or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case - Page 2

post #41 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Ok.. What you're asking is answered in the freaking post you QUOTED.


The court apple filed in was the one that over 90% of patent disputes in the EU are filed in because it's similar to our East District of Texas, a district that will often side with patent holders and ignore any other evidence (even prior art). IF Apple would file an injunction, it's i statistically probable it would be in that court.

Don't believe me? then provide me with PROOF that Apple informed Samsung that they had filed for the injunction. I'll save you the trouble. you won't find it, because even DED admits they didn't do this. Samsung having suspicions and acting on those suspicions isn't the same thing as being INFORMED by Apple. Which is what their response implied.

So are the post offices of East Texas also filled with Samsung's random letters?

Does Samsung have a department which sends their random letters out weekly, monthly or what?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #42 of 142
My favourite line from the article is

Quote:
Samsung also complains that Apple seeks to prevent it from using "common, functional, obvious and otherwise unprotectable elements of design patents, trademarks and trade dress, rather than seeking to innovate in the face of legitimate competition from Samsung."

Because we all know that Apple is just so lazy and really doesn't put much effort into innovation.

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply
post #43 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by techno View Post

My favourite line from the article is



Because we all know that Apple is just so lazy and really doesn't put much effort into innovation.

Yeah, before Apple releases their next iPhone, they wait and see what Samsung is coming out with, then Apple orders their engineers to copy it, down to the millimeter almost!
post #44 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

Message to Apple: Let it go...move on...you already have about 95% of the tablet market. Why are you fighting so much for the remaining 5%? Yeah, I know....you have every right to protect your inventions.....but jeez, maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.

If Apple doesn't defend its' patents now, it is more difficult to get the courts to enforce the patents later.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #45 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

If Apple doesn't defend its' patents now, it is more difficult to get the courts to enforce the patents later.

Then why aren't they "defending" themselves against Bada? against WebOS? against the playbook?
post #46 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So are the post offices of East Texas also filled with Samsung's random letters?

Does Samsung have a department which sends their random letters out weekly, monthly or what?

The east districts could have filings. But the US market is different from the EU. for an injunction to go through it has to pass a 4 step process. the EU has one.

And if you think Samsung knew when Apple would file, please show me evidence of this (no, the timing doesn't count ) or ANYWHERE that shows Apple informed samsung of said filing.
post #47 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Apple will SUE any competition that starts gaining share in their target market. Their patents are broad enough that they can do this.

Of course. If their patents give them a real legal chance in their estimation they will test the legal waters *every time.* They can ignore small fry, obviously. But they will naturally go after the big ones. Why? Simple. They don't think it's cool for someone with significant manufacturing/distribution capability, who Apple thinks is using their IP, to be allowed to sell the allegedly questionable product in an unfettered fashion.

So what do they do? Apply to the courts. LIKE EVERYONE ELSE CAN.

Further, if Apple does indeed have a case (and from what we've seen it looks like they do), then there is really nothing you can hold against them. If you were in Apple's position, you would do exactly the same thing. It's rather stupid in business to allow a competitor to get away with something at your expense. If you can afford to, you test your argument in the courts.

Simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

They also ignore any companies that don't pose a huge risk (even ignoring samsung's own Bada)

Naturally. You go after those that can hurt you - again, under the assumption that they are using what is yours in an unlawful fashion.

Apple is just exercising their legal rights. Everyone else can do the same. Whoever comes out on top, comes out on top. That's the nature of the system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

because they are using the courts as a blunt weapon and not as something to "force companies to innovate".

It makes no difference. The law is blind to deeper intentions. Apple could, for all anyone knows, be pursuing these companies thinking that they are completely blameless and trying to protect themselves. You can go on all day about their "real" intentions, but if they have a legitimate case (so far they do) then that's all that the law can consider.

You might think you know the "real story", but it can't be proven one way or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Apple is trying to shut the companies down.

Of course. If these companies are in violation, and the law provides injunctions as a remedy, then what's the natural thing to do? Pursue these legal remedies.

Apple is not trying to shut down companies. Apple is trying to block the sale of products that they feel are in violation, and so far the courts agree. What else do you expect Apple to do?

If the non-sale of these products end up shutting down companies, then you need to take a serious look at how these companies are managed and wonder why they persisted in violating IP law. The company has no one to blame but themselves. Too bad they aren't diversified enough, maybe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

They pretty much HAVE to fight.

Or they can stop using Apple's IP. Or sure, they can fight. So what. They choose to fight it, that's their business. If Apple is in the right, why bother sympathizing with these companies?

Sorry, as a consumer, you might want some of their products. But that has nothing to do with the law. If the product you want gets axed due to legal decree, who are you going to blame? You can blame no one but the offending entity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

The only thing that would protect Samsung (maybe) is going to windowsphone7. Not because it is free of any patent violations, but because Apple would get countersued with stuff it can't dismiss.

You don't know what Apple can be countersued with. For that matter neither do I. Apparently, and to some people's surprise, courts have already decided in Apple's favour on some things that lay people thought were impossible to enforce.

Samsung could possibly go to WP7. Which would also mean choosing a platform that consumers don't give a sweet damn about. WP7 is heading the way of WebOS. For the time being I'd avoid that platform because it might very well suffer the same fate as the Zune.

WP7 phones are already in stores (have been for almost a year) and MS has been steadily losing share with them. If Google gets into hot legal water with Android and manufacturers shy away from the platform (the Moto purchase will help in this) then WP7 might have a chance, though the strategy for it will have to be re-thought and re-evaluated entirely. Because for the time being there's a WebOS situation going on with WP7.

MS had their chance to make an incredible first impression and the whole thing fizzled. And competing with Apple in a segment where Apple has an overwhelming lead in mindshare is usually a losing game, unless you can radically shift your way of thinking to Apple's way of thinking. Most don't have what it takes to do that. You can't out-Apple Apple. You need about 30 years of Apple-like philosophy and values under your belt to achieve it. An ambitious and progressive start-up could do it. Not MS, though. Not under their current leadership. Forget it. You'll need a radical paradigm shift at MS. They aren't really set up for that.

Ballmer needs to GTFO.
post #48 of 142
Interesting how there are all these "common, functional, and obvious" ways of going about things that never seem to happen before Apple does it. In fact, there's typically a period right after Apple introduces a new product (iPod, iPhone, iPad, Air) when a fair number of tech pundits/Apple haters/competitors declare that the new design is stupid and wrong and will never amount to much. Sealed batteries, high prices, "insufficient" specs, walled gardens..... those never seem to strike a lot of people as common, functional, or obvious until Apple starts to have a lot of success, at which point the same people declare that nothing Apple has done is innovative, they just got to where everyone was "obviously" going a bit early.

Remember when the iPad was just a big iPod Touch? When it had a comically large bezel? When abandoning the stylus was a critical shortcoming? When a sealed battery made it practically disposable and terrible value for the money? When the lack of a full array of ports rendered it all but useless? And the glossy screen made it unusable? And just generally there was no point because no one needed a stupid big media tablet for "consumption"?

But when Samsung slavishly copies exactly those horrible mistakes, it's because those horrible mistakes are common, functional, and obvious. OK.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #49 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by techno View Post

My favourite line from the article is



Because we all know that Apple is just so lazy and really doesn't put much effort into innovation.

the UI for the iphone has remained fundamentally unchanged for 4 years. The ui changes hitting this year are things that were present in other platforms (android and webOS) previously.

But that's not the issue here. What Samsung is arguing is that certain designs (such as a slate for a tablet design) are obvious, and shouldn't be given to any one company. Just like the idea of a desk being supported on (at least) two sides that oppose one another is obvious.

I think Apple has a really strong case with Touchwiz, and the galaxyS lines. But they're going after ALL of samsung's android models (even those with stock) and then ignoring Bada which is touchwiz built on a different OS. if apple's concerned about stolen IP, why are they leaving Bada alone? why haven't they attacked HP yet?
post #50 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

the UI for the iphone has remained fundamentally unchanged for 4 years.

Which is precisely its genius. It works so well and is so well thought out that it remains the same UI on the #1 handset; the same UI that is a part of by far the dominant mobile OS in the market. And we're talking about a closed platform here - a "walled garden."

There's probably a good reason Apple's stuck with it. They aren't stupid.

It just works. Consumers seem to agree.

Measure twice, cut once. Apple seems to have done it right the first time, and it has a lot of staying power because it's evidently the only truly viable and usable mobile OS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

The ui changes hitting this year are things that were present in other platforms (android and webOS) previously.

Didn't do too much for them, now did it? Especially in the tablet space. The competition needs to flood the market in order to achieve higher share.

Lots of cool things had been present in otherwise deficient and poorly-conceived products. I'm glad that someone can take them and make them meaningful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

But that's not the issue here. What Samsung is arguing is that certain designs (such as a slate for a tablet design) are obvious, and shouldn't be given to any one company. Just like the idea of a desk being supported on (at least) two sides that oppose one another is obvious.

It all depends who owns the IP. Seems Apple does, and it seems that under the IP laws that have existed all this time, that IP is valid.

And the whole desk analogy is way too simplistic to apply here.

It's funny how Apple keeps achieving first-mover status, backed by immense popularity thereafter, and the competition ends up crying about it. Why can't they do the same as Apple did? Seems all the big game-changers have an Apple logo on them . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

I think Apple has a really strong case with Touchwiz, and the galaxyS lines. But they're going after ALL of samsung's android models (even those with stock) and then ignoring Bada which is touchwiz built on a different OS. if apple's concerned about stolen IP, why are they leaving Bada alone?

No one says Apple can't pick their battles. Anyone can. You go to court against those that can hurt you unlawfully. You deal with those products that can hurt you unlawfully.

This makes sense.
post #51 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Then why aren't they "defending" themselves against Bada? against WebOS? against the playbook?

Well, the playbook is defunct and, oh, it didn't copy the look and feel of the iPad like the galaxy devices do. Are you simple? Or are you just deliberately trolling this thread?
post #52 of 142
I don't want to get involved in this protracted fight you seem to be having with everyone here today, but I don't think you have any evidence to support this statement at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Apple will SUE any competition that starts gaining share in their target market. ...

You make it sound like Apple is some predatory bastard here using the courts as a hammer against anyone that would dare to oppose them, instead of competing fairly on the basis of good design (which is what they actually do).
post #53 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

This is DED paraphrasing the legal team. Pretty sure what they actually said is in legalese. It's impossible for DED to see anyone not from Cupertino as having a valid argument and he writes his "articles" as such.

When you have a community design, something that hinges on an "informed" user being confused between the two, changing the aspect ratio and comparing the "main screen" of the iphone to the "app screen" of an android device (which is rarely if ever, used in promotions or sales material) is dishonest. If Samsung is clearly copying (and I think Apple has an argument with Touchwiz) they shouldn't have to resort to warping pictures to exaggerate the effect.

I don't see any percentage in arguing with you so I'll just point out that while that might be your opinion, the facts speak otherwise.

It's also pretty clear from the framing of your own statements above that you have a severe bias if not against Apple per se, then against Daniel.

Whether you agree with me or not, if you have any thinking power at all you must see that it's kind of foolish for you to expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you start off with this diatribe against the bias of the author. You might as well start everything you say with "I'm really biased against the author of this article and everything he says but ..."

I mean WTF?
Why should anyone listen to you after that?
post #54 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't want to get involved in this protracted fight you seem to be having with everyone here today, but I don't think you have any evidence to support this statement at all. You make it sound like Apple is some predatory bastard here using the courts as a hammer against anyone that would dare to oppose them, instead of competing fairly on the basis of good design (which is what they actually do).

There isn't any proof that Apple only sues those who appear a little successful in competing with them. But the timing of the suits they filed might leave that impression with some who don't really understand what Apple is all about..

The Droid line from Motorola was the first smartphone to get serious comparisons to the iPhone as well as pretty good sales figures. Apple promptly sued them.
HTC was next to gain traction with quality devices that were favorably compared to Apple's product. Apple sued them. Then along came Samsung with devices even thinner than Apple able to produce . . .

You get the idea. Is there anyone else who can actually compete with Apple, or has even shown any potential to do so in the near future?

So IMO it's understandable why some people might get the mistaken impression they really are predatory and making prodigious use of the courts as tho they're a division of Apple to stifle competition.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #55 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

There isn't any proof that Apple only sues those who appear a little successful in competing with them. But the timing of the suits they filed might leave that impression with some who don't really understand what Apple is all about..

The Droid line from Motorola was the first smartphone to get serious comparisons to the iPhone as well as pretty good sales figures. Apple promptly sued them.

Just a minute... Motorola sued Apple first... and then Apple sued Motorola shortly there after.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #56 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

Well, the playbook is defunct and, oh, it didn't copy the look and feel of the iPad like the galaxy devices do. Are you simple? Or are you just deliberately trolling this thread?

Apple is suing over the 7inch Samsung tab, they're also suing over the Nexus S, the transform, the Gem, and countless other phones that also look nothing like the iphone (and a good chunk of them run stock android, not android)

Did you actually read the lawsuits, or do you just defend apple, no matter what?
post #57 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't want to get involved in this protracted fight you seem to be having with everyone here today, but I don't think you have any evidence to support this statement at all. You make it sound like Apple is some predatory bastard here using the courts as a hammer against anyone that would dare to oppose them, instead of competing fairly on the basis of good design (which is what they actually do).

They're suing to shut the other companies down. To deny imports and for excessive damages. They're not suing to get licenses, and they're not going after the worst vioations of their IP, but rather the companies that are giving them the most competition.

Or are you also going to ignore the fact that not every android phone runs touchwiz, and not every phone looks anywhere near an iphone.
post #58 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Just a minute... Motorola sued Apple first... and then Apple sued Motorola shortly there after.

According to FOSSPatents' Florian Mueller, Motorola already knew Apple was preparing to sue them. Their suit was preemptive in the hope it would improve their chances of defending themselves.

http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...not-other.html
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #59 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't see any percentage in arguing with you so I'll just point out that while that might be your opinion, the facts speak otherwise.

It's also pretty clear from the framing of your own statements above that you have a severe bias if not against Apple per se, then against Daniel.

Whether you agree with me or not, if you have any thinking power at all you must see that it's kind of foolish for you to expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you start off with this diatribe against the bias of the author. You might as well start everything you say with "I'm really biased against the author of this article and everything he says but ..."

I mean WTF?
Why should anyone listen to you after that?

Please give me a SINGLE example of an article Daniel's posted here that hasn't been an attack against a competing operating system (or he doesn't take an unrelated article and make it this). you'll notice the site can go for a long time without a single article posted by him. And then when something like the Samsung issue happens, suddenly there are 10 posts where he does everything he can to villify whoever he sees as attacking Apple.

Of course I am biased against him. You know, like anyone rational is biased against Glenn Beck. Even if you consider yourself a conservative, you still can see why Beck's not the brightest bulb in the bunch, just like you can appreciate Apple, and even support them, but know that DED isn't the person you should be quoting.


And remember, they sued HTC first. The company that was making crazy amounts of money. Are you telling me that anyone would confuse a HTC Hero or Google Nexus One for an iPhone? And then samsung started making massive profits, and look at that, Apple sued.

Again, (since you missed it) I think Apple has a VALID point when it comes to touchwiz, and even the galaxy S lines of phones. but they're going after ALL samsung android products (and not all samsung touchwiz products)
post #60 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

So you're saying that Apple should have the EXLCUSIVE rights to having icons arranged in a grid? You know, the style that goes back to the earliest GUI's.

Seriously, that's a pathetic argument.

Even some of the icons are similar in terms of design, layout, and even color. Does the icon for the "phone" app OBVIOUSLY have to be whitish handset tilted at that specific angle on a green background? What do you think?

Thompson
post #61 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Even some of the icons are similar in terms of design, layout, and even color. Does the icon for the "phone" app OBVIOUSLY have to be whitish handset tilted at that specific angle on a green background? What do you think?

Thompson

I think you're talking about something I'm not talking about
post #62 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

... Of course I am biased against him. You know, like anyone rational is biased against Glenn Beck. ...

Sigh.

See, again you go over the top.

Glenn Beck is a fascist hate monger with a slim grasp on reality and the morals of a snake.

So again, why should I take anything you say seriously when you start a post by comparing the author to someone like that?

I don't like to argue for the most part, I'm here for debate. There is a big difference between the two and it mostly centres around emotionally coloured language, abuse and hyperbole.
post #63 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Then why aren't they "defending" themselves against Bada? against WebOS? against the playbook?

Show me the WebOS device or playbook that actually copies the UI from the interactive method (pinch to zoom, etc) all the way down to the shape and color of specific icons. These other tablet or smartphone OS's prove that there is still plenty of latitude left in design choices, but somehow Android has managed to emerge as much more of an iOS clone. Hmmm. Wonder why that is? Probably because Apple got a lot of it right, and Android is a wild-west "we don't care about IP" kind of thing. And it shows.

Thompson
post #64 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

According to FOSSPatents' Florian Mueller, Motorola already knew Apple was preparing to sue them. Their suit was preemptive in the hope it would improve their chances of defending themselves.

http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...not-other.html

Motorola didn't "know". They had a "reasonable apprehension". Not the same thing as knowing at all. Maybe Apple was holding back, maybe Apple would never had sued them for whatever reason.

If Apple had sued first and then said they had a reasonable apprehension, would you be asserting that Motorola actually sued first.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #65 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

I think you're talking about something I'm not talking about

Well that may very well be, but I feel like talking about it. You were suggesting that a grid layout of icons is obvious and not worthy of suing over, and I somewhat agree. But when you add in the fact that the icons themselves bear a striking resemblance, the method of getting to the next "page" or grid of icons is the same, and even the indicator for more pages is the same (except moved to the TOP) then you have to admit that there is a lot of design element COPYING going on there. Maybe that's why you don't WANT to talk about what I'm talking about. You know that it strongly supports the case against Samsung.

Thompson
post #66 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Sigh.

See, again you go over the top.

Glenn Beck is a fascist hate monger with a slim grasp on reality and the morals of a snake.

So again, why should I take anything you say seriously when you start a post by comparing the author to someone like that?

I don't like to argue for the most part, I'm here for debate. There is a big difference between the two and it mostly centres around emotionally coloured language, abuse and hyperbole.

You're not here for debate. If you wanted debate you would post on a site that presented the news without such a heavily filtered lens. Understandably, this site will have a very pro-apple focus, which is fine. The problem is that they (specifically a single author) go out of their way to post everything negative about the competition they can. that's not the point of this site. The point of this site, as per their own heading is "Apple news and analysis" If you wanted to debate, you'd post more on TIMN, or an Android site. though Android sites rarely, if ever, post Apple news unless it directly relates to Android in some way.

The comparison to Glenn Beck is entirely accurate. I don't think DED is a Facist, but he's irrational in his hatred of other operating systems and I'm far from the first (or the most well known) to say so. His personal blog is nothing but a "this is why android sucks" screed and has been for quite some time. If he was an Apple blogger, wouldn't he write, you know, about Apple? What rational person spends so much time writing against a specific platform? if he was just a commenter he'd be labeled a troll faster than you could hit the spam button. the fact that he is the author of the article doesn't change his attitude.

I also discovered long ago that it's impossible to have a rational discussion on this site. If you post anything questioning Apple's motives, you're told to stop reading the site. If you refuse, they start calling you an astroturfer. So why bother trying to remain "civil" in the discussion? No one here is interested on getting to the truth, we're all here to shout about how much we're right and the other person is wrong. I tried fighting that mentality, I failed. If you can't beat em, join em, right?
post #67 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Show me the WebOS device or playbook that actually copies the UI from the interactive method (pinch to zoom, etc) all the way down to the shape and color of specific icons. These other tablet or smartphone OS's prove that there is still plenty of latitude left in design choices, but somehow Android has managed to emerge as much more of an iOS clone. Hmmm. Wonder why that is? Probably because Apple got a lot of it right, and Android is a wild-west "we don't care about IP" kind of thing. And it shows.

Thompson

Again, you're not talkinga bout the same thing.

Here I'll make it big and red for you.

APPLE HAS A VALID COMPLAINT FOR TOUCHWIZ

My problem is not the touchwiz suit. My problem is that they are suing ALL android devices, and NOT all touchwiz devices.

And you don't know what Android is like. Don't try.
post #68 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Motorola didn't "know". They had a "reasonable apprehension". Not the same thing as knowing at all. Maybe Apple was holding back, maybe Apple would never had sued them for whatever reason.

If Apple had sued first and then said they had a reasonable apprehension, would you be asserting that Motorola actually sued first.

I'm just following a guy that is supposed to know more about these patent suits than the rest of us. It's not my opinion. It's stated as proof that Apple was the aggressor by a guy that's generally accepted as reliable by other posters here at AI.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #69 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I'm just following a guy that is supposed to know more about these patent suits than the rest of us. It's not my opinion. It's stated as proof that Apple was the aggressor by a guy that's generally accepted as reliable by other posters here at AI.

And generally questioned on other law sites and within the FOSS community. But even a broken clock..

But even Florian's argument is pretty clear that motorola didn't know for sure. Motorola knew discussions broke down and knew Apple was going against Android developers, so they sued for Apple's patents to be invalidated (they sued themselves) in a court of their choosing so that Apple couldn't choose the venue.

My timeline is a bit fuzy, but I'm pretty sure Apple sued HTC first, and then Motorola sued. So the pattern was there already.
post #70 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I'm just following a guy that is supposed to know more about these patent suits than the rest of us. It's not my opinion. It's stated as proof that Apple was the aggressor by a guy that's generally accepted as reliable by other posters here at AI.

Proof bullshit. Apple was the agressor against HTC. Motorola got the jitters so they went after Apple.

Motorola looks pretty aggressive to me.

That's all the proof I need.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #71 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Proof bullshit. Apple was the agressor against HTC. Motorola got the jitters so they went after Apple.

Motorola looks pretty aggressive to me.

That's all the proof I need.

If Motorola was aggressive, they would sue Apple, not sue themselves
post #72 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Proof bullshit. Apple was the agressor against HTC. Motorola got the jitters so they went after Apple. . .

I certainly don't have any independent inside evidence to show otherwise, so it's possible you're correct. The supposedly well-connected FOSSPatents blogger would disagree with you.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #73 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I certainly don't have any independent inside evidence to show otherwise, so it's possible you're correct. The supposedly well-connected FOSSPatents blogger would disagree with you.

Maybe he has an agenda... and well connected guys have been wrong before.

By the way... if you read the article without putting a slant on it you'll notice that Florian never ever gives any "real" proof... and he never puts the argument, that Apple was the aggressor, to rest.

Try using that argument in a criminal court and see where it gets you. "Oh your honor, I smacked the crap outta that guy because I had a reasonable apprehension that he was coming to get me... and then, guess what, after I slapped him around he came after me 2 weeks later".
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #74 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

The comparison to Glenn Beck is entirely accurate. I don't think DED is a Facist, but he's irrational in his hatred of other operating systems and I'm far from the first (or the most well known) to say so.

Wow, this is such a ridiculous thing to say. DED has been writing about tech for many years, and has an extremely high batting average in terms of offering an accurate outlook. He's not some fanboy who just dreams up fanciful notions of how things are. He supports what he says with facts and reasoning. His AI stuff is pretty fair, if not neutral, but AI is an Apple blog. His Roughlydrafted stuff is a personal website where he says exactly what he's thinking, and again, he is far more often right than wrong.

Not that he's never been wrong, saying that CDMA phones made no sense for Apple. It appears that they'll enable Apple to see a year's worth of phones on Verizon before 4G kicks in. And I think he expected Apple TV to have more of an impact that it did.

But his comments on Android have been accurate and fact-based, unlike the wild euphoria that everyone else has spewn, saying things like Android 3.0 would hammer the iPad into second place, and that Android phones would erase any demand for the iPhone (just like people once crowed about webOS!). That's the kind of unsupported, emotional rhetoric that you try to pin on DED.

If anything, DED is more of a Jon Stewart, having fun taking apart people who say silly things and being pretty much right all the time because he's moderate and thoughtful and well reasoned.

There are about a dozen people I've seen who sit on AI message boards hating on DED, but based on their track records, they're almost ALWAYS wrong. That should tell you something about your decision to harp on how much you hate DED.

Find an example of DED crying for pity, selling worthless gold trinkets to his audience (or hawking some other waste of money he personally benefits from), using numerology and spelling tricks to paint out conspiracy theories, fanning rabid hatred for other people, or anything else in the list of deplorable conduct of Glenn Beck before you try to pin that label on him.

Really, you should have some respect for somebody who doesn't hide behind a phony name and troll phony attacks on real people who do, particularly somebody who is a clever and obviously intelligent as DED.
post #75 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Wow, this is such a ridiculous thing to say. DED has been writing about tech for many years, and has an extremely high batting average in terms of offering an accurate outlook. He's not some fanboy who just dreams up fanciful notions of how things are. He supports what he says with facts and reasoning. His AI stuff is pretty fair, if not neutral, but AI is an Apple blog. His Roughlydrafted stuff is a personal website where he says exactly what he's thinking, and again, he is far more often right than wrong.

Not that he's never been wrong, saying that CDMA phones made no sense for Apple. It appears that they'll enable Apple to see a year's worth of phones on Verizon before 4G kicks in. And I think he expected Apple TV to have more of an impact that it did.

But his comments on Android have been accurate and fact-based, unlike the wild euphoria that everyone else has spewn, saying things like Android 3.0 would hammer the iPad into second place, and that Android phones would erase any demand for the iPhone (just like people once crowed about webOS!). That's the kind of unsupported, emotional rhetoric that you try to pin on DED.

If anything, DED is more of a Jon Stewart, having fun taking apart people who say silly things and being pretty much right all the time because he's moderate and thoughtful and well reasoned.

There are about a dozen people I've seen who sit on AI message boards hating on DED, but based on their track records, they're almost ALWAYS wrong. That should tell you something about your decision to harp on how much you hate DED.

Find an example of DED crying for pity, selling worthless gold trinkets to his audience (or hawking some other waste of money he personally benefits from), using numerology and spelling tricks to paint out conspiracy theories, fanning rabid hatred for other people, or anything else in the list of deplorable conduct of Glenn Beck before you try to pin that label on him.

Really, you should have some respect for somebody who doesn't hide behind a phony name and troll phony attacks on real people who do, particularly somebody who is a clever and obviously intelligent as DED.

John Stewert is funny, even to people who disagree with him. DED is only funny to people who already agree with him, and only people who agree with him would ever label his writings as "fair" and again, please give me an article where DED has said ANYTHING positive about android, or windows, or any system that wasn't apple. if he's "fair and level headed" it should be pretty easy.

And DED uses quite a few false names, at least two actively for articles here. As for why I use a false name, that would be obviously to anyone who's participated in a forum. I used to use my real name, and then I had someone dredge up stuff my friends posted and started mocking them in an attempt to discredit me.
post #76 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Samsung's claim that they were ignorant of the German hearing where they lodged a letter a week before it happened is perjury.

I don't think US judges take too kindly to blatantly lying to the court.

Perjury is charged only after a sworn oath in court.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #77 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I certainly don't have any independent inside evidence to show otherwise, so it's possible you're correct. The supposedly well-connected FOSSPatents blogger would disagree with you.

I tell you what... just for the sake of argument I'll give my twist on the document that Florian uses as "proof".

Motorola knew damn well that Android might have patent issues down the road but they used it anyway thinking that they could use their own patent portfolio to slap down any lawsuit against them. Motorola was ready and had already mentioned to Google not to be worried if Apple went after any of the other manufacturers... they (Motorola) had the countersuit drafted.

I think Google and Motorola have had a sweet thing going on for a long time... and, in a way, Florian also agrees with that.

... and I also agree with Florian that there is more than meets the eye about the Google/Motorola deal.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #78 of 142
It seems like more and more Apple is a design company and Samsung is a technology company.

Apple barks about the design aspect of things, where as Samsung barks about the technology aspect of things.

Apple is run by idealist designers, Samsung is run by precise engineers.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #79 of 142
Oh puhleeese! Galaxy tab is a blatant copy, Samsung pulled the previous one out once they saw the iPad 2. Their whole argument will be based on the same premise as all the other copycats'! That the iPad design is too generic to have a legitimate patent.

Apple has every right to protect its IP. They had an idea that others ridiculed For a long time, they made a successful product based on that idea and then others rip it off?
post #80 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post


And this video from 1994:
http://youtu.be/JBEtPQDQNcI
.

I find it funny that everyone in your video is using Apple computers. I would bet they all have iPads now and love them and are proud they predicted this form factor would be a reality in mass at this point in time.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case