or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple injunction against Galaxy S III would give Samsung 'big problems'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple injunction against Galaxy S III would give Samsung 'big problems'

post #1 of 134
Thread Starter 
Apple's recent string of courtroom victories against rival Samsung are continued progress in the company's "thermonuclear war" against Android. Its next target: the latest flagship Android smartphone, Samsung's Galaxy S III.

Apple initially tried to halt sales of the Galaxy S III with an injunction before it launched in the U.S. last month, but failed to halt the stateside debut of Samsung's latest smartphone. However, the Galaxy S III remains a courtroom target for Apple, and a victory halting its sale would leave Samsung with "big problems on its hands," analyst Brian White of Topeka Capital Markets said in a note to investors on Monday.

Apple has found success in the courtroom by focusing on four patents, though its recent success with Judge Lucy Koh against Samsung has stemmed largely from U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604, for a "universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system." Koh found that Apple is "likely to suffer irreparable harm" for any infringement on the '604 patent. The other three patents cited by Apple are:
  • U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647 for a "system and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data."
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172 for a "method, system, and graphical user interface for providing word recommendations" or predictive text.
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721 for a system describing "unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image" or the "slide to unlock" function found on iOS device.

Galaxy


Last week, Apple won injunctions against both Samsung's Galaxy Nexus smartphone, and its Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet. White sees the victories as one step in Apple's lengthy battle against Android — a showdown he said the iPhone maker is "well prepared for," with $110.2 billion in net cash as of the second quarter of its fiscal year 2012.

Late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs vowed to biographer Walter Isaacson that his company would "destroy" Android, as he considered it to be a "stolen product." Jobs said he was "willing to thermonuclear war" and would have spent "every penny" that Apple had to "right this wrong."

While Apple's legal success against the Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy Tab 10.1 are important decisions, those devices are not major sellers at the same level as the newly released Galaxy S III. Samsung has already announced that it expects sales of the Galaxy S III to reach 10 million this month, even in the face of demand outstripping supply.

Apple failed to block the June 21 U.S. launch of the Galaxy S III because Koh said she couldn't fit the issue on her calendar on such short notice. The docket for the case between Apple and Samsung has become particularly crowded leading up to the official trial, which will begin at the end of this month.
post #2 of 134
That would be a shame. The SIII is a really nice looking phone for people that can palm a basketball.
post #3 of 134

Go go Apple :)

post #4 of 134

I can't palm a basketball but the phone fits nice in my hands - The iPhone 4s I own looks very puny screen wise as compared...

 

but both are great phones...

post #5 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by holmstockd View Post

I can't palm a basketball but the phone fits nice in my hands - The iPhone 4s I own looks very puny screen wise as compared...

 

but both are great phones...

 

I can palm a basketball and the 4s doesn't look "very puny screen wise" to me at all. If that very large phone "fits nice" in your hand(and pockets), but you can't palm a basketball, you just need more hand strength. That's all. ;-)

post #6 of 134

lol only meant each phone in each hand makes the standard 3.5 inch screen they use small...

 

Not sure if rumor is true but lets see how the 4inch they may produce will stand out.

post #7 of 134
Come on now, Samsung doesn't copy Apple!

454
post #8 of 134

They both copy each other (not to mention all the other manufacturers).  But this whole legal war has far exceeded asinine!  The only result from all of this will be bottlenecked innovation.  All these companies need to just get the F* over it and move on!

 

Very VERY good article IMO:

http://goo.gl/Yz5sw

post #9 of 134

Why is this even being mentioned because it's not going to happen.  Apple won't be able to stop the Galaxy S III from being sold.  And even if they did temporarily, it would probably be easy enough for Samsung or Google to make whatever changes are necessary in a relatively short time.  I'm willing to bet that most users wouldn't even care if changes were made.

post #10 of 134

InspiredBy.png

 

The hint is in the picture. Samsung calls it inspiration. Apple calls it stealing. The only thing I can see that is in any way related to 'nature' is the picture on the screen. When is the Galaxy S5 coming?

GalaxyIIIII.png or Galaxy5.png

 

Really Samsung. As a geek company whithout any afinity with design and inspiration you should not use such misleading words in advertising.

 

Sorry, couldn't help it.

Posted by the door post at the post office the post man posted his last post-millennial post card with a Penny Black postage stamp via the Royal Post.
Reply
Posted by the door post at the post office the post man posted his last post-millennial post card with a Penny Black postage stamp via the Royal Post.
Reply
post #11 of 134

Oh well. It coulda been Sammy doing that keynote in June 2007 and redefining the entire mobile industry.

 

Instead, it was, of course, Apple. And Apple never liked to license anything, but they *loved* to patent - from day 1 of the company. It's the product of supreme foresight. 

post #12 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Why is this even being mentioned because it's not going to happen.  Apple won't be able to stop the Galaxy S III from being sold.  And even if they did temporarily, it would probably be easy enough for Samsung or Google to make whatever changes are necessary in a relatively short time.  I'm willing to bet that most users wouldn't even care if changes were made.

Or not in this case as it is a tech issue and not a design one.

The only way for Samsung to quickly get out of this would have been to agree that said tech was part of Android that Google created, not them. So Apple should be suing Google not them. But that time has passed.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #13 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrakaJap View Post

They both copy each other (not to mention all the other manufacturers).  But this whole legal war has far exceeded asinine!  The only result from all of this will be bottlenecked innovation.  All these companies need to just get the F* over it and move on!

 

 

 

Why? There are billions of dollars at stake. This is what the courts are there for. 

post #14 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

. And Apple never liked to license anything, but they *loved* to patent - from day 1 of the company. It's the product of supreme foresight. 

It's the same with all companies.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #15 of 134

If it's a war on Android, why isn't Apple suing Google?

post #16 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrakaJap View Post

They both copy each other (not to mention all the other manufacturers).  But this whole legal war has far exceeded asinine!  The only result from all of this will be bottlenecked innovation.  All these companies need to just get the F* over it and move on!

Very VERY good article IMO:
http://goo.gl/Yz5sw

"Copy each other?" BS. Show us the evidence. Just because you can claim something nonsensical in an internet forum doesn't make it true or right.
post #17 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post

Come on now, Samsung doesn't copy Apple!
454

 

Right down to the connectors and packaging. Even the marketing campaign.

post #18 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post

If it's a war on Android, why isn't Apple suing Google?

This question must have been answered a million times already in many many forums.

Google makes no hardware (yet). Once Apple gets some wins from the implementation of Android in the commonly used hardware out there, they could, perhaps some day, go after Google, as the 'enabler.'
post #19 of 134
Why innovate when you can litigate?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #20 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647 for a "system and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data."
 

 

It's incredible that you can you patent something so vague as this. No wonder the system is in such a mess.

post #21 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post

Come on now, Samsung doesn't copy Apple!
454

When I see posts like this I feel sad that I waste too much time on AppleInsider standing on my soap box yelling the obvious. Well, I'm sure I'm sharpening my skills (or something) here, for future battles. Don't give up brotha.
post #22 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by holmstockd View Post

lol only meant each phone in each hand makes the standard 3.5 inch screen they use small...

 

Not sure if rumor is true but lets see how the 4inch they may produce will stand out.

 

Glad to see that some people have a sense of humor around here. My hat's off to you, sir.

post #23 of 134

Really.  We really want to live in a world in which predictive text or sliding to unlock any device is permanently patented to one company.  This stifles innovation.

 

By contrast, the tablet injunction was also based on look and feel (a lawyer for Samsung could not tell an iPad from the Samsung device at a distance in court in front of a judge).


The SIII is the first real challenger to the iPhone.  That is a good thing.  It forces Apple to innovate and improves the lives of everyone.  Creating monopolists is bad.


This reminds me of Amazon patenting "one click" purchases.  How is that good for market?

post #24 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

It's incredible that you can you patent something so vague as this. No wonder the system is in such a mess.

is that the complete definition of the patent and how it works?
post #25 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Why is this even being mentioned because it's not going to happen.  Apple won't be able to stop the Galaxy S III from being sold.  And even if they did temporarily, it would probably be easy enough for Samsung or Google to make whatever changes are necessary in a relatively short time.  I'm willing to bet that most users wouldn't even care if changes were made.

If they could've, they would've.

Moreover, this is not a game: the reputational consequences and negative stock market reaction could be huge.
post #26 of 134

Patenting One Click for Amazon, slide to unlock and autocorrecting text are very egregious as well.


This stifles innovation rather than supports it as it is hard to argue patenting such ideas leads to more innovation.


Look at Blackberry - the company may live forever just on patent royalties.

post #27 of 134

See the article.  

 

More generally - the MS Word had spell correct of a less aggresive type before the iphone ever existed, the one click amazon patent it tried to get would probably have invalidated purchases in iTunes.   What a horrible system....

post #28 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by sr2012 View Post


When I see posts like this I feel sad that I waste too much time on AppleInsider standing on my soap box yelling the obvious. Well, I'm sure I'm sharpening my skills (or something) here, for future battles. Don't give up brotha.

FWIW that Samsung booth image was dealt with here (and elsewhere) months ago. The back "logo" wall is not Samsung's. It's part of the store decor for Euronics, similar to a Best Buy here. Samsung's area is just a display dedicated to their products. The logo wall is Euronics'. I remember the thread well ;)

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/09/23/samsung_shop_features_apples_app_store_safari_icons_on_decorative_app_wall.html

 

EDIT: Something I had forgotten: Look at the very first post in that thread. Then the dozens of posts with various claims and insults that followed telling me how wrong I was. lol.gif


Edited by Gatorguy - 7/2/12 at 7:47am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #29 of 134
If Apple's goal is to truly go thermonuclear, this is a no-brainer. The Tab injunction was a laugher; the Nexus is also an aging, but more relevant device. If Apple could affect an injunction prior to the S III getting into the majority of consumers' hands, it would create a huge ding in Samsung's bottom line. I say "go for it."
Snarky Mac commentary, occasionally using bad words.
themacadvocate.com
Reply
Snarky Mac commentary, occasionally using bad words.
themacadvocate.com
Reply
post #30 of 134
I don't see any design patent or trademark that looks like any Apple product so any injunction would seem to be in regards to other aspects of the device which, to me, would put in the same category as pretty much every other Android-based phone or at least all Samsung Android phones. Because of that I'm going to say that I predict no injunction and that the SIII will continue to sell.

PS: Could the reason for the HW changes for the US market be to avoid such an injunction?

Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post

Come on now, Samsung doesn't copy Apple!

image: http://forums.appleinsider.com/image/id/170274/width/590/height/454

edit: Gatorguy has cleared it up on post #28.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #31 of 134

I don't have a problem with the design of the samsung s3.

In fact I think it is a beautiful, elegant almost feminine design that I'm sure appeals to most woman.

It will of course appeal to certain men also.

 

Never underestimate the strength of the 'pink pound'. It is a huge market and a very smart move by Samsung.

Grocery Stores FEAR Him
Reply
Grocery Stores FEAR Him
Reply
post #32 of 134
post #33 of 134
Quote:

Originally Posted by NYCMacFan View Post

We really want to live in a world in which predictive text or sliding to unlock any device is permanently patented to one company.  This stifles innovation.

 

I never understand the "this stifles innovation" argument.  No, it doesn't.  

 

Let's say Apple has patented a method to achieve a desired result.  If Samsung wants to do something similar and get a similar result without infringing Apple's patent they would have to innovate and come up with their own solution.

 

Patents don't stifle innovation, they encourage it.

 

If you see it differently, please explain.  I truly never understand that line of argument.

John
Reply
John
Reply
post #34 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

 

Instead, it was, of course, Apple. And Apple never liked to license anything, but they *loved* to patent - from day 1 of the company. It's the product of supreme foresight. 

 

Are you sure?  I'm not trying to be argumentative, but my recollection is that Apple's lack of focus on patents was part of why Apple lost the desktop wars to M$.  I thought in the early days, Jobs wasn't interested in patents, he wanted to focus on other things.  I believe the original, revolutionary Mac UI had few accompanying patents and it was only protected by relatively weak copyrights.  So the unhappy results of that war is part of today's story, i.e. it's part of the reason Apple put a lot of effort into patents when they introduced the equally revolutionary smart phone interface in 2007.

 

Can anyone confirm or correct this?

post #35 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCMacFan View Post

Really.  We really want to live in a world in which predictive text or sliding to unlock any device is permanently patented to one company.  This stifles innovation.

 

By contrast, the tablet injunction was also based on look and feel (a lawyer for Samsung could not tell an iPad from the Samsung device at a distance in court in front of a judge).


The SIII is the first real challenger to the iPhone.  That is a good thing.  It forces Apple to innovate and improves the lives of everyone.  Creating monopolists is bad.


This reminds me of Amazon patenting "one click" purchases.  How is that good for market?

You seem to define innovation as company A inventing something and being copied by company B, C and D, thus forcing company A to again invent something to keep ahead of companies B, C and D.

 

How about holding the copiers to a higher standard? Everyone copies features, and that is perfectly legal - what is not legal is copying the feature and the implementation without doing any work to originally implement the feature or improve it.

 

Samsung has been sued for trade dress violations, copyright violations and patent violations - you could argue that you see patents as "evil", but what about the trade dress issue? Should a company be able to knock off a products look, packaging, marketing, and accessories? 

post #36 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoradala View Post

Never underestimate the strength of the 'pink pound'. It is a huge market and a very smart move by Samsung.

And good for both men of pink persuasion and women, it vibrates! Zing!
post #37 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrakeX View Post

Samsung: We’re working on an Apple attack with Google.
http://bit.ly/MDkUAj

I'm so sick of Samsung!

Funny how more and more Google really looks like the Dr Evil behind all these machinations with HTC, Motorola and Samsung their puppets ~ you know the guys that get killed in the Bond movies while Dr Evil escapes in his private rocket.
post #38 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

FWIW that Samsung booth image was dealt with here (and elsewhere) months ago. The back "logo" wall is not Samsung's. It's part of the store decor for Euronics

The lame excuse of "it was store in the store display" didn't deal with it back then or now. There's an abundance of evidence that Samsung has blatantly copied Apple in an effort to deceive consumers thinking that they're getting an Apple like product - see:

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/09/28/no-comment-proof-that-samsung-shamelessly-copies-apple/
post #39 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

FWIW that Samsung booth image was dealt with here (and elsewhere) months ago. The back "logo" wall is not Samsung's. It's part of the store decor for Euronics, similar to a Best Buy here. Samsung's area is just a display dedicated to their products. The logo wall is Euronics'. I remember the thread well
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/09/23/samsung_shop_features_apples_app_store_safari_icons_on_decorative_app_wall.html

EDIT: Something I had forgotten: Look at the very first post in that thread. Then the dozens of posts with various claims and insults that followed telling me how wrong I was. lol.gif

In defense of the people in that post most Americans aren't used to that type of store setup where half-walls or different flooring can be the demarcation points between this Samsung-controlled shop and the Euronics store surrounding it. You asked good questions but I think the concept was just too atypical for most to grasp then. I've seen this in parts of Europe and Japan where each "area" has it's own employees with their own registers, but in the US the closest would probably be Best Buy with their Mac area or Target with their Starbuck area but even those are run by Best Buy and Target employees, respectively, to the best of my knowledge.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #40 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post

The lame excuse of "it was store in the store display" didn't deal with it back then or now. There's an abundance of evidence that Samsung has blatantly copied Apple in an effort to deceive consumers thinking that they're getting an Apple like product - see:
http://www.tuaw.com/2011/09/28/no-comment-proof-that-samsung-shamelessly-copies-apple/

I doubt he'd deny that Samsung brazenly copies Apple but on the topic of the App Store images being posted just outside the Samsung store area all evidence points to Samsung not having anything to do with that.


Can we get back on the original topic? What about the SIII is Samsung copying? What could Apple feasibly get an injunction for?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple injunction against Galaxy S III would give Samsung 'big problems'