or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple and Samsung identify all infringing devices in Galaxy Nexus patent case
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple and Samsung identify all infringing devices in Galaxy Nexus patent case

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 
In a pair of filings with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Friday, Apple and Samsung detailed the scope of their respective assertions for an upcoming patent suit scheduled to start proceedings in 2014.

The two documents identify in list and table form the alleged infringed patents and respective devices associated with each violation each party is claiming, including the two companies' flagship handsets, Apple's iPhone 5 and Samsung's Galaxy S III. Both compaies have been adding products to what is known as the Galaxy Nexus dispute since Apple first filed the formal complaint in February 2012.

Samsung Products
Sample of Apple's identifier list. | Source: U.S. District Court


Apple is asserting a total of eight utility patent infringement claims against 23 Samsung products. As noted in the filing, only four of the Korean company's devices were part of the Apple v. Samsung jury trial that resulted in a $1.05 billion verdict against Samsung.

As for Samsung, the company is asserting Apple infringed upon three of its patents with certain iPhone, iPad, iPod and Mac models. The filing also mentions five other patents that are not currently being considered by the court.

Presiding Judge Lucy Koh said on Thursday that she was considering putting a hold on the case until an appeals court handed down a ruling pertaining to the first suit. The appeal was lodged by Apple in connection with Judge Koh's denial to ban certain Samsung handsets following the Apple v. Samsung trial.

"I just don't know if we really need two cases on this," Judge Koh said, suggesting that the two companies' ongoing litigation elsewhere in the U.S. and the world could cover both California complaints.

For its part, Apple noted that none of the patents in the Galaxy Nexus case overlap with the jury trial, an important point of consideration if the upcoming suit is to move forward. Samsung, however, disagreed and said there was enough overlap to substantiate a suspension of the second suit.

Judge Koh has given Apple and Samsung until March 7 to submit official statements regarding the matter before she decides whether to postpone the case. Currently, the Galaxy Nexus dispute is slated to start proceedings in March 2014.



post #2 of 51
First!

Apple can only litigate?
Why don't they direct their effort towards innovation?




/s
post #3 of 51

I'm sick and tired of this back and forth bickering just like everyone else.  However, I truly believe that Samsung was doing this since day one knowing they can just drag it out in court, make a mockery of the process, and make the bucks off of Apple's hard work.

I truly want Samsung to get the hammer dropped on them.  Bunch of slimy bottomfeeders they are.  Not just in electronics, but pretty much everything else too.  Just ask the German appliance makers how Samsung rips off their tech too.

post #4 of 51
In all honesty I have to comment Samsung on their forward thinking by naming one of their phones "Exhibit II"
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #5 of 51

Why the chart?

 

All infringing devices are marked with the following:

 

post #6 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I'm sick and tired of this back and forth bickering just like everyone else.  However, I truly believe that Samsung was doing this since day one knowing they can just drag it out in court, make a mockery of the process, and make the bucks off of Apple's hard work.

I truly want Samsung to get the hammer dropped on them.  Bunch of slimy bottomfeeders they are.  Not just in electronics, but pretty much everything else too.  Just ask the German appliance makers how Samsung rips off their tech too.

And Apple has the money.  They aren't going any where.  I honestly think Sammy is gonna lose.  But like you said they are enjoying the profits during this whole process.

An Apple man since 1977
Reply
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
post #7 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Why the chart?

All infringing devices are marked with the following:



They should update that logo, to reflect their true nature
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #8 of 51
Samsun's behavior is akin to motor car companies who have to juggle whether to recal N number of vehicles, due to a dangerous fault that may cause deaths, or ride it out and pay when sued.
Samsung is making a huge amount of money, and if/when sued will simply pay out a paltry sum compare to the amount they have made. Yes $1B is paltry compared to the amount they have made by copying, it's simple maths.
I'm quite surprised this is allowed to happen and is not being curtailed as its industrial espionage, not be stealth but brazenly in the open. The sheer audacity is mind blowing.
post #9 of 51
OT (but who cares on this story): Why say "maths" plural? This is re post 8 by htfs. Is this a regional thing? Or maybe a meme? Not on the attack or trying to be snarky, I see a lot of posts online where things are plural with an "s" that wouldn't normally be in everyday conversation in the USA's south or west or northeast. Maybe it's an auto-correct thing? Just culturally curious, and posters here are decent enough that I feel I'm asking. Is it British?
post #10 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Why the chart?

All infringing devices are marked with the following:



Which Apple product was my Samsung oven copied off?
post #11 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Which Apple product was my Samsung oven copied off?

oeioeioei jfanning. Were you that kid, sitting on a wall, policeman passing by, telling you that you cannot sit on that wall and replying: "Sure you can, I'm sitting on it right now"?
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #12 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

oeioeioei jfanning. Were you that kid, sitting on a wall, policeman passing by, telling you that you cannot sit on that wall and replying: "Sure you can, I'm sitting on it right now"?

Nope, I am the guy that wants to know the answer to GTR's false claim? Can you answer it?
post #13 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Nope, I am the guy that wants to know the answer to GTR's false claim? Can you answer it?

I read it that he believes all infringing devices (from the court I presume) have a Samsung logo on it. Meaning that the Samsung devices that infringe on Apple patents have a Samsung logo on it. Which would seem accurate. It's meant to be a humorous post, at least that is how I perceived it. Therefore I cannot claim his post is false, nor can give you an answer to your question.
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #14 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post

OT (but who cares on this story): Why say "maths" plural? This is re post 8 by htfs. Is this a regional thing? Or maybe a meme? Not on the attack or trying to be snarky, I see a lot of posts online where things are plural with an "s" that wouldn't normally be in everyday conversation in the USA's south or west or northeast. Maybe it's an auto-correct thing? Just culturally curious, and posters here are decent enough that I feel I'm asking. Is it British?

 

As a British-born 69-year-old writer, former publisher and editor, my experience of the word "math" is that it is primarily American. When I see it used in print, or hear it on British radio and TV, it is used only by Americans. "Maths" (as in the short form of mathematics) is always used in Britain, and also appears to be used primarily in the rest of the English-speaking world. However, language changes with time... but another word spelling increasingly used by Americans in forum messages which I (as a photographer) dislike is "lense" rather than lens.

post #15 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

It's meant to be a humorous post, at least that is how I perceived it. Therefore I cannot claim his post is false, nor can give you an answer to your question.

 

Phil gets a gold medal for having a sense of humour.

 

I'm assuming that the "J" in "jfanning" doesn't stand for joke?

 

You totally caught me trying to pass off every Samsung product in history as an infringement against Apple...

 

lol.gif

post #16 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I read it that he believes all infringing devices (from the court I presume) have a Samsung logo on it. Meaning that the Samsung devices that infringe on Apple patents have a Samsung logo on it. Which would seem accurate. It's meant to be a humorous post, at least that is how I perceived it. Therefore I cannot claim his post is false, nor can give you an answer to your question.

You said "samsung devices that infringe on apple patents have a samsung logo on it", since all Samsung devices have a samsung logo on them, so I will ask you, what Apple patent does my oven infringe upon?
post #17 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Phil gets a gold medal for having a sense of humour.

I'm assuming that the "J" in "jfanning" doesn't stand for joke?

You totally caught me trying to pass off every Samsung product in history as an infringement  against Apple...

lol.gif

You can't just someones sense of humor on your post, as it wasn't funny

Did you realise this fact and try to insult me?
post #18 of 51
The following post will go into history of the most utter stupid, off topic and completely useless post of all time. In fact, I might be banned for this:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Bye
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #19 of 51
Maths is the correct term in my neck of the woods.
post #20 of 51
Samsung are the ultimate copiers, a Xerox machine (or in my neck of the woods - a photocopier, if I am allowed to use the term on this US-centric site), can only stand in awe at them.
post #21 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts View Post

Samsung are the ultimate copiers, a Xerox machine (or in my neck of the woods - a photocopier, if I am allowed to use the term on this US-centric site), can only stand in awe at them.


The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs, they deserved to get punished over that, because that was copying, no doubt about it.

But these "Utility patents" or better know as software patents are weak, and has been shown to be weak all across europe, asia, and even in the Uninted States.

Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.
post #22 of 51
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post
The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs…

 

Well, the law says otherwise.


Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.

 

"Innovate, don't litigate! Except also don't innovate because you don't deserve to own anything you do!" 1oyvey.gif

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 #23 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Well, the law says otherwise.

"Innovate, don't litigate! Except also don't innovate because you don't deserve to own anything you do!" 1oyvey.gif

Oh those so called "inventions" were progress, but not all progress deserves a patent, nothing apple did was new or not obvious, or deserved a patent regrading those software patents, its why many of them don't exist in Europe because they had the sense to limit what a software patent should be. But in the U.S we don't have software patents, we just have patents. meaning Apple can hold wide ranging multi-touch patents they shouldn't. Its not just Apple, Amazon and Google own some pretty ridiculous wide ranging software patents. But that is changing. Hopefully we split software patents into their own category and limit the years they can be held.
post #24 of 51
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post
…nothing apple did was new or not obvious, or deserved a patent…

 

You don't get to decide that.


…Apple can hold wide ranging multi-touch patents they shouldn't.

 

Thanks, opinion.


…and limit the years they can be held.

 

"It's too hard to do my own work. I know! I'll force the people actually doing work to give me their stuff sooner! That way I don't have to bother!"

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 #25 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by tylerk36 View Post

And Apple has the money.  They aren't going any where.  I honestly think Sammy is gonna lose.  But like you said they are enjoying the profits during this whole process.

Sammy already lost. It's only a matter of determining whether the decision will become permanent or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post

The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs, .

Actually, a jury decision says otherwise.

Not to mention common sense. Their own attorneys (who had been working with the products for months) were unable to tell the difference between a Tab and an iPad. Then you could consider the Samsung memo where they outlined all the features of the iPhone that they wanted to copy.
"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 #26 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post


oeioeioei jfanning. Were you that kid, sitting on a wall, policeman passing by, telling you that you cannot sit on that wall and replying: "Sure you can, I'm sitting on it right now"?

Ya, and seconds later, screaming the words "Don't taise me bro!"

post #27 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Nope, I am the guy that wants to know the answer to GTR's false claim? Can you answer it?

 

How do you know it's false? Can you answer it? How can he answer your question if he doesn't know which Samsung oven you own?

 

Show us which oven you own, and maybe we can find out if they copied it, and answer your question. The assumption here, based on experience, observation and history is that Samsung habitually copies other company's products for their own profit. To assert that a blanket statement regarding that is false, well…. I'd have to disagree.

 

So which Samsung oven do you own? (Truth be told, I didn't know Samsung manufactured ovens, but hey, why not? Plenty of those around to copy, right?)

 

Perhaps we'll find the exception to the observed generality that "Samsung Only Makes What It Has Copied"...

post #28 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post


The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs, they deserved to get punished over that, because that was copying, no doubt about it.

But these "Utility patents" or better know as software patents are weak, and has been shown to be weak all across europe, asia, and even in the Uninted States.

Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.

 

 

I take it you think Amazon's "one click" patent (which Apple pays a license fee to use, by the way) should go away too…. since these "utility patents" are at least as strong as that one, conceptually speaking...

post #29 of 51
Look up on google to see what samsungs tablet & phones looked like before the iPad. Not even close! Really a bad looking set of phones & tablet. Then look at pictures of the Samsung phones & tablet after the iPhone. If you can't tell Samsung ripped apple off, you're just stupid.
post #30 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

(re: proposed shorter time limit for software patents)

 

"It's too hard to do my own work. I know! I'll force the people actually doing work to give me their stuff sooner! That way I don't have to bother!"

 

Too many software patent infringement cases are about people independently coming up with similar  methods... and/or the goofy patenting of vague ideas instead of methods.

 

No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas.   It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Not to mention common sense. Their own attorneys (who had been working with the products for months) were unable to tell the difference between a Tab and an iPad. 

 

As has been pointed out several times, it was not "attorneys", it was ONE older lady attorney.

 

A younger male attorney, seated further behind her, immediately pointed out which was which.

 

Quote:
Then you could consider the Samsung memo where they outlined all the features of the iPhone that they wanted to copy.

 

Unlike most people, I've actually gone through that 126 page list of suggested improvements.  

 

First off, most were comparisons of ease of use, not about copying, and a lot seemed like the author was just trying to fill up his/her report to make it bulkier.

 

Over half of the recommendations were never implemented at all.   Of the other half, about ten were related to Kies (Samsung's iTunes) which I don't use and cannot speak about.  

 

Of the remaining phone related items, most were recommendations that didn't require an iPhone to come up with, as they were just common sense (e.g. "keyboard shouldn't cover the input fields").  In other words, defects like our handheld group's testers come up with on their own without needing a comparison to anything else.

 

In the end, I found these items that could vaguely be considered a direct "copy" of something Apple did, and even some of them are pretty non-iOS specific.

 

  1. Show Bluetooth connection type while pairing (headphone, mouse, etc)
  2. Show links for URLs, phone, email (this is a patent dispute)
  3. End Call button should be larger (actually the S2 didn't do this, but other Android phones do).
  4. Double-tapping shift locks uppercase mode (replaceable keyboards might be different).
  5. Long press on key shows alternate language characters (again, not an Apple invention)
  6. Email viewer should allow zoom in and out. (duh)
  7. Facebook message editor should add camera button.
  8. Camera app should have easier camera/camcorder switch.
  9. Maps should sometimes have pin drop effect.
  10. Time entries should allow scrollwheel input.
  11. Voice memo should show something like a microphone instead of reel-to-reel recorder.
  12. Add 3D lighting effect to some app icons.  (Did Apple even invent that idea?)

 

Of those, #8 (camera app) is the only one that I would consider a direct copy of a uniquely Apple visual.  (For a while, the Samsung camera app really looked like an iPhone clone.)   Maybe #9 and #10 as well.

 

There are some good examples of Samsung's attempts to emulate the iPhone look and feel, but this list isn't really one of them.  It's more like a laundry list of UI improvements that anyone could come up with, even if the iPhone had never existed.


Edited by KDarling - 2/16/13 at 10:16am
post #31 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Too many
 software patent infringement cases are about people independently coming up with similar  methods... and/or the goofy patenting of vague ideas instead of methods.

 
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas.   It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.

As always, you're misrepresenting the patent system. You can't patent a 'vague idea'. If that happens, the patent can be readily invalidated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

As has been pointed out several times, it was not "attorneys", it was ONE older lady attorney.

A younger male attorney, seated further behind her, immediately pointed out which was which.

Not according to one of the reports from a blogger who was in the room. The report is that there was a delay before the younger attorney could identify it.

Regardless, there's absolutely no reason why even an older woman attorney should not be able to tell the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Unlike most people, I've actually gone through that 126 page list of suggested improvements.  


First off, most were comparisons of ease of use, not about copying, and a lot seemed like the author was just trying to fill up his/her report to make it bulkier.


Over half of the recommendations were never implemented at all.   Of the other half, about ten were related to Kies (Samsung's iTunes) which I don't use and cannot speak about.  

Of the remaining phone related items, most were recommendations that didn't require an iPhone to come up with, as they were just common sense (e.g. "keyboard shouldn't cover the input fields").  In other words, defects like our handheld group's testers come up with on their own without needing a comparison to anything else.

In the end, I found these items that could vaguely be considered a direct "copy" of something Apple did, and even some of them are pretty non-iOS specific.
  1. Show Bluetooth connection type while pairing (headphone, mouse, etc)
  2. Show links for URLs, phone, email (this is a patent dispute)
  3. End Call button should be larger (actually the S2 didn't do this, but other Android phones do).
  4. Double-tapping shift locks uppercase mode (replaceable keyboards might be different).
  5. Long press on key shows alternate language characters (again, not an Apple invention)
  6. Email viewer should allow zoom in and out. (duh)
  7. Facebook message editor should add camera button.
  8. Camera app should have easier camera/camcorder switch.
  9. Maps should sometimes have pin drop effect.
  10. Time entries should allow scrollwheel input.
  11. Voice memo should show something like a microphone instead of reel-to-reel recorder.
  12. Add 3D lighting effect to some app icons.  (Did Apple even invent that idea?)

Of those, #8 (camera app) is the only one that I would consider a direct copy of a uniquely Apple visual.  (For a while, the Samsung camera app really looked like an iPhone clone.)   Maybe #9 and #10 as well.

There are some good examples of Samsung's attempts to emulate the iPhone look and feel, but this list isn't really one of them.  It's more like a laundry list of UI improvements that anyone could come up with, even if the iPhone had never existed.

And, yet, the jury who saw all the evidence said that Samsung owes Apple more than a billion dollars.

So please explain why your unfounded opinion is more valid than theirs?
"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 #32 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotoformat View Post

 

As a British-born 69-year-old writer, former publisher and editor, my experience of the word "math" is that it is primarily American. When I see it used in print, or hear it on British radio and TV, it is used only by Americans. "Maths" (as in the short form of mathematics) is always used in Britain, and also appears to be used primarily in the rest of the English-speaking world. However, language changes with time... but another word spelling increasingly used by Americans in forum messages which I (as a photographer) dislike is "lense" rather than lens.

 

Maths is used in Australia, the abuse I dislike most is "loose" rather than "lose", instead of removing vowels such as "u" from words Americans seem to have decided to add another "o".

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 #33 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


You said "samsung devices that infringe on apple patents have a samsung logo on it", since all Samsung devices have a samsung logo on them, so I will ask you, what Apple patent does my oven infringe upon?

 

Is it a "rounded rectangle"?

 

If it is, there you go then.

 

/s


Edited by hill60 - 2/16/13 at 1:25pm
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 #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by skleiniv View Post

Look up on google to see what samsungs tablet & phones looked like before the iPad. Not even close! Really a bad looking set of phones & tablet. Then look at pictures of the Samsung phones & tablet after the iPhone. If you can't tell Samsung ripped apple off, you're just stupid.

 

That was when they were ripping off Nokia, Motorola, Palm and RIM.

 

Nokia finally decided to act, rather belatedly, the other day.


Edited by hill60 - 2/16/13 at 1:28pm
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 #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I'm sick and tired of this back and forth bickering just like everyone else.  However, I truly believe that Samsung was doing this since day one knowing they can just drag it out in court, make a mockery of the process, and make the bucks off of Apple's hard work.


I truly want Samsung to get the hammer dropped on them.  Bunch of slimy bottomfeeders they are.  Not just in electronics, but pretty much everything else too.  Just ask the German appliance makers how Samsung rips off their tech too.

Unfortunately it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Outside of tech sites consumers don't care about copying or infringement. As long as they get a decent device and it lasts it doesn't effect them. I don't think Samsung will pay a dime for it but will continue to make a tidy profit. Apple will as well and this will all be for nothing.
post #36 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical View Post

How do you know it's false? Can you answer it? How can he answer your question if he doesn't know which Samsung oven you own?

Show us which oven you own, and maybe we can find out if they copied it, and answer your question. The assumption here, based on experience, observation and history is that Samsung habitually copies other company's products for their own profit. To assert that a blanket statement regarding that is false, well…. I'd have to disagree.

So which Samsung oven do you own? (Truth be told, I didn't know Samsung manufactured ovens, but hey, why not? Plenty of those around to copy, right?)

Perhaps we'll find the exception to the observed generality that "Samsung Only Makes What It Has Copied"...

You do realise that Apple doesn't make ovens? Hence the question, how can every samsung product be copied off Apple
post #37 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

You do realise that Apple doesn't make ovens? Hence the question, how can every samsung product be copied off Apple

 

Wrong.

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100

 

1smoking.gif

post #38 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Wrong.

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100


1smoking.gif

Watch out, he has less capacity to understand tongue-in-cheek than a Chia Pet.
Edited by SolipsismX - 2/16/13 at 4:59pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #39 of 51

Also this...

 

post #40 of 51

Hell, they could have even ripped off Apple's big disruptor for this year - the Apple Bus-stop:

 

 

Take your pick.

 

But I think I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Samsung have copied every product ever.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple and Samsung identify all infringing devices in Galaxy Nexus patent case