AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Dutch court rules Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn't infringe on Apple's designs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dutch court rules Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn't infringe on Apple's designs - Page 2

post #41 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

No, that's not what I mean. I mean a different suit between the iPad and the Tab for the purpose of determining similarity of appearance.

Not with that particular Community Design.

EDIT: Tallest Skil, Apple hasn't ever filed an EU court case claiming the Tab resembled the iPad too closely AFAIK. I find that curious and raises the question whether they have a grounds for a legal complaint on that. I don't know.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #42 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So you're both fine with a court using completely irrelevant evidence to rule on a case?

"Your honor, O.J. Simpson was acquitted. Therefore my client, Casey Anthony, is also innocent."

EDIT: No, seriously. Explain to me how...

Ok, first off that analogy doesn't really make sense and is insulting in some ways. No one lost their lives over this IP dispute. Second I don't have to explain anything or even agree. It's simple, In the modern democratic world we let the courts handle disagreements and disputes and accept their decisions and respect them for what they are. Obviously it's not a perfect system but it's what we civilized people have determined to be fair. I certainly respect your disappointment or frustration at the outcome but to say it's blatantly illegal and it can't be over is somewhat amusing, this was the appeal and Apple lost twice in this scenario, therefore it's simply over.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #43 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I find that curious and raises the question whether they have a grounds for a legal complaint on that.

Try looking at one.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #44 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Try looking at one.

Apple lawyers doesn't have looked a t them?
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:18am
It's a losing battle for Apple. The best thing that Apple needs to do is sign licensing agreements with Google. Apple i products should begin transitioning to Android. The overwhelming momentum of Android will solidify its top place in the market. Apple needs to adopt and get on board or get lost the Android tidal wave. There really is no denying the future of iOS.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Try looking at one.

I'm certain you're well aware that it's not what you think in a lawsuit, it's what you can prove. I suspect Apple understands that can't show Samsung has copied the iPad design. There are differences if you look for them, and some would say they're significant. The display format would be the most obvious.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #47 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

It's a losing battle for Apple. The best thing that Apple needs to do is sign licensing agreements with Google. Apple i products should begin transitioning to Android. The overwhelming momentum of Android will solidify its top place in the market. Apple needs to adopt and get on board or get lost the Android tidal wave. There really is no denying the future of iOS.

Are you on something? Being sarcastic? Or just idiotically trolling? I certainly can't see how anyone can take you seriously.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #48 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

It's a losing battle for Apple. The best thing that Apple needs to do is sign licensing agreements with Google. Apple i products should begin transitioning to Android. The overwhelming momentum of Android will solidify its top place in the market. Apple needs to adopt and get on board or get lost the Android tidal wave. There really is no denying the future of iOS.

In the scheme of things this was a very small victory....the battle is far from over.
The future of IOS? Dude the iPhone is the best selling phone ever! Thye can't keep enough iPads on the shelf..... I can't wait for iPhone 5 to come out this summer! :-)

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #49 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

Are you on something? Being sarcastic? Or just idiotically trolling? I certainly can't see how anyone can take you seriously.

He is definitively trolling
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:26am
Apple is required to attempt to protect their IP wherever they deem it is being challenged, but they are at the mercy of the ability of their legal team to properly present the case, the judges to properly understand and accept the assertions and make a correct decision. So this isn't wasted money, in that it is part of IP ownership.

That being said, I doubt the legal team assumed a complete sweep of legal decisions, and each dismissal and non-infringement decision causes the Apple legal team to review and strengthen their arguments, tighten their case and become more effective. Which is why you are seeing these get delivered in Europe first. By fielding these in less impactful countries market-wise, they are preparing for the larger battles in the markets where it will make a difference, like China or India.

As a tactical move, it causes Samsung to hedge their bets designwise and forces them to consider retrenching their approach - so the Dutch decision is a point of relief for them, but not definitive in the sense that it only affects sales in the Netherlands, and could possibly color somewhat the EU court action later, but that is not assured. And that court is going to look at Samsung's alleged mishandling of standards patents. The court will look for a pattern of abuse as well as the specifics of the case in question. Samsung has already been hit with adverse decisions on their other "copying" issues, so they are not clearly not going to enjoy any favoritism by the court.

Anyone who has been a part of international corporate life understands the requirements that create the sort of actions that Apple has taken - it doesn't really matter if you agree with them or not in your particular version of reality as you see it. There are facts on the ground of which most of us are not aware, and parts of the picture completely obscured for you if you don't have the necessary background. Absurdly reducing the factors impacting here to a simple few, fails utterly to reflect the complex reality of the environment in which international corporations are required to operate.
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
post #51 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

It's a losing battle for Apple...(continued rant of no consequence).

Now technically I am violating my own requests to other posters to not rely to troll posts, but I just wanted to say how refreshing your consistency is. While I have ignored you, I have no choice but to see what you have posted when someone replies to it, so I have ample evidence of your consistency. I am very happy that you do not flip-flop, that you are always all about the successful domination of Android (in your mind at least) of the industry, and it's ultimate sovereignty in the mobile space. The same sort of consistency that allowed the captain of the Titanic to blythely ignore the effects of the grinding crunching noise of the iceberg that sunk the unsinkable ship.

This is corporate gamesmanship at the highest level. When the elephants dance, it's most fun to be on the sidelines watching - not underfoot. Samsung is not going to change decades of corporate culture to avoid treading on Apple's toes, and Apple is not going to let that same corporate culture trample all over their IP rights.
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
post #52 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:42am
Have you looked at all modern flat tv's?
Where's all the lawsuits over those.
Luckily Apple hasn't made a tv. Oh wait...
Get some popcorn. Its good to be a lawyer with Apple going thermonuclear.
Just read that Apple spent 100 mil on lawyer fees against HTC
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post

Now technically I am violating my own requests to other posters to not rely to troll posts, but I just wanted to say how refreshing your consistency is. While I have ignored you, I have no choice but to see what you have posted when someone replies to it, so I have ample evidence of your consistency. I am very happy that you do not flip-flop, that you are always all about the successful domination of Android (in your mind at least) of the industry, and it's ultimate sovereignty in the mobile space. The same sort of consistency that allowed the captain of the Titanic to blythely ignore the effects of the grinding crunching noise of the iceberg that sunk the unsinkable ship.

This is corporate gamesmanship at the highest level. When the elephants dance, it's most fun to be on the sidelines watching - not underfoot. Samsung is not going to change decades of corporate culture to avoid treading on Apple's toes, and Apple is not going to let that same corporate culture trample all over their IP rights.

There are many die hards who can't or wont accept new ideas
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post

Apple is required to attempt to protect their IP wherever they deem it is being challenged. . .

That's not true. US patents can lanquish for years before the holder decides to wield them. Even if they never move against known infringement, the patent is still valid and can be used against someone else if they decide to at some future time.

If you're referring to these EU Community Designs or "look and feel" design patents in the US, then yes those should be asserted once the holder is aware that infringement may be taking place AFAIK. In fact if Apple had waited just a few more weeks before making the claims against Samsung in Europe then they would not have been entitled to ask for an emergency injunction in the first place, altho they could still have pursued a final judgment. As far as the courts in Germany were concerned, it can't be an emergency if the holder was aware of possible infringement for months before acting.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #55 of 121
1/24/12 at 8:56am
FlorianMuellerInsider. All the latest re-reporting of whatever Florian Mueller posted!
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
post #56 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:01am






...
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:04am
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/cus...re-Design.html

http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/cus...ace-Icons.html

http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/cus...ge-Design.html
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:11am
Your images are broken. And you could just rehost them on Imgur instead of posting links.

But apparently none of that matters anyway. That's not the argument being made. That's not the reason for the lawsuit. Nothing to see here.

The fact that they're blatantly copying and obviously directly stealing this stuff doesn't legally matter.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #59 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The fact that they're blatantly copying and obviously directly stealing this stuff doesn't legally matter.

The fact is that they are not copying, despite your denial of reality
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Your images are broken. And you could just rehost them on Imgur instead of posting links.

They link fine for me.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #61 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

They link fine for me.

Link, sure, but they don't appear.

PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #62 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So you're both fine with a court using completely irrelevant evidence to rule on a case?

"Your honor, O.J. Simpson was acquitted. Therefore my client, Casey Anthony, is also innocent."

EDIT: No, seriously. Explain to me how pre-iPad tablets are relevant to what we, as modern humans, call a tablet. This would be like a light bulb company winning a lawsuit based on the court looking at Edison's incandescent lamp.

The thing that Edison created wouldn't be defined as a light bulb today. A car from the 20s wouldn't be defined as a car today. This case is insane.

Lol @ your fanboi rage.
Your logic is so flawed this time, its embarassing.
Apple tries to patent someone else's design concept as their own and your fine with it until someone else also implements the earlier design comcept.

Why dont you just leave it at what it is - exposing the whole patent system as the fraud it is.
Leave your fanboi glasses at the door on this one Tallest-shill.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Link, sure, but they don't appear.


They do for me.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #64 of 121
1/24/12 at 9:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Lol @ your fanboi rage.
Your logic is so flawed this time, its embarassing.
Apple tries to patent someone else's design concept as their own and your fine with it until someone else also implements the earlier design comcept.

Why dont you just leave it at what it is - exposing the whole patent system as the fraud it is.
Leave your fanboi glasses at the door on this one Tallest-shill.

I'll thank you to leave your insults at the door, particularly when they're wrong.

Who else's design concept was Apple trying to 'patent as their own'?
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #65 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

It's a losing battle for Apple. The best thing that Apple needs to do is sign licensing agreements with Google. Apple i products should begin transitioning to Android. The overwhelming momentum of Android will solidify its top place in the market. Apple needs to adopt and get on board or get lost the Android tidal wave. There really is no denying the future of iOS.

Hehehe, you're funny.

Apple makes waaaay more money per handset sold than any of their competition. Why on earth would they want to adopt an inferior OS like Android? Apple's success is based on creating the entire widget.

Who really cares if Android is on more handsets? That doesn't equal better. I'd rather be the guy doing the better job, while making more money than putting crap on any handset under the sun that will have it.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Agreed. Apple's products need to stand or fall on their own merit (and I think they will). The thing that will take down Apple is not Android, etc., but instead will be some future internal decisions. That is what almost killed Apple the first time around. Look at Sony. Sony's hubris is what caused its late adoption of the digital music idea. Sony fought against it, all the while Apple breezed in the iPod. Sony never recovered. Even now in Japan, the iPod and iPhone have take much from Sony.

I agree. As much as fandroids and haters fantasize about Apple's "hubris" or "patent trolling" destroying Apple, in the long run, it will be Apple's missing an opportunity to disrupt markets and create new ones in the process, from sheer lack of foresight. I'm not sure who on Apple's leadership team can do that the way Steve did. It was one of Steve's strongest talents: being able to sense intuitively where technology was going. And it's not something you teach in management school. My only hope is that Apple's culture of wanting to change the world will collectively net some good, disruptive ideas that management will get behind, and turn into future products.
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
post #67 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:20am
Winner: Lawyers

"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 #68 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Winner: Lawyers

Also Samsung and all other rectangular tablets
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by felisberto2 View Post

http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/cus...re-Design.html

http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/cus...ace-Icons.html

http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/cus...ge-Design.html

Samsung should be sued for packaging. Did Apple patent that?
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

It's a losing battle for Apple. The best thing that Apple needs to do is sign licensing agreements with Google. Apple i products should begin transitioning to Android. The overwhelming momentum of Android will solidify its top place in the market. Apple needs to adopt and get on board or get lost the Android tidal wave. There really is no denying the future of iOS.

<insert Tim Cook "Not sure if serious" pic/>

Even if you're not serious, people back in 96 were seriously telling Apple to drop hardware and adopt Microsoft's model of selling OS licenses to cloners. Windows 95 and NT were seemingly on top of the world, and Apple was a has-been, sitting on the Mac market for 10 years without any real change (System 7.5 was hardly state of the art by then). Pundits were telling Apple that Microsoft was the one to copy.

Of course, today, many of those pundits are sporting MacBooks under their arm, like PC Magazine's once-Apple-hater John Dvorak.

If Apple ever does go back to the days when this kind of advice can be taken seriously, then Apple has fallen and is no longer the master of its destiny.
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
post #71 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So you're both fine with a court using completely irrelevant evidence to rule on a case?

"Your honor, O.J. Simpson was acquitted. Therefore my client, Casey Anthony, is also innocent."

EDIT: No, seriously. Explain to me how pre-iPad tablets are relevant to what we, as modern humans, call a tablet. This would be like a light bulb company winning a lawsuit based on the court looking at Edison's incandescent lamp.

The thing that Edison created wouldn't be defined as a light bulb today. A car from the 20s wouldn't be defined as a car today. This case is insane.

Crappy analogy.

A car is a car even if its from the 1920s.

Modern car vs old school car

1) Both transport people from one location to another via voluntary control by the users on, mostly, paved roads.

2) Both have engines, 4 wheels, hard cover passenger compartment, headlights, instruments, user interfaces, and both use gasoline as the primary fuel.

On top of that, their general layout (design) is similar.

The same goes with the "tablets".

"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 #72 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post

Also Samsung and all other rectangular tablets

Nope, they still have to pay unnecessary legal fees.

"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 #73 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Crappy analogy.

Nope. In this analogy, "street legal" is the equivalent of "modern definition of a tablet".
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #74 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Nope, they still have to pay unnecessary legal fees.

I wonder if Samsung countered sued for legal fees.

So winners so far Lawyers, Rectangular tablet makers and blog sites?

Maybe Samsung.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Who else's design concept was Apple trying to 'patent as their own'?


Wasn't the design first used in Star Trek?
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post

Also Samsung and all other rectangular tablets

Don't forget consumers. They are the biggest winners here.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post

Apple is required to attempt to protect their IP wherever they deem it is being challenged, but they are at the mercy of the ability of their legal team to properly present the case, the judges to properly understand and accept the assertions and make a correct decision. So this isn't wasted money, in that it is part of IP ownership.

That being said, I doubt the legal team assumed a complete sweep of legal decisions, and each dismissal and non-infringement decision causes the Apple legal team to review and strengthen their arguments, tighten their case and become more effective. Which is why you are seeing these get delivered in Europe first. By fielding these in less impactful countries market-wise, they are preparing for the larger battles in the markets where it will make a difference, like China or India.

As a tactical move, it causes Samsung to hedge their bets designwise and forces them to consider retrenching their approach - so the Dutch decision is a point of relief for them, but not definitive in the sense that it only affects sales in the Netherlands, and could possibly color somewhat the EU court action later, but that is not assured. And that court is going to look at Samsung's alleged mishandling of standards patents. The court will look for a pattern of abuse as well as the specifics of the case in question. Samsung has already been hit with adverse decisions on their other "copying" issues, so they are not clearly not going to enjoy any favoritism by the court.

Anyone who has been a part of international corporate life understands the requirements that create the sort of actions that Apple has taken - it doesn't really matter if you agree with them or not in your particular version of reality as you see it. There are facts on the ground of which most of us are not aware, and parts of the picture completely obscured for you if you don't have the necessary background. Absurdly reducing the factors impacting here to a simple few, fails utterly to reflect the complex reality of the environment in which international corporations are required to operate.

I appreciate the calm, well-reasoned argument. It's rare these days. Hence, my posting the whole thing again.

I would add that Apple lost a huge battle over the Macintosh interface long ago that permitted the rise of Microsoft. Many of us at the time felt it was a horribly bad call on the part of the judge, but none of us thought the battle shouldn't have been fought. As a 65 year old stockholder who has a major part of their retirement tied up in Apple stock, I sincerely hope they fight every last one of these patent disputes to the bitter end. And I only ask that they win the ones they deserve to win. That won't happen, I know. They'll lose some and maybe win some they didn't deserve to. Hopefully, it'll balance out in the end.

In any case, I couldn't be prouder of Apple, win, lose, or draw.
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post

I appreciate the calm, well-reasoned argument. It's rare these days. Hence, my posting the whole thing again.

I would add that Apple lost a huge battle over the Macintosh interface long ago that permitted the rise of Microsoft. Many of us at the time felt it was a horribly bad call on the part of the judge, but none of us thought the battle shouldn't have been fought. As a 65 year old stockholder who has a major part of their retirement tied up in Apple stock, I sincerely hope they fight every last one of these patent disputes to the bitter end. And I only ask that they win the ones they deserve to win. That won't happen, I know. They'll lose some and maybe win some they didn't deserve to. Hopefully, it'll balance out in the end.

In any case, I couldn't be prouder of Apple, win, lose, or draw.

Yeah Apple (SJ) did a great job coming from near bankruptcy.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

OK Netherlands... how 'bout this?
I'm going to build an exact replica of the Van Gogh Museum next to the real thing and get a sizable percentage of tourists to unknowingly come into my museum.
Inside will be amateurish copies of the master's paintings, and my customers will end up pissed at the Netherlands, degrading your reputation. But that's just fine, right?

You OK with that?
Just asking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

As I'm Dutch I'll react...

Absolutely no problem with your suggestion, as long as you don't claim the paintings are real van Goghs.

Samsung has never sold their galaxy tab as an 'Apple iPad'






People, just get over it. Take off the armchair lawyer hats and stop pretending you're legal experts. You really don't have a say in telling the courts of Netherlands and Germany what's legal. The people there decide what's legal, not you.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 121
1/24/12 at 10:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So you're both fine with a court using completely irrelevant evidence to rule on a case?

"Your honor, O.J. Simpson was acquitted. Therefore my client, Casey Anthony, is also innocent."

EDIT: No, seriously. Explain to me how pre-iPad tablets are relevant to what we, as modern humans, call a tablet. This would be like a light bulb company winning a lawsuit based on the court looking at Edison's incandescent lamp.

The thing that Edison created wouldn't be defined as a light bulb today. A car from the 20s wouldn't be defined as a car today. This case is insane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Lol @ your fanboi rage.
Your logic is so flawed this time, its embarassing.
Apple tries to patent someone else's design concept as their own and your fine with it until someone else also implements the earlier design comcept.

Why dont you just leave it at what it is - exposing the whole patent system as the fraud it is.
Leave your fanboi glasses at the door on this one Tallest-shill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Crappy analogy.

A car is a car even if its from the 1920s.

Modern car vs old school car

1) Both transport people from one location to another via voluntary control by the users on, mostly, paved roads.

2) Both have engines, 4 wheels, hard cover passenger compartment, headlights, instruments, user interfaces, and both use gasoline as the primary fuel.

On top of that, their general layout (design) is similar.

The same goes with the "tablets".


The importance of reasoning via logic and proper analogy is lost on them. Their avid defense of Apple's tactics comes from neither, but rather from a self-esteem and identity that are tied too closely to a brand.



But I'm glad to see we're hearing more from sounder minds in this thread.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Dutch court rules Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn't infringe on Apple's designs
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Dutch court rules Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn't infringe on Apple's designs