or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung exec calls legal battle with Apple 'a loss' for innovation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung exec calls legal battle with Apple 'a loss' for innovation - Page 2

post #41 of 74

Samsung make great products now? Not if my Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 is anything to go by - the screen is unresponsive (particularly close to the bezels), it suffers from lag despite having an equivalent speed processor and twice the ram of my ipad2 and in landscape mode, the keyboard virtually fills the screen making it difficult to see what you are typing.  Also, its battery life is not as good and the build quality is cheap.  Wish I had the iPad mini instead.

post #42 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

Samsunf's copying is shameless but theft is the wrong term for it. ...

 

No, theft is exactly the right word for it.

post #43 of 74

I have never understood how they can argue that innovation is being harmed by not being allowed to copy others. If anything it should drive innovation because when you are not allowed to copy from somebody else, you have to make your own solution, and thereby you are forced to innovate (or at least develop your own solutions, which hopefuly will lead to new and useful inventions).

Why are they allowed to get away with that argument without being challenged by the interviewer?

post #44 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by tryd View Post

I have never understood how they can argue that innovation is being harmed by not being allowed to copy others. If anything it should drive innovation because when you are not allowed to copy from somebody else, you have to make your own solution, and thereby you are forced to innovate (or at least develop your own solutions, which hopefuly will lead to new and useful inventions).

Why are they allowed to get away with that argument without being challenged by the interviewer?

I believe it's nigh impossible to create any new smartphone or tablet product today without someone claiming it infringes on someone else's IP. Often those claims turn out legitimized in the courtroom or by a licensing agreement between the parties. Whether you choose to call that use of someone else's IP theft, stealing, copying, unfair or simply an oversight it cane still end up as infringement. Every company, Apple included, does it. 

 

No doubt sometimes the infringing company has no idea of the "theft", whether by choice or by ignorance. Perhaps some don't like the IP holders licensing terms and choose to avoid it until their hand is forced. Others may be well aware that their product is using IP owned by someone else but make a business decision that the profit to be gained outweighs any penalty or licensing they might have to pay. Certainly there's times when a company is aware of another's claims but doesn't consider them valid in the first place and thus properly ignored. Calling one "stealing" and another justified is often a product of someone's opinion rather than facts.

 

A small newcomer with a great original idea may never see any success with their competitive product if they end up in the the crosshairs of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Motorola or some other large multi-national. Who could afford to take them on? A simple threat of litigation from one of those might be enough to abandon the idea. So yes, the high level of IP claims and lawsuits in the past couple of years probably does become a roadblock for innovation. If he doesn't come loaded with pockets full of money a small innovators only chance for a return on his investment may be to sell out to one of the big guns. As for the major players they just build their products and pay what they have to as needed. Lawyers and judgments are just normal business expenses. Just my opinion of course.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #45 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I believe it's nigh impossible to create any new smartphone or tablet product today without someone claiming it infringes on someone else's IP. Often those claims turn out legitimized in the courtroom or by a licensing agreement between the parties. Whether you choose to call that use of someone else's IP theft, stealing, copying, unfair or simply an oversight it cane still end up as infringement. Every company, Apple included, does it. 

No doubt sometimes the infringing company has no idea of the "theft", whether by choice or by ignorance. Perhaps some don't like the IP holders licensing terms and choose to avoid it until their hand is forced. Others may be well aware that their product is using IP owned by someone else but make a business decision that the profit to be gained outweighs any penalty or licensing they might have to pay. Certainly there's times when a company is aware of another's claims but doesn't consider them valid in the first place and thus properly ignored. Calling one "stealing" and another justified is often a product of someone's opinion rather than facts.

I hope Samsung pays you well for your shilling.

In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.

It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.
"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 #46 of 74

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/5/13 at 3:28pm
post #47 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


I hope Samsung pays you well for your shilling.

In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.

It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.

As I hope Apple pays you well for yours. /s

 

You sound silly and juvenile. I've said several times that Samsung "copied" Apple in many ways as you well know. They may still for that matter tho it's becoming less obvious. You didn't bother at all to address the points I really made in my post tho. Why?

 

I'd love to know if you believe that broadly written and issued software patents might be a hindrance to innovation in some cases rather than helping push the mobile industry forward. Do you have an opinion on that, which was the point of my post?


Edited by Gatorguy - 2/12/13 at 7:08am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #48 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

You mean this one?

 

Judge Finds No Willful Infringement of Apple Patents by Samsung

http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/judge-finds-no-willful-infringement-of-apple-patents-by-samsung

 

 

Did you actually read the article you posted?

 

At best, even if Samsung did not infringe wilfully, they still did what they did. Sometimes "unintentional stupidity due to a complete lack of creative ability" counts as an excuse. 

 

They're still on the hook for around a billion dollars. 

 

Also interesting, that a jury - some of which was made up of everyday consumers - concluded that Samsung are ripoff-artists. The general consensus has been, for at least the last 18 months if not more, that Samsung are ripoff-artists. This is obvious at the product level - from hardware design to even the packaging. Even Samsung's own lawyers made statements that insinuated the same. 

 

Samsung is probably one of the most notoriously corrupt and shameless copycats in the entire industry. it's in their DNA. Just like Apple has a certain "culture" in the way that it operates, so does Samsung. Samsung's culture:

 

 

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151659/samsung-takes-excluded-evidence-to-the-media-gets-reprimanded/40#post_2158987

 

 

^^^^^^^

Yeah. A golf bag.


Edited by Quadra 610 - 2/12/13 at 7:13am
post #49 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

During a panel at the D: Dive Into Media conference on Monday, Samsung Executive Vice President David Eun outlined a bold initiative to drive innovative thinking at the intersection of hardware and software

 

This talk of the "intersection of" sounds vaguely familiar... oh, right, Jobs talked about the intersection of technology and liberal arts.  He also talked about the marriage of hardware and software coming from the same company.

 

It's amazing how someone can talk about innovation and yet echo another person's words in the same breath.  Are they willfully ignorant, or just missing the part of the brain which allows for self-awareness?

 
Reply
 
Reply
post #50 of 74

What a load of crap.  Since when did making your product barely distinguishable from your competitor become "innovation"?

 

I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude too on whether these "innovation centers" Samsung is planning turn out to be "imitation centers".


Edited by tundraboy - 2/12/13 at 7:13am
post #51 of 74

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/5/13 at 3:28pm
post #52 of 74
Samsung exec calls legal battle with Apple a 'loss' for copying Inovation.
post #53 of 74
I
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post


No need to visit Steve and tell him that. Apple tried to buy Palm, but was outbid by HP. Apparently, Apple was going to run Palm as an independent subsidiary to compete directly in the keyboard segment against RIM. 

I know they were in there. I mean pull out all stops. Maybe stop hp by showing them they don't actually make any money with it.
post #54 of 74
The argument that Apple never invents anything so therefore everyone should be able to copy Apple's ideas, trade dress, etc. at least admits that others are copying Apple. These people therefore conclude that Apple is wrong to sue anyone for copying. That copying is the supposed to encourage (rather than discourage) innovation, which is opposite to the spirit of the patent system.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #55 of 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post

They can't even innovate enough to come up with their own catch phrases.  They say they are "Doubling Down"  Their meeting goes:  We are going to really innovate. Since Apple is doubling down on secrecy, we will have to double down on spying, I mean innovation!

They missed out on the focusing though. Apple is laser-focused, which is better than normal focusing.

There's a video here:

http://allthingsd.com/20130211/samsung-david-eun-diveintomedia/

Kara's a bit of a mess as usual but she goes for the jugular on the Apple stuff so kudos for that.

Samsung talked about "It’s not just about putting software onto hardware. It’s about a thoughtful integration between the two" and they want to get closer to multiple devices that "just work" together. It's like something we've never seen before.

I actually thought the Samsung exec was quite professional and rational during the interview but he hasn't been working at Samsung very long so maybe that'll change.

It would be hard being in Samsung's position as both a key supplier and primary competitor to another company. As he says, they make money from every iPhone sold - that phrase is a little shocking when it's put out there because Apple can't say the same thing in reverse. Samsung wins on both fronts as long as they remain an Apple supplier so there's an incentive to stay on their good side.
post #56 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesmall View Post

Samsung steals technology from Apple and then they call it innovation. How utterly ridiculous.

 

What, microsoft has been doing it from the beginning.  Steals everything from others and calls it innovation.  

You don't want to make me curmudgeon, you would not like me when I am curmudgeon.  I go all caps, bold, with a 72PT font and green lettering.  

Reply

You don't want to make me curmudgeon, you would not like me when I am curmudgeon.  I go all caps, bold, with a 72PT font and green lettering.  

Reply
post #57 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

If it makes Samsung come up with more of their OWN designs and fewer Apple-clone designs, then it's a win for innovation, choice, and competition.

If it fails to achieve that, then yes, a loss.

Not really a loss. Just the status quo Samsung was not innovating (in the mobile phone market anyway) prior to the lawsuit.
post #58 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


Samsung talked about "It’s not just about putting software onto hardware. It’s about a thoughtful integration between the two" and they want to get closer to multiple devices that "just work" together. It's like something we've never seen before..

Coming from an Android licensee who dumps features left and right into their phones to win a paper checklist war?

Soon, Samsung will be saying they want to be at the intersection of technology and liberal arts. Or something that essentially means the same.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #59 of 74
Originally Posted by bwik View Post
Apple should have taken a different tack.  Instead of saying Galaxies were _like_ Apple products, Apple should have asserted that galaxies _were_ Apple products.

 

There's probably a legal requirement that disallows them from saying that. Or, rather, that claiming one instead of the other would be able to hold up in court.


Originally Posted by TBell View Post
Apparently, Apple was going to run Palm as an independent subsidiary to compete directly in the keyboard segment against RIM. 

 

That sounds like the opposite of anything Apple would do.


Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post
At best, even if Samsung did not infringe wilfully, they still did what they did. Sometimes "unintentional stupidity due to a complete lack of creative ability" counts as an excuse. 

 

Hey, can that decision be challenged? Because a person would have the IQ of a box turtle if they're stupid enough to think that Samsung didn't willfully infringe.

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 #60 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel View Post

Not really a loss. Just the status quo Samsung was not innovating (in the mobile phone market anyway) prior to the lawsuit.

A few years ago, Hyundai ran a commercial for the their SUV which directly compared it to the Lexus RX. The two SUVs were parked next to each other and a woman gets into the wrong one. The tune playing in the background was "Anything you can do (I can do better)." Which is what the Korean brands think of themselves. Samsung and Hyundai are the two largest Korean companies. They brashly flaunt their copying, except in court.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #61 of 74

They innovated nothing the Android OS is provided by google, the only innovation is the kind of double speak that they spew out.

post #62 of 74

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/5/13 at 3:28pm
post #63 of 74
%u201CWe%u2019re doubling down on software innovation, particularly software that will enhance our products,%u201D


This is GOLD! Samsung execs even steal Apple phraseology!
post #64 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio View Post

This talk of the "intersection of" sounds vaguely familiar... oh, right, Jobs talked about the intersection of technology and liberal arts.  He also talked about the marriage of hardware and software coming from the same company.

 

It's amazing how someone can talk about innovation and yet echo another person's words in the same breath.  Are they willfully ignorant, or just missing the part of the brain which allows for self-awareness?

 

It helps to know computer history.   Jobs himself got many of his thoughts and phrases from others.  

 

For example, "People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware" originally came from Alan Kay, who advocated tablet computers back in the late 1960s, and later worked at Apple for a while.

 

The "intersection of technology and arts" is a speech theme that dates at least back a decade, if not two or three.

 

However, these things are worth repeating by anyone.

post #65 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

It helps to know computer history.   Jobs himself got many of his thoughts and phrases from others.  

 

For example, "People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware" originally came from Alan Kay, who advocated tablet computers back in the late 1960s, and later worked at Apple for a while.

 

The "intersection of technology and arts" is a speech theme that dates at least back a decade, if not two or three.

 

However, these things are worth repeating by anyone.

 

Yup, I know all about Alan Kay -- brilliant man, and definitely a huge influence on Jobs.  Apple should have tried to hire him out of PARC a long time before they finally did (in 1984).

 

The thing with Jobs is that, even if all the ideas weren't his own, he definitely understood and conveyed the profound meaning of them.  With Samsung, it just feels like they are regurgitating a mish-mash of slogans.  I dunno if it's lost in translation, or they need to do some LSD and let the concepts soak in a bit more, but it just feels contrived to me.

 
Reply
 
Reply
post #66 of 74
Dear David,

Do some REAL innovation and you won't have to worry about Apple patents!
post #67 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

In this case, it wasn't accidental. Not only did the Tab look so much like the iPad that Samsung's attorneys couldn't tell the difference, 

 

If you're going to use that story, at least be accurate.  One attorney -- an older woman --  said she couldn't tell them apart from a distance.  Another attorney seated further behind her immediately spoke up with the correct answer.

 

but Samsung's internal documents indicate that they specifically set out to copy the iPhone. They had a long list of things that they needed to change to make their phones copy the iPhone.
 
That document mostly listed generic ways to improve without copying, and in fact pointed out that some parts looked too much like Apple's design and should be changed.
 
LIkewise, Apple clearly has looked at things like Notifications pulldowns from other companies, and decided their way needed improving as well.   Heck, we know for a fact that they decided to make a mini iPad after using a Samsung 7" tablet.
 
All companies do reviews and comparisons.
 
It was a clear, deliberate decision to copy Apple's IP. Unfortunately, they're going to get away with it - they've made far more from their blatant copies than any fine will remedy.
 

It was a clear, deliberate decision to get as close as possible to the same look and feel without anything being an exact copy.   However, they still got too close.

post #68 of 74

A timely opinion piece from the respected Mercury News today.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_22565075/jon-potter-software-patent-trolls-can-be-stopped

 

 

"Few topics leave app developers and startups as frustrated as software patents. Gather app developers and publishers, and within minutes one will ask, "Have you received a patent infringement letter yet?" Then they tell varying versions of the same story.

An app gains a little notoriety or market share, and soon after receives a letter from a patent holding company (aka "troll") claiming that the app is infringing the troll's patent and requesting payment of a licensing fee. The letter identifies the patent, but it covers extraordinarily broad technology that could relate to virtually any app, website, or software.

When the app developer calls the troll for more details about the alleged infringement, the answer is chilling: that information will only be shared in the litigation discovery process. The developer's choices are to either pay the troll or hire lawyers and prepare for a financially devastating, time-consuming and distracting legal battle.

It sounds like extortion. But that is how our patent system works.

While app developers are angry with the trolls, they are also frustrated, rightly, with their government. The patent system was created to promote innovation and protect entrepreneurs. But in the trenches of the app development industry, people are intimidated and angered. App developers and entrepreneurs, the very people whom the patent system should protect, now consider software patents as inhibiting -- rather than promoting -- innovation . . ."

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #69 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

That document mostly listed generic ways to improve without copying, and in fact pointed out that some parts looked too much like Apple's design and should be changed.
 
LIkewise, Apple clearly has looked at things like Notifications pulldowns from other companies, and decided their way needed improving as well.   Heck, we know for a fact that they decided to make a mini iPad after using a Samsung 7" tablet.
 
All companies do reviews and comparisons.

 

So Sammy can produce 132 page doc comparing its smartphones to other Android competitors? It's amazing that its "future" designs look so similar to the iPhone. It's pure bunk that it was coincidental. Not only that, Sammy has a habit of copying: witness the Blackjack.

 

And you bring up a 7" tablet, but Apple didn't do a 132 page presentation. They said, let's see if we can shrink the 10" original iPad into a smaller form factor rather than let's see if we can copy what Sammy has with a 7" tablet.

post #70 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

So Sammy can produce 132 page doc comparing its smartphones to other Android competitors? It's amazing that its "future" designs look so similar to the iPhone. It's pure bunk that it was coincidental. Not only that, Sammy has a habit of copying: witness the Blackjack.

 

I agree about the Blackjack.  

 

As for comparison docs, I've done my share of them.  Samsung's was not about direct copying.  It was about getting the same kind of experience.  And it wasn't even done until 2010, three years after the iPhone came out.  They were in no rush to compare.

Quote:
And you bring up a 7" tablet, but Apple didn't do a 132 page presentation. They said, let's see if we can shrink the 10" original iPad into a smaller form factor rather than let's see if we can copy what Sammy has with a 7" tablet.

 

We have no idea what docs Apple did internally.  

 

We do know that Apple, when designing the iPhone, took looking at other companies' designs to an entirely new level, by going so far as to commission an internal mockup of what a Sony designed smartphone might look like.  

 

After it was done, they then decided that parts of it looked better than Apple's iPod derived designs, so they took some inspiration from the Sony mockup.

 

This influence was not allowed to be told to the jury in the California trial.


Edited by KDarling - 2/12/13 at 8:11pm
post #71 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

I agree about the Blackjack.  

As for comparison docs, I've done my share of them.  Samsung's was not about direct copying.  It was about getting the same kind of experience.  And it wasn't even done until 2010, three years after the iPhone came out.  They were in no rush to compare.

We have no idea what docs Apple did internally.  

We do know that Apple, when designing the iPhone, took looking at other companies' designs to an entirely new level, by going so far as to commission an internal mockup of what a Sony designed smartphone might look like.  

After it was done, they then decided that parts of it looked better than Apple's iPod derived designs, so they took some inspiration from the Sony mockup.

This influence was not allowed to be told to the jury in the California trial.

Inspiration is fine. Copying is not. Apple created a mock up of what a Sony phone would look like. Sony didnt produce a similar phone nor did Apple produce and sell the mockup.
post #72 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

My selfless wish...

If I had a time machine, I would relentlessly attempt to persuade Steve to aggressively treat his cancer using modern medicine from day-one of his diagnosis.

I could be greedy and add to the 4000 shares of AAPL I bought at a split-adjusted ~$4.25/share when Steve became interim CEO in the late '90s.....but I'm happy with what I have.

I just wish we still had Steve. Lord knows how much more our lives would be enriched by his vision.

+1000

...and just wanted to comment on your signature: I thought you just left the "AB" part of it out 1smoking.gif
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #73 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

It's similar to what Microsoft is starting to do by coming out with their own product designs to compete with their OS OEM customers.

Which is the Apple way. Is it not in Microsoft's (or Samsung's) best interest to do what works best for this space? Mobile isn't the desktop wars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I just won't buy ANYTHING with the Samsung label on the outside.  They can make components all they want, but if the product has Samsung's name on it, I will simply not buy it.  They aren't the only game in town for their other products like household appliances and TVs. They aren't the best either.  Plus they resort to desperate sales tactics by handing out spiff checks to sales reps, misleading advertising campaigns, and just simple backstabbing.

Same here. It is actually what caused my wife to move from feature phone to an iPhone. The only Verizon feature phone she liked was a Samsung. I vetoed it, and she has a 4S. My TV and the monitor on my mini are Samsung. And to be honest? We bought a Samsung baby monitor. I returned that the next day, and it made me realize something that all my Samsung products share. Blinking displays. It would fade in and out brightness wise. The same exact thing happens with my monitor and TV. And that is all the software for the brightness sensors, which would imply Samsung work, no?
post #74 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

No, theft is exactly the right word for it.

Nope. You're responding emotionally rather than rationally.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung exec calls legal battle with Apple 'a loss' for innovation