or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › ITC judge: Samsung infringes on Apple touchscreen and design patents
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ITC judge: Samsung infringes on Apple touchscreen and design patents - Page 2

post #41 of 55

Thank whoever making this website, just to show how Scamsung rip off Apple as a whole.

Yep, it doesn't take a genius to see how you rip off Apple. Only the blind judges around the world

At least, in the U.S, Apple can get justice.

 

 

 

 

Source: http://samsungcopiesapple.tumblr.com/

 

 

Hey, you asked for it Samsung.

 

 

Okay, Samsung didn’t do this, Samsungs presidents brother did. And they sure as hell certified it for their products.

Smart Cover for iPa.. Galaxy Tab, anyone?

 

 

Samsung just loves Apples charger…

…infact they love it so much that they actually took it’s design.

 

 

iRemote Control 3GS

That’s atleast what they should have called it. Looks just like an iPhone 3g/s.

 

 

iRemote Control 4

Another Remote Control from Samsung. This time, iPhone 4 style.

 

For christ sake Samsung, did you just use App Store and Safari-icons in your Samsung Shop? You could just call it iShop!

 

A box of a Nexus S and an iPhone 3G…

 

… and here’s also a box of a Galaxy Tab net to an iPad.

 

Like the charger they did. Same thing, but black.

 

 

This Recording App looks familiar. I wonder why…

 

They just had to make it black and white.

 

If you can’t use iOS Google Maps on an Android, just photoshop it instead!

 

Samsung phoned me today, said they wanted to partner up with my blog to show their new stuff. (Nah, not really…)

 

It has been a while, however, that didn’t make Samsung stop ripping of Apple…

 

4 months later from the last post, Samsung makes a copy of the Mac Mini. I thought they would have started to get boring on copying. Turns out i was wrong!

 

Not like we’re suprised, they had to start copying OS X someday, right?

"Apple sells premium products at premium prices to premium customers." Cheapskates need not apply 

Reply

"Apple sells premium products at premium prices to premium customers." Cheapskates need not apply 

Reply
post #42 of 55

^^^

 

Blimey .... 1oyvey.gif

post #43 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post


Let's see:
 

 

Seriously, do you work for Samsung or something?

 

I ask, because I don't really see how anybody can defend every single one of those blatant ripoffs shown in all of those devastating photos.1smoking.gif

post #44 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I thought I read this morning another headline on some other site that Samsung didn't infringe on Apple's touchscreen patents. I don't recall if it mentioned ITC. DId I read that headline wrong or is there another case elsewhere on this issue?


Could this be the headline?:

 

 

Quote:

USPTO nixes Apple patent used in victory over Samsung

The office's action, which is non-final, rules that all 20 claims in Apple's rubber-banding patent are invalid. Now let's see what, if anything, Judge Koh has to say.

October 23, 2012 5:29 AM

Apple might have some trouble on its hands.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) yesterday ruled that all twenty claims included in Apple's so-called "rubber-banding" patent are invalid, according to Foss Patents' Florian Mueller, who first discovered the rejection.

 

For some strange reason, AI seems to be trying hard to ignore this news, not that the prospect of Apple's patent infringement win over Samsung being ruled invalid is anything noteworthy, of course.

post #45 of 55
What is so sad is that other companies have painted Apple as "having a reputation." Certainly Forbes can't wait to print some yellow journalism on them at least once a week.

Nobody follows all the lawsuits of other companies -- it's the curse of all the attention Apple gets now (I suppose closing in on $1 Trillion market cap is part of that).

Even on Slashdot, so many get it wrong -- that apple was suing over "rounded corners" when that was just a part of a detailed description of numerous things Samsung changed while they abandoned their "blackberry-like" design for the iPhone one. Meanwhile -- they were the Fab that was making money assembling iPhones. How tacky is that?

The "essential patents" that Samsung is abusing to charge Apple extra has seemed like a "tit-for-tat", but it's not the same thing at all. There are STANDARDS that companies have to rely on, otherwise phones don't work on networks. So a company that wants a standard, has to have a low cost way to sell it. Apple was paying the cost as attached to a chip they were buying, and didn't want to pay 2% of the entire device. If every component took that much, you'd have a 200% payout by the time you assembled the thing, and there aren't enough pieces to a pie when you are done to carve up the costs like that.

Well, at least the COURTS will be used to battle these issues -- not ill informed public opinion. Whatever the result, people will re-affirm that Apple is suing everyone for rounded corners, and being ridiculous -- because that's what all the pundits tell them.

Apple may have to start buying up needless ads to pay the "media protection racket" for some silence. Or maybe all these annoying ranters are having less of an impact on the market, because everyone is happy just to annoy the ranters, and buy a product they can depend on.
post #46 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


Could this be the headline?:

 

 

 

For some strange reason, AI seems to be trying hard to ignore this news, not that the prospect of Apple's patent infringement win over Samsung being ruled invalid is anything noteworthy, of course.

AI didn't ignore it. They ran a story on it yesterday.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #47 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

AI didn't ignore it. They ran a story on it yesterday.


I missed it.  I only look at my RSS feed drop down and it must have popped on and off it within a few hours.

post #48 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post


Well Samsung DIDN'T abandoned "blackberry-like" design in favor of the "touch screen" design, as a matter a fact Samsung didn't even abandoned other types of phone design. Here are some models released one year back for example:


- Blackberry-Like design (actually wide bar design):

Samsung Galaxy Y Pro Duos

Samsung Galaxy Chat


-Slide Side design

Samsung Galaxy Array

Samsung Galaxy Appeal

Samsung Intensity III


-Slide-Up design

Samsung E 2600


- Bar design

Samsung C3780...

Samsung E1200...


- Flip Design

Samsung C3520

Samsung W999
 

All of it likely copied. The others don't have the b411s or the resources to go after the company.

Btw, nice to see you earning your keep today. Just so you know, the many others like you that preceded you on this forum over the years have quietly run away with their tail between their legs.

You will too, when your sense of shame from losing face finally catches up with you.
post #49 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post


If it weren't for Christopher Columbus, you people ... use your imagination lol.gif



 

We wouldn't have the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico to go on vacations to.
"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 #50 of 55
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post
If it weren't for Christopher Columbus, you people ... use your imagination.

 

Lief Ericson. I don't see any Koreans discovering any continents, so I don't really get why you'd bring this up at all.


Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post
S3 iPhone 5 > if you cannot distinguish between those two you are utterly blind.

Smart Cover > few pieces of plastic clamped together - spare me.
Charger > Do they look similar? Like any box with round corners. Are they the same? No.
Remote Controll > piece of plastic and a wire? - spare me.
Safari-icons > you don't think these shops sell only galaxy phones?
Boxes > now what did you expect a pyramidal box? - spare me.
Charger > Samsung wins on design, Apple wins on simplicity.
USB > Standard.
Recording App > are you blind?
Color > Since when Apple owns colors.
Charger again ???
Mac mini > wow a box with rounded corners
Copying IOS?

 

Let's see… 

 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it. 

You don't get it.


I think that covers it.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #51 of 55
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post
Leif Ericson lived before Christopher Columbus so obvious he wouldn't matter.

 

… I think we've discovered the crux of our problem here. You don't think being first matters. Be it for OS' or continents.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #52 of 55
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post
You know that Native Americans ancestors came to American continent and de facto discovered it waaay before Leif and Columbus. From where? Yup from Asia, over the frozen Bering Strait.

 

But I don't live in the United States of Strelnikov. 

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #53 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Wouldn't South Korea just keep copying Japanese companies, as was—and remains—their primary modus operandi?

Apple is the company that copies Japanese companies. Or did you forget about that iPhone prototype that was based on "Sony Style". There was that one Apple employee that said the whole iPhone design changed after that sony style design. It was also sneaky how Apple made it so that one employee didnt have to testify in the San Jose case.

post #54 of 55
Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post
Do you really think these others actually ran away? 1oyvey.gif

 

Yes. Or we banned them because we got sick of allowing them to repeat the same lies long after they had been personally shown they were wrong using irrefutable data.


But primarily they really do just give up on their own when the numbers, the lawsuits, and the facts don't go their way.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #55 of 55

Apple win, Samescum appeal, it all goes round and round. Jeez it gets boring.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › ITC judge: Samsung infringes on Apple touchscreen and design patents