Originally Posted by dpackman
From about a mile and half away I can't tell the difference between Angelina Jolie and Kathy Bates.
Please, Jolie's been copying Kathy for years!!
Originally Posted by MacRulez
In a world where OJ was found innocent of crimes but also found financially liable for crimes he didn't commit, how this weird case plays out is anyone's guess.
But a little stroll down Multi-touch Prior Art Lane suggests where it may be headed:
Pinch and zoom circa 2006:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcKqyn-gUbY
Microsoft Multi-Touch Patent App Predates Apple’shttp://www.bnet.com/blog/technology-...tes-apples/609
Tablet UI concepts, circa 1994:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI
Touch gestures, including two-finger pinch, circa 1992:http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...30828816089246
Multitouch UIs, 1970s forward:http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html
And then there's this summary from Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch
By the time this is done, the scope of enforceable "non-obvious" elements in Apple's patents related to multitouch will likely be so slender as to have very low liabilities if any at all.
That would leave only the hardware design patents, which are increasingly seen as questionable in the courts since they rely on attributes such as round corners, black frames, and slender form factors which are not only utilitartian in nature but have also been in existence throughout so much of consumer electronics that their application to tablets seems likely to face the same scrutiny, forcing Apple to describe their specific non-obvious contributions over prior art which may form a subset of enforceable elements, again reducing penalties down to something closer to zero.
Some good links, haven't seen those videos in a while! You are making an assumption that the gripe Apple has it related to muli-touch, and I don't think that's the case. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Whilst your links make your point well (assuming multi-touch is the issue in question here), the overwhelming feeling I get watching the clips is "what have Apple's competitors been doing with this technology for the last 5 years?"
Where is Microsoft's Surface? Apple have brought the wow factor of that first Adobe demo into people's homes in a way nobody else has. I think they deserve credit for that. I know that's not related to this case, it's just a thought. Therein likes a legal question, if MS and Adobe haven't used this technology and Apple has, is there patent really valid? To my knowledge, that's how the law sees it to some extent. A patent troll is someone who files a patent, does nothing with it and then sues others that do. Just spitballing.
The brilliance of Apple was to make those features demoed in your links into a coherent operating system. It's not as easy as it sounds. Moving photos around on a grey background and pinching them to zoom is a long way from a full OS.
Originally Posted by Loptimist
well, i probably can't tell samsung tv and sony tv apart from 10 feet away.
That's a very valid point, more so than it appears. The issue here isn't whether the iPad and Galaxy Tab look the same - they undeniably do; the issue is whether or not the design elements of the iPad that look so similar in the Galaxy Tab are actually so intrinsic to the tablet form factor that they cannot be subject to an enforceable patent.
With televisions, you have to have a rectangle around a screen. There's only so much you can do with that stylistically without being simply pedantic.
Personally, I think Apple will ultimately have to concede that the iPad's form factor is inherent to the tablet form factor. Ultimately, the iPad is a screen with a black border and round edges. There's only to much you can do with that.
That said, Samsung take it to the wire. They copy docks and accessories and even their docking ports looks similar. They have the rows of icons with the springboard etc. It does all seem a little too much. I don't know if Apple can make that stick in court, but if I was Apple, I'd be hacked off too. To my mind, there is no doubt Samsung copy Apple, but if they didn't copy Apple I don't think there tablets would looks ENORMOUSLY different.
Originally Posted by j1h15233
This lawyer should have at least guessed. She had a 50/50 shot haha.
Can you imagine the headline if she'd guessed wrong? That's how lawyers think. If she says the Samsung Galaxy Tab is the iPad, she looses her job. It's that simple.