[Shiara]

Lawsuit analysis: LINK

Thoughts?

[Silencer]

Apple needs to get over themselves. Badly. From the horribly overdone wording of their marketing campaigns ("a magical and revolutionary product", "this changes everything...again" when clearly neither are true) to their attitude to IP - I mean, yeah, intellectual property is important, but there is a distinct difference in saying "hey, that feature works, let's make something similar" to "let's copy that idea". What Apple is saying is that they have a monopoly on smart phones (or should have) simply because they thought of some things first.

It's like the so-called 'Retina Display'. They don't want other companies releasing a phone with as good resolution, so they try to trademark/copyright/etc the IDEA OF A HIGH-RES DISPLAY ON A PHONE. What is ridiculous is that if they DID do all this, other phone manufacturers would be screwed, because they can't make their phones as good/better than Apple's products...which would leave them with a monopoly, which would see them get ass-raped for it.

What's worse is they're freaking suing SAMSUNG, who they not only buy parts from, but owe a lot of their recent improvements in computer tech to - without which, the Mac would be dead in the water.

What's worse, is that as you can see from the long list of lawsuits in the first paragraph, the company (and others) are basically playing bully/posturing for position. It's pathetic, imo.

[Tiste Simeon]

What ^ said.

[Lucifer's Heaven]

Silencer if you're ranting about their excessive IP nonsense, don't forget the whole leaking policy. If a company leaks a device/prototype, even by accident, Apple withdraws that companies license to sell apple products. No second chances.

I also agree with what you said about it yesterday Shiara (we were discussing it a bit not on the forum) in that it's probably somewhat motivate by the following:

iPad 2 vs Galaxy Tab 10.1 vs Galaxy Tab 8.9

Apple doesn't like actual competition...

After all, the Galaxy S has been out for a while, as has the original Galaxy Tab (not to mention how old some of the other devices they are complaining about), yet they only sue now?

[dktorode]

Those samsung Phones do look like cheap copies tho...

[Tapper]

dktorode, on 20 April 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

Those samsung Phones do look like cheap copies tho...

Yup. Must say I'd never trade in my Galaxy S for whatever model of iPhone, however.

[dktorode]

Silencer, on 20 April 2011 - 12:08 AM, said:

It's like the so-called 'Retina Display'. They don't want other companies releasing a phone with as good resolution, so they try to trademark/copyright/etc the IDEA OF A HIGH-RES DISPLAY ON A PHONE. What is ridiculous is that if they DID do all this, other phone manufacturers would be screwed, because they can't make their phones as good/better than Apple's products...which would leave them with a monopoly, which would see them get ass-raped for it.

I believe there are phones out with better resolution than the retina display...i think even before it was released there was a few with better resolutions.
I might be mistaken but im sure i read it somewhere on the day of the iphone 4 release

Tapper, on 20 April 2011 - 09:51 AM, said:

dktorode, on 20 April 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

Those samsung Phones do look like cheap copies tho...

Yup. Must say I'd never trade in my Galaxy S for whatever model of iPhone, however.

each to his own... for sure.

still doesn't mean that sumsang didn't steal any design look and feel from apple tho... thats the bare bones of this case.
Apple spend allot of money researching and designing a certain look and feel and then samsung just copy what they have done... they kinda have a point in that regard.

This post has been edited by dktorode: 20 April 2011 - 11:04 AM

[Gothos]

The world deserves an alternative to apple products.

Aside from that, this whole issue is just big business vs big business for me, so I can't support either side. Quarrels between the rich will just end up hurting the little man anyway.

[Silencer]

dktorode, on 20 April 2011 - 11:00 AM, said:

Silencer, on 20 April 2011 - 12:08 AM, said:

It's like the so-called 'Retina Display'. They don't want other companies releasing a phone with as good resolution, so they try to trademark/copyright/etc the IDEA OF A HIGH-RES DISPLAY ON A PHONE. What is ridiculous is that if they DID do all this, other phone manufacturers would be screwed, because they can't make their phones as good/better than Apple's products...which would leave them with a monopoly, which would see them get ass-raped for it.

I believe there are phones out with better resolution than the retina display...i think even before it was released there was a few with better resolutions.
I might be mistaken but im sure i read it somewhere on the day of the iphone 4 release

Tapper, on 20 April 2011 - 09:51 AM, said:

dktorode, on 20 April 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

Those samsung Phones do look like cheap copies tho...

Yup. Must say I'd never trade in my Galaxy S for whatever model of iPhone, however.

each to his own... for sure.

still doesn't mean that sumsang didn't steal any design look and feel from apple tho... thats the bare bones of this case.
Apple spend allot of money researching and designing a certain look and feel and then samsung just copy what they have done... they kinda have a point in that regard.

I still haven't heard of one which surpasses it. And the vast, vast majority of phones if one does exist are at best 800x480, which is pretty much every Android 'superphone' at the moment. If there is one, it's very rare. XD

And while I kinda see the influence of the iPhone on some of Samsung's stuff (like single central button at bottom of touch screen), that's pretty much where the visual similarities end, to me. The iPhone series is VERY distinctive, and look pretty damn unique as far as I'm concerned. :S

Also I think you'll find that, like the four or five other cases Apple has launched, they'll be ruled against - Samsung carry out their own research, have their own designers, and it's pretty hard to prove someone saw your product and then lifted a specific idea from it, and more to the point, a specific INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY from it. Tell me, for example, that the lastest MacBooks and Sony Vaio laptops do not share certain similarities?

You could even argue that inspiration =/= copying. Besides, what exactly are Apple complaining about, here? That Samsung took their idea, put it into a plastic mold, and sold it for cheaper? Hardly the case. Considering their phones are just as expensive, look only vaguely similar (some of which, btw, were out before the iPhone 4, at least), and are made out of different materials, it's not exactly something that result in loss of sales, even if it WAS IP theft, which it isn't.


Though I can't agree with Tapper...the reason I'd never get (if I could afford it) an iPhone4 is because of the damn restrictive and money-draining plans they require. If it weren't for those, I'd probably prefer it to the best Samsung has to offer. Even so, I sadly cannot afford anything as luxurious as a Galaxy S. XD


EDIT: Also, what Gothos said. In both cases. Though personally I support Samsung in this because Apple is the aggressor, and being a dick about this ALL THE FREAKING TIME TO EVERYONE.

[Lucifer's Heaven]

One of the main reasons I'd agree with Tapper is because the the Galaxy S looks like the iPhone 3GS. Yet it is far superior. Argue what you want about the iPhone 4 vs Galaxy S, but the Galaxy beats the 3GS

The 3GS and Galaxy at first glance really do look similar. But who doesn't have a second look at a phone before they buy it? And several of the points Apple are arguing are about design elements that aren't very unique. Black screen with black borders? Really? Has that not been done with every type of screen to date? And it's a rectangle with rounded corners...



That was announced with images out to the press prior to the iPhone...
Hardly easy to mistake it for an iPhone, but kinda negates their black touchscreen, black symmetrical borders, round cornered rectangle argument in my eyes. Though if Apple wins I'm going to laugh fif LG serves them

This post has been edited by Lucifer's Heaven: 20 April 2011 - 12:22 PM

[cerveza_fiesta]

I would hope by virtue of printing SAMSUNG in large bold letters on the top border of the device, Samsung effectively avoided "consumer confusion" about the product's manufacturer.

I mean, apple has an apple on it, samsung has SAMSUNG written on it. Holy shit man, even if they are physically similar in every other respect, doesn't that tell you something? Even the in-store point-of-sale displays will have a pricetag on them, next to which is written the manufacturer, model, and a limited list of features. The "consumer confusion" claim is completely wakcy. If you can read, you can tell the difference. If you can afford to buy a smartphone and are smart enough to tell the difference between manufacturers, you've probably figured out reading.

I's like if I try to return a clearly marked Ford Fiesta I just bought and I tell the Ford dealer "oh I thought I was buying a Toyota Prius, the compactness, four wheels, windscreen and hatchback totally had me fooled".

The analyst had it right. Out of touch copyright laws. Holy crap.

I understand the trade-dress part of the lawsuit and that certain shapes can be associated with certain products over time, but if you're making a touch-screen phone (regardless of which company you are) how the hell else is it going to be shaped? It needs a touch screen on the front and needs to be ergonomic (hence rounded corners). Good god. I agree with the analyst that the strongest parts of the case are likely

• positioning of the one button relative to the screen
• shapes and styles of the icons
• Graphical user interface software and the way the interface it is navigated.

Samsung could change a few of those things (like putting the button in the corner or something) and pretty much avoid this in the future. But who knows. This is likely to drag on for years. Seems to me most of the claims will fall away once the central "consumer confusion" part is disproven. Probably easy to do with some basic data from retail outlets regarding product returns and the reasons for them.

This post has been edited by cerveza_fiesta: 20 April 2011 - 12:56 PM

[dktorode]

Gothos, on 20 April 2011 - 11:10 AM, said:

The world deserves an alternative to apple products.

Aside from that, this whole issue is just big business vs big business for me, so I can't support either side. Quarrels between the rich will just end up hurting the little man anyway.

Im not taking sides at all.

All i am saying is I can understand how Apple would get upset if people keep borrowing their "look" and slapping their own label on it.

[alt146]

dktorode, on 20 April 2011 - 01:41 PM, said:

Gothos, on 20 April 2011 - 11:10 AM, said:

The world deserves an alternative to apple products.

Aside from that, this whole issue is just big business vs big business for me, so I can't support either side. Quarrels between the rich will just end up hurting the little man anyway.

Im not taking sides at all.

All i am saying is I can understand how Apple would get upset if people keep borrowing their "look" and slapping their own label on it.

I can see why they are so upset

Seriously though a lot of the IP type lawsuits, especially between computer/cellphone companies is a load of BS. The thing about patents is that they are supposed to be non-obvious and so much of the stuff that gets brought into this arguments is the obvious way to do things. Like the multitouch lawsuit that Apple launched last year - there were similar gestures in Minority report before multitouch was around so it obviously wasn't something that no one had thought of before.

[Obdigore]

Just like how Apple is suing Amazon because Apple filed for a trademark of "App Store" (which they have not yet gotten).

Sorry Apple, 'Apps' were around long before you decided to create an Iphone.

The simple fact of the matter is that a front touchscreen with rounded corners is a good design for humans to use. It isn't like black is an odd choice of colors in technology either.

This 'case' is a simple marketing ploy by apple in an attempt to put into the minds of consumers that they were the first and that everything else is a knock-off.

And since this case is going to drag on for 5 years before it gets dismissed and no one is going to care about it at that time, it is seen as a success for apple.

PS - My Samsung Galaxy S screen is so much nicer than the 'retina' display. My colors > resolution that your eye cannot even notice.

This post has been edited by Obdigore: 20 April 2011 - 05:22 PM

[Shinrei]

I will never, ever, buy an Iphone now.

http://www.theage.co...0421-1dpab.html

[Sir Thursday]

alt146, on 20 April 2011 - 05:07 PM, said:

Seriously though a lot of the IP type lawsuits, especially between computer/cellphone companies is a load of BS. The thing about patents is that they are supposed to be non-obvious and so much of the stuff that gets brought into this arguments is the obvious way to do things. Like the multitouch lawsuit that Apple launched last year - there were similar gestures in Minority report before multitouch was around so it obviously wasn't something that no one had thought of before.

As alt says, IP lawsuits are a mess at the moment. And this sort of thing is pretty commonplace - pretty much all the major companies are suing each other for copyright infringements at the moment (I'm sure I saw a pretty picture somewhere diagramming the fact).

The current modus operandi in the software IP world is to patent everything you can think of. Then when someone comes knocking with the inevitable infringement claim (because of the rise of patent trolls, this WILL happen at some point if you are writing commercial software), you can counter attack with patent claims of your own. If you're lucky, eventually both sides will agree to drop the cases.

It's a terrible system and it really stifles innovation (Hmm, I've just read that and it makes me sound like I've been infected with a bad case of the corporation buzzwords. Next I'll be leveraging synergy...), but that's just how it is at the moment. These kinds of arguments are commonplace and will continue to be commonplace until someone sorts out the patent system.


ST

[Mezla PigDog]

Sir Thursday, on 22 April 2011 - 10:49 AM, said:

It's a terrible system and it really stifles innovation

Tis very true. Some of the stuff that is patented in my field is ridiculous. IP lawyers aren't what I expected either. Ours generally say "Do you what you want and we'll just write it in a way that protects us". It makes my brain hurt. My team is currently developing some chemistry where because of IP, we aren't allowed to add X to Y but are allowed to add Y to X. It just feels pointless sometimes but many businesses survive on licensing out one crucial bit of IP and you can't blame them if they came up with one good little idea within a product that is otherwise useless.

With the Apple thing, I can see why they're sueing because so much of their business is wrapped up in the egonomics of their products. They must have invested a HUGE amount of money in their industrial design and human interface (I'm playing ST at his own business jargon game here ) and the Apple brand is driving the look of modern technology. Why shouldn't they benefit from their own effort and innovation?

[Adjutant Stormy~]

The Real Reason Apple is Suing Samsung

[Lucifer's Heaven]

That actually makes sense Stormy...

I was also going to point out that while the harware design claims are leveled squarely at Samsung, the complaint about icons is pretty much an indirect swipe at Android. And it's not the first time Apple has done that (several of their other lawsuits are doing similar things), but they don't seem willing to directly fight Google. Which is not a surprise really, who wants to fight the company that told China to stop being dicks?

I agree with you to a certain extent Mezla, but I disagree a bit in this case. Mostly because it's very arguable that what Samsung "copied" was a style and idea that originated with Apple. As some of the pictures show, they were not the first to start that style trend. When it's clear a company came up with an idea first it should be upheld, but when it's not...

[MTS]

Any time I hear something like this it reminds of the end of this Daily Show bit:

Appholes

This post has been edited by MTS: 24 April 2011 - 06:57 AM