US judge says Samsung tablets unlikely to attract Apple's customers

2456789

Comments

  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post


    I wonder how all of this will affect Samsung sales in the US, across all their product lines.



    I, for one, will not be buying any more Samsung products going forward. All the legalize aside, it is clear to me that Samsung has targeted Apple products and design. The Samsung TV on the wall of my family room will be my last.



    I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away. Second, by launching iTV which sucks all of the remaining profit out of the TV business



    Well there's Samsung hardware within your idevices.
  • apple ][apple ][ Posts: 7,906member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hjb View Post


    Remember in the Australia case? Apple were basically scared of Galaxy series. How contradictory Apple?



    Maybe that's just what they have to claim in a court of law dealing with all sorts of legal mumbo jumbo, but Apple is not scared of any Galaxy Tab or any other tab.
  • 8002580025 Posts: 172member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post


    Isn't a bad copy still a copy?



    No, it's a Samsung
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


    Well there's Samsung hardware within your idevices.



    He seems to indicate that with his " I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away." sentences.
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    He seems to indicate that with his " I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away." sentences.



    Yea I kinda caught that after I had written my response.
  • ochymingochyming Posts: 474member
    Psystar bring IT on!





    : AH! AH!

    : Seriously?

    : Savage Capitalism indeed! - You spend money and human resources to develop ART and some punk come along and use yr sweat to make easy money and this judge says … WHAT?

    : Psystar… anyone?
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ochyming View Post


    Psystar bring IT on!





    : AH! AH!

    : Seriously?

    : Savage Capitalism indeed! - You spend money and human resources to develop ART and some punk come along and use yr sweat to make easy money and this judge says … WHAT?

    : Psystar… anyone?



    That would make sense if the punk was making money and hurting you, but its obvious that's not the case so the judge didn't want to pick on said punk. And Psystar was a whole different animal, they were actually using Apple's SW on their hardware.
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRR View Post


    Isn't this about samsung stealing IP, not customers?



    It's ALWAYS about customers.
  • cmvsmcmvsm Posts: 204member
    This is a bogus ruling. It basically states that if I'm an inventor, someone is free to copy my device as closely as possible, just as long as they don't have as wide of distribution channels as I do, or their reputation isn't quite up to par with mine, thus resulting in poor sales. I've never heard of such a thing, as one has nothing to do with the other. I could careless if they sell one unit, infringement is infringement, and this ruling sets a dangerous precedent for future intellectual property cases.



    Apple is already moving to Sharp for panels and hopefully in deals with them, as well as others, to diversify their chip suppliers as well. Guess we'll see how much revenue the Galaxy brings in once Android's open source platform begins to implode upon itself just like Windows Mobile did. A copied design won't be able to help that.
  • ochymingochyming Posts: 474member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


    That would make sense if the punk was making money and hurting you, but its obvious that's not the case so the judge didn't want to pick on said punk. And Psystar was a whole different animal, they were actually using Apple's SW on their hardware.



    It always hurts when people steal from you, it is not civilized and it is disrespectful. Even IF the one you steal from IS rich.



    Stealing IS just wrong ( : not that i never did. : we are all hypocrites? ).

    Because you can always ask for ?
  • bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 1,441member
    The statement by this judge must be in the top 10 list of "the stupidest thing a judge had ever said".



    What does that even mean? It's ok to take advantage of other manufacturers, ride their success, and copy their products down to the packaging, connector, and UI, diluting their identit?! And it's ok because people already know exactly what they want?!



    WTF?!
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post


    you win the preliminary injunction if you are likely to win in the permanent verdict.



    inversely, (albeit the logic is not this simple), it means that apple is unlikely to win the permanent verdict against samsung in this case.



    Please stop posting since you obviously don't know what you're talking about.



    To win the injunction, Apple had to prove that they were likely to win at trial AND to show that they would suffer irreparable harm. The judge did not rule on whether Apple was likely win at trial, but did rule that they would not suffer irreparable harm since Samsung could afford to pay any reasonable penalties.



    There was no decision on the merits of the case.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    The statement by this judge must be in the top 10 list of "the stupidest thing a judge had ever said".



    What does that even mean? It's ok to take advantage of other manufacturers, ride their success, and copy their products down to the packaging, connector, and UI, diluting their identit?! And it's ok because people already know exactly what they want?!



    WTF?!



    It's especially bizarre given that this was the judge who pulled the stunt of asking a Samsung attorney to tell her which tablet was which - and the attorney was unable to do so.
  • hjbhjb Posts: 278member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Maybe that's just what they have to claim in a court of law dealing with all sorts of legal mumbo jumbo, but Apple is not scared of any Galaxy Tab or any other tab.



    Really? I acctually beleived and still beleive what Apple's lawyer said in Australia case. Um... you are saying they lied in Court or Apple lied to their lawyers?



    I was drown into this debate and subsquently bought Ipad 2. Never had any tab nor smartphone before. It was good initially, to be honest, playing application games (my wife played Big Fish alot). But a month later, it became an expensive toy to my pre-schoolers. They loved it.



    Soon after I bought a Galaxy Fit to my wife, a cheap Samsung smartphone. Very plastic and poor design. I did not like it, honestly. My wife played with it quite a lot and was really happy, I never understood her.



    Then I bought a white Galaxy Note 3 weeks ago from Hong Kong, thinking that I had bought her a substandard smartphone. Galaxy Note amazed me. It rocks. I had thought that Iphone 4 was the ultimate smartphone by experience from friends and relatives' Iphone 4. The Note completely changed that. There is so many things that she could do it with, with bigger screen and amored display. Now even my kids are playing with the Note more.



    A week ago, I gave it a try on her Galaxy Fit, the poor one then. I have changed most of settings with widgets and free applications. This is seriously good AND I am in control. I feel good.



    I have never been fandroid, but sure I am now.
  • oc4theooc4theo Posts: 294member
    Lucy Koh is of Korean decent.



    It is right for me to point out that she might be biased, and rule in favor of Samsung. Koreans are best customers of products made by Korean companies. Most Koreans I know here in Orange County California only drive Korean made cars. They buy only Korean cosmetics, electronics, food, etc. They are more nationalistic than Japanese. And they are more racist than Mississipi.
  • apple ][apple ][ Posts: 7,906member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hjb View Post


    Really? I acctually beleived and still beleive what Apple's lawyer said in Australia case. Um... you are saying they lied in Court or Apple lied to their lawyers?



    I believe that most lawyers are liars, it's practically a part of their job.
  • mister snitchmister snitch Posts: 580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    I believe that most lawyers are liars, it's practically a part of their job.



    The term should have been changed to 'lieyers' years ago.
  • jacksonsjacksons Posts: 244member
    This is as bad as DED misquoting Ballmer. The only reason the Judge "said" that is because he was reading Apple's study at the time he said it. Sigh!



    It is pretty clear why MacRumors is getting all the traffic these days. We might as well rename this site to "AppleTabloid"



    It's getting more pathetic by the day...
  • kpomkpom Posts: 541member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hjb View Post


    Remember in the Australia case? Apple was basically scared of Galaxy series. How contradictory Apple?



    Perhaps the Australian market is different from the American market? Apple has a lot of brand equity in the US, and perhaps more so than in Australia. Perhaps they are worried about losing sales there, but not so much here.



    Then again, from what I recall, Apple merely told the court in Australia that it preferred the status quo (i.e. no sales of the Galaxy) to an outcome where the Galaxy is sold but Samsung pays royalties in accordance with their proposed settlement. Perhaps the Australian court didn't ask Apple to go into as much detail as Judge Koh did.



    Anyway, in both courts, Apple asked for a ban, not monetary damages. There seems to be nothing inconsistent with Apple's argument. Maybe Apple isn't worried so much about lost sales as they are about others in the industry copying their design. Even if Apple is perfectly content with its current market share, it could be concerned that Samsung is diluting Apple's brand.



    Anyway, in a court of law, it's completely acceptable to make two mutually exclusive arguments, as long as they are both conceivable individually. For instance, you can deny a charge, and then at the same time claim that even if you did commit the charge that it wouldn't harm anyone or wasn't illegal.



    Apple can reasonably argue that Samsung shouldn't be allowed to steal sales from Apple by improperly using Apple's IP, while at the same time saying that even if Samsung doesn't actually steal sales from Apple, it should still not be allowed to sell a product that relies upon the stolen IP.
  • mark fulwidermark fulwider Posts: 2member
    so he said, she said....

    you spin the news for the apple side...

    the droids spin for their side...

    if you can't read through the crap... what make apple dogma any better?



    what kinda of computers does apple use to design apple computers... ?



    there are not any serious cad programs on the mac os..... so



    we design macs on pc....



    if it takes a company 20 years to come up with a three button mouse...



    well, it's ok, it's just a home computer. i use one... for leisure and entertainment....
  • mark fulwidermark fulwider Posts: 2member
    did i mention,

    you morons need to get a life...
Sign In or Register to comment.