The iPad and MacBook air both disprove your point completely.
- Joined: Jun 2010
- Posts: 834
- Select All Posts By This User
The iPad and MacBook air both disprove your point completely.
You are correct the injunction was based on a utility patent, however, you are wrong about the look and feel not resembling Apple. I was in a Best Buy Store the other day and I saw at least three people walk by the Samsung display and think the phone was an iPhone. Samsung is coping Apple heavily. Much more so than HTC, Motorola, and Nokia. Apple's argument is Samsung's copying of its look and feel is what is allowing Samsung to sell so many phones. Considering HTC, Motorola, and Nokia are struggling Apple's argument may have some validity.
The difference is Motorola isn't selling many phones. Hence Posner saying Apple couldn't' prove damages. Samsung is selling more phones than Apple. Damages are easier to establish there. Further, different patents are at issue.
Why does people equate copying with innovation? Innovation inherently means coming up with your own ideas not copying your competitors.
There's people that think every smartphone is an iPhone. Neither the Nexus nor S3 has even a passing resemblence to Apple products other than they both have screens and icons. Even you would agree with that, correct? The "look" isn't much issue any longer IMO. I can't think of any new smartphone that looks like an iPhone.
Screamie!! You are back to resorting to ad homs and not even trying to debate on a posts merits.
Google hasn't yet sued anyone despite a large number of patents in its portfolio both home-grown and acquired, including one filed for the notification bar back in 2009. They controlled thousands of them even before the MM purchase. Google has a completely different attitude towards initiating litigation against it's tech neighbors than any of it's competitors.
Well they have to since they don't have much in the technical non-search space. Just about everything they have outside of the search space is bought after the fact or just hoping to not get sued over. That's a significant part of why they purchased Moto Mobile.
Google hasn't yet sued anyone despite a large number of patents in its portfolio both home-grown and acquired, including one filed for the notification bar back in 2009...Google has a completely different attitude towards initiating litigation against it's tech neighbors than any of it's competitors.
Well, Apple hasn't sued Google either, for that matter.
And it would be kind of silly (or take a lot of chutzpah) to sue a competitor whose product came out a year before yours.
I take care of my own finances and I mainly only trade AAPL. No Samsung is allowed in my portfolio. If I were to have companies which I don't care for in my portfolio, it would only be for shorting purposes.
To me, this is a bigger concern for Google than Samsung.
I don't know what are the exact terms and conditions for Android licensing, but since Galaxy Nexus uses Pure Google experience, anything related to core Android functionality would and should be indemnified by Google.
Google better pour money and support Samsung in this litigation, or else Apple basically can ban any Android smartphones "infringing" on the same patent.
effing rotten apple.
Don't see this on Reuters website.
All of you can laugh at yourselves. Rah, Rah, Team, Rah, Rah, Team. What a bunch of idiots. Tech is not Apple, Microsoft or Google. Tech is what makes our lives funner, it does not all come from our apparent software overlords. Make of it what you can with what you have. I do get a lot of popcorn reading from both sides, so, I have to thank you for that lol, stupid sheep (both sides).
I think that's just an assumption that's no longer true. Outside of the search space they actually have thousands of patents, some reportedly targeting Apple directly including specific IBM transfers.
They own patents for computer architecture, encryption, networking, multi-thread processing, 3-dimensional modeling. Others are in the area of fiber-optics, the Google Glasses project, self-driving cars, voice search, audio and video. They've cherry-picked network patents and data center patents among others from HP, a few thousand more hand-selected IBM patents, even IP from "patent-troll" MOSAID. No doubt that if Google wanted to go on offense they could make quite a commotion at the minimum. Even in the search space where they've played and innovated for years they've not sued any competitor even tho it's clear they have IP to do so.
Every comment they've made in the past says that's not what they're about, and their actions to date have mirrored that attitude. That's the way I see it at least. It's not that they can't sue, lacking IP of their own. IMO, it's that they've made a policy decision not to.
The 4 patents are listed above in the article I believe the biggest one was regarding Siri. The tablet that they got the injunction against already has a newer version out, but I believe that their is a fee for Samsung to have to pay Apple now. Samsung won a case last week where Apple will have to pay them money. Now this Samsung Google Nexus phone, when I looked it up all I could find is an older phone from last year, from October of 2011. Not being familiar with android personally is there a newer version of this out? Color me confused with so many android phones and names. I keep seeing news articles saying Nexus "device" which isn't right from what I can find it's only the phone.
"Google sues tiny indie label"
My personal feeling is that Google and Android have taken quite a bit from Apple and the iPhone. It's pretty hard to say otherwise based on their handsets pre-iPhone.
Besides that though, I'd rather plunk down my hard earned money for phone created by a company whose core business model is designing great hardware and software, then selling it to anyone who wants it. (It doesn't even necessarily have to be Apple) Google's core business however is very different. They create (for the most part) services and offer them for free so they can harvest your personal information and then sell it. THAT is the real product that they sell. I avoid Google wherever I can. They creep me out. like Facebook.