UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad - Page 5

It will be appealed. And, the more this keeps up and the more time it takes, the more forcefully it will remind people that Samsung is a cheap copier, a failed one at that (in tablets).

Don't regurgitate this tired, old, nonsense.

Yet I'm sure he is much more respected that some keyboard warrior on a internet forum such as yourself. What have you accomplished in your life?

Why because you can't argue with facts?

While I'm sure you are absolutely correct about the newspaper libel cases, the difference here is that Apple has not been sued for libel (or slander, which I think is what is implied here). Are you suggesting that if you lose a civil case in British courts then you are, by definition, guilty of defamation for bringing it in the first place, and, even worse, will be penalized proactively by the judge in that case, without any need for an action by the successful defendant? I don't believe that is a correct interpretation of British law.

 

There were touchscreen phones before the iPhone. There were high-res displays before the iPad 3 and Retina MBP. There were laptops before the Macbook Air. Blah blah blah.

 

You claim Apple's patents are vague, but your comments are vague as well. Only reason I can think of is you're trying to troll again instead of actually having a reasonable discussion.

Could they just say "iPad. Nothing else comes close." without mentioning Samsung?

You're right! They're like deer caught in headlights ... SpamSandwich, fedarooney, gone forever, too! It's almost too easy :-)

Your Funny 'fact' is wrong. Apple was not the first to integrate USB into their computers. A number of other manufacturers offered USB at the time.

Apple MAY have been the first to drop serial and parallel ports (or, in Apple's case, ADB ports) and rely exclusively on USB, but that's quite different than what you claimed. You might also argue that they popularized USB (within weeks after the iMac's launch, almost everyone was selling bondi blue keyboards and mice), but again, they were not the first to use USB.

Of course, your other 'fact' is also not correct. The iPad was not the first computer-like device to drop USB. Apple's Newton used Apple's 8 pin serial port instead of USB. There were other PDAs that did not use USB, as well.

More likely because he is tired of arguing with nonsense.

You were saying?

 

 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/us-freedom-of-speech-reforms-target-australian-libel-laws/story-e6frg6nf-1225884947059

 

What facts are you talking about exactly?  You mean the convertible tablet/laptops on the market before the iPad.  Yes, you're right.  Apple copied them lock stock and barrel.  And let's not give Apple any credit for the mouse or the personal computer or a GUI - because, well because they are Apple and we don't like them.  I mean the facts don't prove anything.  And any anecdotal or assumptive arguments about Samsung copying Apple are complete rubbish.  Samsung's products that look like Apple products released before them are purely coincidental.  And to top that off, it doesn't even matter if they copied Apple, because, well because what other shape would a phone or tablet have...

 

the key word here is "from a distance".  After examining the product, it was clear it was not an ipad.  Did you really think it was an ipad because it looked identical to the ipad, or because the VAST majority of tablets that anyone will see anywhere are iPads.  From a distance, all touch-screen tablets are going to have a similar design.  There's a big screen that you touch, a headphone jack, a possible volume control button, and likely a button or two that have to be on the edge of the case (where else would you click it?)  From the same distance, all cars of the same size can start to look the same.  Look at the average dashboard of a car... The layout is very similar from one car to another .. . not because of blatant copying, but because people expect this to be the case.  Of course, cars are much bigger, and have many more externally visible features than a tablet, so they will look less similar. 

 

Seeing lawsuits like this, it is clear that apple wants the courts to crush all of their competition (if this design patent holds up, very few tablets will ever be allowed because from 15 feet away (especially when turned off), they're going to look identical (at least from the front).   I'm sorry, but there's only so many ways to arrange a screen.  

 

Despite the fact that I've loved the apple ecosystem in the past, apple's actions regarding their competitors, and their sheer arrogance as they've grown into the behomouth that they are make me hesitant to purchase more apple products.  Sadly, the competition has failed to really offer compelling products, but hopefully that will start to change.  It's not that different from the days when MS windows was your only option for a computer.

 

Phil

So Phil, I've asked this before of others and I'm curious to know what your response would be.  If you had designed a product and patented the design - then went to a manufacturer to source parts for this product, then months later see this company's product come to market looking suspiciously like your product that they supplied parts for - how would you feel and what would you do?  Would you simply shrug your shoulders and say they can just do whatever they want?

 

As a patent holder myself, I will defend my patents against any and all infringement - which is something you have to do if you want to maintain your patent.

Look at what I was replying to...why bother?

Then why bother to reply at all?

Where did I say "Apple copied them lock stock and barrel."? I simply said there were tablets before Apple came out with the iPad. 

 

I do agree that the iPad is the better than anything before it, in fact I own a iPad 3, but to say they invented the tablet is simply not true. You should take the emotion out of your post and just look at the facts.

Edited by fredaroony - 7/18/12 at 3:40pm

I could say the same to you... It's common knowledge that there were tablets before Apple came out with the iPad. Its this fact that seems to escape many in here.

Excuse me? This isn't about comparison shopping. If you were comparison shopping, you'd KNOW to look and see if they were different.  It's theft of look and feel with the intent to confuse the potential novice purchaser. Key word is NOVICE. And when the iPad first came out, that meant everyone, since there was nothing comparable on the market.

 

Nice try. No cigar.

The claim that others (i.e. Samsung) copied the iPad is not predicated on the assumption that Apple invented the tablet. It is based on the observation that Apple created a quite new and different tablet, that was then substantively copied.

You could say the same, but it would not make any sense. As for your actual point, see my previous post.

You are correct. When the iPad came out, there was literally nothing comparable on the market. Hence, a look-alike would have intentionally been meant to attract a novice buyer - which practically everyone was at the time!

Now that is libelous.

Apple doesn't need to apologize or say Samsung didn't copy the iPad.
They must say that the court ruled Samsung did not copy the iPad.
Edited by Chris_CA - 7/18/12 at 4:48pm

But the judge did not rule Apple should apologize or state that Samsung did not copy them.
"The notice should outline the July 9 London court decision that Samsung’s Galaxy tablets don’t infringe Apple’s registered designs, Judge Colin Birss said today."
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-18/apple-must-publish-notice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html

 

Really?

 

That judge is a bigger tosser than the one who sent my ancestor to this country in 1788, what a wally.

 

London Olympics here I come.

 

Heading to the old dart courtesy of an old fart.

 

PS What clothing should I pack for sitting in a bog in the drizzle drinking warm lager?

Many of us would thank you profusely if you didn't. Bother, that is.

So what the heck was your point then?

 

Forget it. Rhetorical question.

Thank you for elevating the discussion.ᵢ

Oh no, some internet tough guy has hurt my feelings. Didn't think you had anything of any real value to add.

What exactly have you added of any value at all?

 

 

Indeed. This is AppleInsider. Fact have no place here. (i kid... i kid).

 

But seriously you're right, every flat panel TV and PC monitor looks the same. I couldn't tell a Samsung from a Sony or ViewSonic. Why don't these companies sue each other? I can't even think of who was first (Sony?).

 

The injunction on the sale of Tabs was reversed, the case is still proceeding through the courts.

 

No-one really wants them much anyway.

wasn't jonathan ive just knighted?  doesn't that mean anything?

You know the sales figures for Australia or are you just making up things as usual?

So when did Apple put anything on their website or in the papers claiming Samsung copied the iPad design? So why in the world would they be required to do that now saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad? I don't remember Apple being convicted of libel.

For a bunch of thoroughly fact-free posts -- which is all you've done in this thread (I haven't had the stomach to look up your past posts, but I think I have a fairly decent idea) -- you sure do throw your weight around, internet guy! 

lol keep making my point for me champ!

At least partly because those companines don't have the design or technology patents on which to base such an action.

Whether or not Apple should have been granted some of their patents is a reasonable, but moot, question. The patents were granted and Apple would be negligent if they did not defend them, especially since it is pretty clear to many people (but not all - obviously) that Apple single-handedly created the current tablet market (and were ridiculed for it at the outset by much of the industry - which rather devalues the argument that it was obvious and would have happened anyway) and their hardware and software were subsequently largely copied when it became apparent that they were, after all, successful.

What "point"? The fact that Apple had to post as bond some pathetic, deeply-embarrassing-to-Samsung sum of money to compensate for lost sales of the Tab (in the US), in the event of a judgment against it? What makes you think that Australia could be any different, mate? Any remotely relevant evidence you can cite?

 

C'mon, at the end of the day, it is a rather sad product that you and your kind are defending. If that gives you the jollies, carry right on!

Edited by anantksundaram - 7/18/12 at 6:00pm