or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

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

post #161 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Well the judge didn't....

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).

post #162 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

There were tablets way before Apple released the iPad though. It's not like their design is particularly unique.

Don't regurgitate this tired, old, nonsense.

post #163 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Stuff like this makes "British justice" an oxymoron.

 

What a foolish, laughable judge!

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?

post #164 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Don't regurgitate this tired, old, nonsense.

Why because you can't argue with facts?

post #165 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by artistry View Post

No it isn't.

Newspapers do it as a result of a voluntary code, and occasionally as the result of losing a libel case. But "quite common" is a bit of a stretch. I can't think of one example. Presumably you have many?

You have no idea what you're talking about. Barely a month goes by without someone suing one or more of the newspapers for libel. I'm not saying they always win but if they do they usually have to publish an apology. Nothing to do with that waste of space PCC voluntary code which has been shown to be a sham by the Leveson Inquiry.

I suppose the last big one I can think of is Christopher Jefferies successfully suing a number of newspapers for libel last year over the Joanna Yates murder. I guess you don't remember that case - it is was only the lead news story for days across TV and the Press here. I'm sure I could find a lot more celebrity cases if I could be bothered to Google it but I'll leave that to you.

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.
post #166 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Why because you can't argue with facts?

 

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.

post #167 of 301
Could they just say "iPad. Nothing else comes close." without mentioning Samsung?
post #168 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Today is a great day for adding trolls to the ignore list, you are all out in the open.

You're right! They're like deer caught in headlights ... SpamSandwich, fedarooney, gone forever, too! It's almost too easy :-)
post #169 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

A Funny fact: Apple was the very first company to integrate USB ports on their computers. They were the first to also NOT include them on a "computer", the iPad. .

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.
"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 #170 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Don't regurgitate this tired, old, nonsense.
Why because you can't argue with facts?

More likely because he is tired of arguing with nonsense.
post #171 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

And that too, speech outside Britain? Good luck trying.

 

I was laughing my a** off at that post. He's off his rocker.


You were saying?

 

 

Quote:
Legislation to protect its citizens from British libel laws will be voted on this week by a Senate judiciary committee in the US. The bill was drawn up after a series of high-profile cases in which American writers and publishers have been successfully sued in the High Court in London after just a few copies of their books or articles were sold in Britain or read on the internet.

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

 

lol.gif

post #172 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Why because you can't argue with facts?

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...

post #173 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical View Post

 

When I first saw a Galaxy Tab from a distance, I thought for a moment it was an iPad… then immediately thought, oh, something's weird with that one (because it seemed longer, due to its 16:9 dimensions). Other than that, it and their nexus phone could both be mistaken for Apple products at a glance. 

 

That kind of blatant copying of design and finishing style is now OK apparently……? "look-alike" products, not a problem, eh?

 

SO what's the point of a trademark, copyright or patent then?

 

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

post #174 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by philgar View Post

 

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.

post #175 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

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.

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

post #176 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

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

Then why bother to reply at all?
post #177 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post

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...

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
post #178 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Then why bother to reply at all?

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.

post #179 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by philgar View Post
the key word here is "from a distance".  After examining the product, it was clear it was not an ipad.

Phil

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.

post #180 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post

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...
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. 

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.
post #181 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Then why bother to reply at all?
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.

You could say the same, but it would not make any sense. As for your actual point, see my previous post.
post #182 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


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 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!

post #183 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rennaisance View Post

 

But is it? Samsung is a friend to the British people. Just yesterday, they bailed out one of our struggling tech companies, CSR, to the tune of £200M.

 

And now, a judge rules that Apple must apologise for falsely accusing Samsung of copying their designs.

 

Do not think these two events are unconnected - "justice" sometimes works in mysterious ways.


Now that is libelous.

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #184 of 301
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
post #185 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rennaisance View Post

And now, a judge rules that Apple must apologise for falsely accusing Samsung of copying their designs.
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
post #186 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

Before you go making anymore disgraceful statements, are you aware that the British libel laws extend to online forums? Any statement made on here can be used in a court case against you. People have been taken to court in the UK for making libellous statements on Twitter, Facebook and online forums like this. And don't think your anonymity is of any use. The court can make the website reveal your identity.

 

Alternatively the Judge can simply find you in contempt of court for showing disrespect for the Judge and throw you in prison without trial. British Judges have a lot of power.

 

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?

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #187 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

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

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

post #188 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

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.

So what the heck was your point then?

 

Forget it. Rhetorical question.

post #189 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

I don't know why don't f u c k off and go somewhere else instead if you're that bothered because you certainly aren't welcome here

Thank you for elevating the discussion.ᵢ

post #190 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

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

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

post #191 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Thank you for elevating the discussion.ᵢ

What exactly have you added of any value at all?

post #192 of 301
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarquisMark View Post

 

That's the thing about design patents that always confuses me. Since you make a car analogy, I have a couple examples: A Chrysler 300m looks like Bentley, Hyundai Genesis looks a lot like a Mercedes Benz, Honda NSX looks like a Ferrari. I'd say those are just as similar as the iPad is to the Galaxy. Why don't we see a lot more of these suits?

 

IANAL so just trying to understand.

 

Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post
 

 

DARN IT!!!!

 

STOP WITH THE FACTS ALREADY! We don't take kindly to those around here.

 

But i must say, to me the genesis says more Acura than mercedes. Also, see the f430 and mclaren mp4-12

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01771/McLaren-MP4-12C-1_1771192b.jpg

http://lasvegasnevadaexoticcarrentals.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/ferrari-f430-las-vegas.jpg

 

Not to mention that pretty much every post-war car resembled each other.

 

But even more than that, I still can't tell the difference between two HDTV's, they all look alike (will be interesting to see how Apple can make a non-rectangular, sharp edged TV)

And is it me, or do Ferragamo wingtips look like a copy of Gucci wingtips?

 

If i was Ferragamo, I would sue the snot out of Gucci. I mean, Ferragamo cannot be the developer of the shoe world. They are all for innovation, but they can not allow competitors to steal their ideas.

 

 

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?).

I own...

1 Android Phone, 2 iPads, 1 Nook reader, 1 Mac Desktop, 1 Windows Laptop, 1 Linux Server, 1 FireTV

 

They all are used regularly and each have their place. Competition is good.

Reply

I own...

1 Android Phone, 2 iPads, 1 Nook reader, 1 Mac Desktop, 1 Windows Laptop, 1 Linux Server, 1 FireTV

 

They all are used regularly and each have their place. Competition is good.

Reply
post #193 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

It was reversed in Australia.....

 

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

 

No-one really wants them much anyway.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #194 of 301

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

post #195 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

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

 

No-one really wants them much anyway.

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

post #196 of 301
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.
post #197 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

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

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! 

post #198 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

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!

post #199 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarquisMark View Post


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?).

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.
post #200 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

lol keep making my point for me champ!

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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad