or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone - Page 2

post #41 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubernabei View Post


Lets face it, Apple wouldn't be investing millions to continue to innovate and release the iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... if there wasn't healthy competition from Android phones.  Competition = good for the consumer like you and me.  Stop being a nerd.

The iPad and MacBook air both disprove your point completely.
post #42 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubernabei View Post


Lets face it, Apple wouldn't be investing millions to continue to innovate and release the iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... if there wasn't healthy competition from Android phones.  Competition = good for the consumer like you and me.

Prior to your statement "competition = good," being considered (much less proven true), the following must be proven:
  1. You must define "competition." Who? What markets? What devices? Is the sale of a 5" "smartphone" an alternative to the purchase of a 3.5" smartphone and a 9.7" tablet?
  2. You must define "good." "Good" for whom? "More good" than alternatives?
  3. You must prove competition is "good." Many studies exist that demonstrate that competition is not "good."


Personally, I find the argument fallacious. Who in their right mind believes that a device which only requires a USD $96 million bond for a preliminary injunction is competition for a company with profits over USD $10 billion per quarter and a market capitalization of over USD $500 billion.
Edited by MacBook Pro - 6/29/12 at 5:34pm
post #43 of 368
RIM must be happy, with BB10 behind schedule this just might give them the space to sell something. I always thought that the best defense would have been a collaboration, one device, one system, where all parties could have profitted. Instead they fought themselves and the iPhone and its ecosystem--it's strongest point to many--allowing Apple to forge an ever growing stronghold on the market. As for this victory I hope it deters not instigates more legal rambling. Really, don't we all just want to enjoy our chosen platforms and devices.
post #44 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

 

Pretty much a boilerplate statement since the Nexus has no resemblance at all to any Apple product, at least that I can see. The injunction must be based on a utility patent or two rather than "look and feel" as the statement from Apple would imply.

 

 

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. 

post #45 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151011/apple-wins-injunction-against-samsung-galaxy-nexus-smartphone#post_2137426"]It's not because they use a different device, it's because of their ignorance, their hatred, their stupidity, their lies and their constant bogus attacks on Apple and Apple users.

I would like to see Android completely destroyed. Windows 8 and other systems can be allowed to survive, because I don't really care about them. Android should die though, because I don't like their users.

So the tech world revolves around what you say should and should not survive based on what you like? High horse much? When you become a big boy and mommy and daddy can no longer fill your head full of lies about being special you will understand how the real world works. I hope you are a minority in the pool of the youth or this world is doomed.
post #46 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

"Apple has articulated a plausible theory of irreparable harm" due to "long-term loss of market share and losses of downstream sales," Judge Koh said.

 

Wasn't this is the "harm" Apple was attempting to demonstrate to Posner?  It's harm that will happen down the line.

 

 

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. 

post #47 of 368
What a nice birthday present for the iPhone on it's 5th birthday.
post #48 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubernabei View Post


Lets face it, Apple wouldn't be investing millions to continue to innovate and release the iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... if there wasn't healthy competition from Android phones.  Competition = good for the consumer like you and me.  Stop being a nerd.

 

 

Why does people equate copying with innovation? Innovation inherently means coming up with your own ideas not copying your competitors. 

post #49 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

 

 

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.

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.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #50 of 368

This is definitely a great win for our Apple family. The fandroids will be hurting real bad over this judgment.

post #51 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post


Why does people equate copying with innovation? Innovation inherently means coming up with your own ideas not copying your competitors. 

Why do people equate writing checks as innovation? Apple didn't invent Siri, develop or have anything to do with it. They wrote a check for it. Smart, very, innovative, not very.
post #52 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos View Post

This is definitely a great win for our Apple family. The fandroids will be hurting real bad over this judgment.

It has already started unraveling:

Update: Reuters reports that Judge Koh, "scheduled a hearing on Monday to consider whether to put the Galaxy Nexus injunction on hold pending appeal." In a decision earlier this week, Koh also granted Apple a pre-trial ban on the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, and Koh said she might rule on Sunday whether to hold that injunction pending appeal.

So she made an decision, then quickly decided to reconsider.
post #53 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post


Why does people equate copying with innovation? Innovation inherently means coming up with your own ideas not copying your competitors. 

In Android-land up-is-down, black-is-white, etc. They have an illogical, irrational view that isn't supported by evidence. Frankly, it is beyond my comprehension but evidence suggests that such is literally the case. Anything to fuel their hatred of Apple. As someone previously noted, there are few people that love Android but many who hate Apple which appears to be the primary force driving the adoption of Android-based smartphones.(1) There truly does appear to be a self affirmation bias (reality distortion field) at work on Android fans.


1. Henry Blodget and Leah Goldman. Published 18 April, 2011. THE TRUTH ABOUT SMARTPHONES: Our Exclusive Survey On iPhone vs Android. Bussiness Insider. Retrieved 29 June, 2012.
post #54 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

glad to see the balance restored. for all the 'idiots' that use android, you are big enough apple buffoon to even it out.

android isn't going anywhere so go take your meds.

 

 

Screamie!! You are back to resorting to ad homs and not even trying to debate on a posts merits.  

.
Reply
.
Reply
post #55 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedude View Post

can someone explain the "$96 million bond" part? they have to pay $96 million to cover damages of what?! and while you are at it, explain "the injunction later be found unjust" part?

Its the number estimated to be the loss Samsung will take for not being able to sell the Nexus. If Samsung wins the patents case then they are awarded that money as compensation.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #56 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

 

 

Screamie!! You are back to resorting to ad homs and not even trying to debate on a posts merits.  

it had no merits. i came, i saw, i insulted.

post #57 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

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.

.
Reply
.
Reply
post #58 of 368
And where is a NYT article to report this ruling? Is this not major news?
post #59 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

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.

Don't read that drivel posted by the Android faithful. Google has plenty of lawsuits or has armed partners and subsidiaries with the means to sue competitors.

"Google owns Motorola Mobility Inc. "Judge Richard Posner threw out a heated case between Apple and Google-owned Motorola Mobility yesterday, ending an infringement squabble between two companies in deep competition."" (1)

"A regional German court in Mannheim ruled on Friday that Apple Sales International -- European sales subsidiary of Apple in Cork, Ireland -- must stop selling or distributing mobile devices that infringe certain Motorola patents." (2)

"The U.S. International Trade Commission has granted an Apple motion to dismiss five patents HTC received from Google last year." (3)






1. Meghan Kelly. Published 23 June, 2012. Apple v. Motorola Mobility epic patent case thrown out. Venture Beat. Retrieved 29 June, 2012.
2. Poornima Gupta and Maria Sheahan. Published 10 December, 2011. Motorola wins German patent case ruling vs Apple. Reuters. Retrieved 29 June, 2012.
3. Steven Musil. Published June 11, 2012. Apple wins dismissal of HTC patents borrowed from Google. CNET. Retrieved 29 June, 2012.
post #60 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

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.

post #61 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubernabei View Post

And besides, why do you personally care if Google infringes on Apple? Is your pension 100% invested in Apple shares? If it isn't, I bet a portion of the Large Cap portion of your 401k (or 403b) is invested in Samsung. 

 

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.

post #62 of 368

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.

 

:D

 

effing rotten apple.

post #63 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

And where is a NYT article to report this ruling? Is this not major news?

They're probably too busy preparing some other article full of lies about Apple, as they have done in the past.

post #64 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by GatorGuy
 
Google hasn't yet sued anyone...

 

 

Also, for what it's worth, Google has indeed sued someone, which also took a lot of chutzpah...

post #65 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post

... Apple basically can ban any Android smartphones infringing on the same patent.

As it should be. Innovate, don't recreate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdq2 View Post


Also, for what it's worth, Google has indeed sued someone, which also took a lot of chutzpah...

Google literally has dozens of pending lawsuits of which this is only one.
post #66 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

android isn't going anywhere so go take your meds.

 

That's probably exactly what RIM and Nokia said a few years ago too.

post #67 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post

or else Apple basically can ban any Android smartphones "infringing" on the same patent.

 

 

 

Now we're talking! That's the bigger picture, or I sure hope that it is. :)

 

Apple has enough money to sue everybody who deserves to get sued.

post #68 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos View Post

This is definitely a great win for our Apple family. The fandroids will be hurting real bad over this judgment.

It sure is, and they sure are. And it will also only get worse, I'm thrilled!

post #69 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post


It has already started unraveling:
Update: Reuters reports that Judge Koh, "scheduled a hearing on Monday to consider whether to put the Galaxy Nexus injunction on hold pending appeal." In a decision earlier this week, Koh also granted Apple a pre-trial ban on the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, and Koh said she might rule on Sunday whether to hold that injunction pending appeal.
So she made an decision, then quickly decided to reconsider.

 

Don't see this on Reuters website.

post #70 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

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.

Right. Their attitude is get someone on the board of another company and rip off all the IP you can.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #71 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdq2 View Post

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.

Could you possibly post info on the touch user interface and virtual keyboard Android had pre iPhone?
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #72 of 368

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).

post #73 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

 

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.

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.

http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2011/08/guest-post-google-is-packing-heat-with-sights-on-apple-1.html

 

http://www.seobythesea.com/2012/01/ibm-assigns-patent-filings-to-google/#more-7107

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.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #74 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post

It has already started unraveling:
Update: Reuters reports that Judge Koh, "scheduled a hearing on Monday to consider whether to put the Galaxy Nexus injunction on hold pending appeal." In a decision earlier this week, Koh also granted Apple a pre-trial ban on the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, and Koh said she might rule on Sunday whether to hold that injunction pending appeal.
So she made an decision, then quickly decided to reconsider.

Well, no.

A decision to stay the injunction pending appeal is not 'reconsidering'. Rather, it is "I made my decision, but I'm willing to wait to hear if the appeals court agrees before letting my decision go into effect."

Not that it matters. In the earlier Samsung case, the appeals court sent it back with a clear message that her refusal to issue an injunction was not acceptable. It's not like they're going to overturn it now.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #75 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


Right. Their attitude is get someone on the board of another company and rip off all the IP you can.

That only worked once. ;)

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #76 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdq2 View Post

 

 

Also, for what it's worth, Google has indeed sued someone, which also took a lot of chutzpah...

Thanks for pointing that out. I'll modify my statement then: Google has never sued any competitor.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #77 of 368

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. 

post #78 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Thanks for pointing that out. I'll modify my statement then: Google has never sued any competitor.

"Google sues tiny indie label"

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/06/google_sues_blues_label/

post #79 of 368

No that was posted in the original news articles along with the ban would be in effect as soon as Apple posted the $96 bond. It's very confusing i know 

post #80 of 368

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.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone