheques were always returned to the payer so the cow had to be returned. It turned into a messy situation
-
If Samsung had really paid Apple in coins....at least those 30 trucks worth...they would be my all time favourite company.
-
I'm not sure if anyone has ever looked up the register of registered designs but when you do it is a real shock! The simplicity of schematic representation that can be registered would be I'd suggest likened to that of a station wagon versus a train!
-
Just saw on the FoxNews ticker...
A court in Tokyo has ruled that Samsung did NOT violate Apple patents.
Battle between jurisdictions.
-
Interesting..
@unknownuser said:
A judge in Seoul ruled Friday that Apple infringed on two of Samsung's technology patents and must stop selling the infringing products in South Korea. In addition, the judge said Samsung infringed on Apple's "bounceback" design patent, but not its icon design patent.
The judges ordered Apple to pay 20 million won, or $17,650 in damages for each violated patent. Samsung was ordered to pay 25 million won, or $22,000. Both companies had sought damages of 100 million won, or about $90,000, from the other.@unknownuser said:
The patent-infringing products banned from sale are: Apple's iPhone 4 and iPad 2, Samsung's Galaxy SII and Galaxy Nexus smartphones, and the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy 10.1 tablet computers.
-
Makes you wonder if some of these court cases are mutual publicity stunts. Looking at some of the claims and counter claims then the final balance is probably quite small in relation to a global advertising campaign that would raise both companies profiles to the same level, although that last USA decision looked eye wateringly expensive for Samsung.
Wasn't there a company called Micro$oft that had some new product in development...
-
@arcad-uk said:
Wasn't there a company called Micro$oft that had some new product in development...
Just got pulled as it has an "on" button and so does the samsung and ipad!
-
@dan rathbun said:
Just saw on the FoxNews ticker...
A court in Tokyo has ruled that Samsung did NOT violate Apple patents.
Battle between jurisdictions.
I expected that
-
Apples shenanigans got me thinking...
-
Some time ago we had a long discussion in our office about patents, copyrights and our architectural design.
Some facts are listed below...-
music/publishing etc
The term of protection or duration of copyright varies depending on the type of copyright work. The term of protection in the UK for an original written (literary), theatrical (dramatic) musical or artistic work lasts for the life of the creator plus 70 years from the end of the year in which he/she died. -
patents - complex engines, ground braking solutions etc
Protection in EU - for up to a maximum of 20 years - renewal every year -
design patents
Protection in EU - for up to a maximum of 25 years - renewal every 5 years
And now...
The design patent is getting tricky as we can see in the Apple vs Samsung case.
Some simple, basic shapes should not be protected for years - you could have 12-24-36 months protection dependent on the 'complexity'.In Apple's IPhone and IPad scenario it could be 12-24 months of protection but, the technology behind it's a completely different animal.
If Apple gets $1 bilion for 'shape' infringement, I wonder how much Sumsung would get for each technological infringement?
The judge asked both parties to speak to each other before jury begins deliberating as he knows that there is more to come.
The current approach of Apple and Sumsung (and others) would get more complex soon...In my humble opinion the International Law should set some standards as the Law of The Land would always produce contradicting results between countries.
There are a few other Apple's cases where, apparently the Apple's brand infringement took place:
- in a Cafe logo design.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8858333/Apple-takes-on-German-cafe-over-logo.html - over Appstore wording
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12817083
and so on.
The trademark should be protected by the Copyright Law but, infringement of shape similarities and dictionary words are starting to be questionable in some cases.
Just some thought in relation to the ground breaking Invention of Fire
-
-
I think Samsung should pull out the big guns (they developed) and stomp the hell out of apple. Some cider should be nice.
-
@marian said:
I think Samsung should pull out the big guns (they developed) and stomp the hell out of apple. Some cider should be nice.
-
Hmmm? That was interesting reading Gregory, that Apple have threatened to protect their logo against such as a cafe chain, and NYC (the big apple) particularly when the logos are in no way similar to the true apple logo and not in the same classes. Apple surely does not have a geographical clain to "Apple" and from what I know they don't have "Apple" cafes! Trademark is considerably different to that of copyright or patent, where two people can hold the same mark but in different classes. And one can lose rights to their trademark should it be in non use - meaning even if they registered in classification of "cafes" if it is not used within 12-36mths it can be lost).
There are SO many grey areas in these laws, another for example "iPhone" can be lost by allowing it to become common language - which I would suggest it possibly has already "new for the iPhone" for example can place it in area of common language as it is not an "iPhone" but an iPhone branded mobile device - should read "new for the iPhone mobile device". The marks "Zipper" and "Escalator" are two well known trademarks to have suffered this fate! Another example of avoiding common use "Roller Blades make for great exercise" should read "Roller Blade inline skates make for great exercise" Companies with such resources normally have an attorney overlook all copy to ensure such common uses don't occur!
The other area of the Law that is grey and in the cases to which Gregory links, the dubious threat of action in the case of the cafe owner can in fact open Apple to action should they be suggesting the trademark is infringing and their actions not followed, you cant threaten if you cant back it up!
I do wonder how long it will be before Apple open themselves up to a class action for "non Competitive practices"? The link between apple products and iTunes is certainly I think ripe for such action and surprised the US gov haven't yet challanged this! Microspft has certainly suffered from such actions in the past!
Advertisement