or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Judge Koh overrules Samsung objection to patent video depicting Apple products
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Judge Koh overrules Samsung objection to patent video depicting Apple products - Page 2

post #41 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post



Seeing that the video is authorized and made available by the Federal Judicial Center (overseen by US judges), I doubt an appeal around the video itself would have any merit.  I wish I had read this yesterday as my good friend and his wife were over for dinner last night.  He's a retired IP attorney and current law professor who trains federal judges in how to conduct IP trials.  Could have asked him.

Instructions with that video make it clear it's up to each court to decide if the video is appropriate to use in a specific case.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #42 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Instructions with that video make it clear it's up to each court to decide if the video is appropriate to use in a specific case.


It only makes sense they would say that as the judge always should have the final say as to what's appropriate and admissible.  OTOH, I don't think that implies there are situations where it's damaging to use the video.

post #43 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post


It only makes sense they would say that as the judge always should have the final say as to what's appropriate and admissible.  OTOH, I don't think that implies there are situations where it's damaging to use the video.

Then why should it be be a "judgement call" then? On the contrary I think the intent was to make it clear there might be instances where that particular video should not be used, and it's up to the presiding judge to determine that. In this case Judge Koh finds it appropriate. An Appeals Court may find she erred in that judgment.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #44 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

So long as Samsung is profiting from copying Apple's IP, they will do absolutely everything and anything to drag this through the court system at a snail's pace.

Shameful company. I absolutely, steadfastly refuse to directly give them any of my business.
Apple moving to another supplier for its components can't come soon enough.

 

Probably one of the silliest things I've ever read.  You call Samsung's business practices shameful, but as long as you have 2 degrees of separation you're okay with it?  Just fyi, indirectly giving Samsung business is the same as directly giving them business.

post #45 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Then why should it be be a "judgement call" then? On the contrary I think the intent was to make it clear there might be instances where that particular video should not be used, and it's up to the presiding judge to determine that. In this case Judge Koh finds it appropriate. An Appeals Court may find she erred in that judgment.


The judgment call is there because the judge always has to have authority over evidence and proceedings.  How do you know the real reason for potentially not showing the video is because the judge may feel it's irrelevant to the trial?

 

Regardless, the chances of a trial being successfully appealed over a video the Justice Dept. helped produce is essentially zero.

post #46 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post


The judgment call is there because the judge always has to have authority over evidence and proceedings.  How do you know the real reason for potentially not showing the video is because the judge may feel it's irrelevant to the trial?

Regardless, the chances of a trial being successfully appealed over a video the Justice Dept. helped produce is essentially zero.

I'd disagree. In a few weeks we'll see if you are right.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #47 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I'd disagree. In a few weeks we'll see if you are right.


Ummm ... no. No chance of appeal on this. Nada. Zip. None.

post #48 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post


Ummm ... no. No chance of appeal on this. Nada. Zip. None.

I'm guessing that there's no memory of Apple demanding that the Samsung logo on courtroom TV's be covered up so as not to prejudice Apple's case in the first trial? Apple made the same general argument then that Samsung made now, that it unfairly implies innovation in the court's view by one of the parties.

But again we'll see in few weeks whether Florian Mueller is correct about it perhaps contributing to a retrial.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/03/over-samsungs-objection-judge-allows.html
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #49 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post

...
Whether Samsung infringed or not, there was still going to be a reason to buy an Android tablet or phone: cost. So if Samsung had not succeeded, Motorola or another Android vendor would have. Except that the other Android vendors did not so blatantly copy Apple devices, which means that Apple would not have had a legal tree to bark up and air their grievances against.
...

Sammy is a thief. It didn't have any good design ideas of its own, so it attempted to steal the work of others.
post #50 of 78
My brother is an IP lawyer and former patent examiner. I sent him the video. He is probably laughing his a** off right about now. It's like the video in the movie "Dodgeball."
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #51 of 78
I wonder why they even had to object, that was a stupid, stupid move on Samesung's part
post #52 of 78
Judge Koh must be sick and tired of dealing with these two squabbling firms, yet ironically they each still do business with one another, I do not get it!
post #53 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post

Why are you guys all so down on Samsung? You must admit that they DO make AWESOME televisions, right?

 

Well, I'll tell you this when it comes to Samsung: I have a Samsung HDTV and a Samsung Blu-Ray player.  I've been pretty happy with both, for the most part.  But it's time to replace my HDTV, as it's old, there are better models out there now, and it has a dead pixel (though to be fair, when sitting on the couch, you can't see it; I only notice it when I'm standing a few feet away).

 

I will NOT be replacing it with another Samsung, though.  The days of them getting any of my money for any of their products are officially over.  Sure, I'll still have random Samsung components in a new iPhone or whatever.  That can't be helped.  But where I can help it, I will avoid them at all costs.

 

Leaning toward either an LG or a Vizio right now.

post #54 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post

You must admit that they DO make AWESOME televisions, right?

Why must anyone admit this?

post #55 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Leaning toward either an LG or a Vizio right now.

If you're going with 50" or better than I recommend you give a Panasonic plasma some consideration while they're still available. With a little research, and due diligence you'll learn that they win awards almost every year. All of plasma's early shortcomings have been rectified, and in many cases the only con is its power consumption compared to LCD/LED.
Edited by dasanman69 - 4/1/14 at 6:05am
"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 #56 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


If you're going with 50" or better than I recommend you give a Panasonic plasma some consideration while there still available. With a little research, and due diligence you'll learn that they win awards almost every year. All of plasma's early shortcomings have been rectified, and in many cases the only con is its power consumption compared to LCD/LED.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. :)

post #57 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


If you're going with 50" or better than I recommend you give a Panasonic plasma some consideration while they're still available. With a little research, and due diligence you'll learn that they win awards almost every year. All of plasma's early shortcomings have been rectified, and in many cases the only con is its power consumption compared to LCD/LED.

Another vote from me for a plasma.  Mine's actually a, gasp, Samsung, and it's wonderful.  I've never come across an LED/LCD television with as good a picture as the best Panasonic and Samsung plasmas.

post #58 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post
 

Another vote from me for a plasma.  Mine's actually a, gasp, Samsung, and it's wonderful.  I've never come across an LED/LCD television with as good a picture as the best Panasonic and Samsung plasmas.

 

The problem is that the Panasonic plasmas I am finding are either too big (60") or are too expensive, or they are just not being sold anymore. :(

post #59 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

The problem is that the Panasonic plasmas I am finding are either too big (60") or are too expensive, or they are just not being sold anymore. 1frown.gif

I was afraid that the smaller or less expensive ones would no longer be available. Just goes to show you that better quality doesn’t always win.
"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 #60 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

Well Mueller's ...writing an Android app that may be released on iOS as some point in the future.  I think he said once that it was a game, but I'm not sure.  He's always very vague when he mentions it at the end of blog posts.

Many of the new media still publish his slanted, maybe paid opinions. Its business as usual for him, needs must, money talks as they say.
post #61 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanie248 View Post
 

it includes many products from different inventors, where are all their competitors crying into their empty milk bottles??

 

some confusion here about the video, its not made specifically for any Apple V Samsung trail, it is just a general info video, to be shown to jurors relating to ANY patent dispute.

 

Now, that I have seen it though, I didn't realise that Apple invented the tractor and plough…. well, you learn something new everyday !!! 

 

I know it wasn't made for this trial.  I wonder if there were Samsung products in the video too. If there weren't, I understand that it's not fair.

post #62 of 78

ClemyNX

maybe, being a US made video and being shown to US citizens, they wanted to predominantly use American products** in the video they made themselves , for themselves. 

 

I happen to agree with that stance, if it was me, I would have had someone shot if they made the video with foreign products, but then again, I do have evil-dictator tendencies !! ;-)

 

** i did not check every other product in the video to see their origin, but Edison was American

post #63 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem View Post

With the world looking on it does seem more than a bit strange that the FEDS 'an Overview for Jurors' included the main contention in their video.

So looking through the round world window Apple have them where they want them.
That is, right in a square corner.

With rounded corners.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #64 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Do you really think it won't be appealed one way or another?

They should do it like tennis: three appeals and that's y'lot.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #65 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem View Post

I doubt anyone knows what he believes. He has been getting a very bad rap for being consistent in his "paid bias".
I think the Foss guy has likely financially milked his past for all its worth and knows he needs to tame his bias.

Don't you mean 'plaid bias'?
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #66 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post

1. Because Android is the only competitor to Apple in smartphones and tablets.
2. Because Samsung is CURRENTLY the only Android vendor with a large market share.
3. Because Apple fans wrongly use 1+2 to use faulty "if p then q, then if q then p" fallacy to conclude that had Samsung not copied Apple devices two generations of Samsung products ago, then Apple would enjoy the same total dominance of the smart phone and tablet market share that they enjoyed in the MP3 market share with the I-Pod.

Why is "if p then q, then if q then p" thing false? Because the reason why Android is viable is not Samsung's copyright infrigement. Instead, the copyright infringement is merely a reason - possibly the main reason - why Samsung is the most successful Android device line. These folks ignore that had Samsung not copied Apple, another Android vendor (or some combination of vendors) would have simply taken its place. Why? Because the main reason for the success of Samsung (and Android) is not the copying of Apple (at least not copying them beyond such things as having touch screens and app stores, things which cannot be copyrighted, which we learned from Apple's failed lawsuit against Microsoft over Windows) but because Apple devices cost more than a significant portion of the market A) can afford or B) is willing to pay.

So, instead of comparing everything to the I-Pod, the one market that Apple was able to totally dominate, they ignore the more relevant comparisons, which includes PCs (for which Apple has plenty of competition) and set top boxes (ditto).


You can get a good Windows PC/laptop for half the cost of an Apple computer, so that market is never going to go away. It was reduced significantly, granted, but by (Apple and Android) tablets, NOT by significantly more expensive Apple computers. Streamers? Ditto. Roku enjoys basically the same market share as Apple TV because 3 of the 4 Roku set top boxes (as well as both streaming stick options) cost considerably less than Apple TV. People usually buy one of the cheaper boxes, learn to like it, and THEN upgrade to the only Roku that costs comparable to the Apple TV.


And why did Apple dominate the MP3 player market? Because that was the only one where Apple was willing to come out with a low-end device, the I-Pod shuffle. The latest iterations of the Shuffle costs $50 and can be had for as little as $35. The Shuffle made it impossible for competitors to make cheaper but still capable and quality MP3 players to introduce users to a low-end alternative brand that would keep them hooked as they introduced better and higher-end devices. In other words, there was no reason to buy anything other than the best device, especially after Apple made I-Tunes available on cheaper Windows machines.


Whether Samsung infringed or not, there was still going to be a reason to buy an Android tablet or phone: cost. So if Samsung had not succeeded, Motorola or another Android vendor would have. Except that the other Android vendors did not so blatantly copy Apple devices, which means that Apple would not have had a legal tree to bark up and air their grievances against.


Samsung gives Apple partisans a reason to pretend that people who could not afford an Apple tablet or smartphone would have chosen to go without such devices entirely instead of simply choosing a device that looked "merely" 80% like an Apple product instead of 90% like Samsung's did. Which, of course, presumes that the vast majority of the American - and global - population has some "Apple or nothing!" mentality. Which is insane, because even if such a mentality is not their preference, adhering to it even if it means not having a device at all is not in their interests. It is in Apple's interests, of course, but it is not in the interests of the consumer. And consumers are always going to look out for themselves whenever they can.

And since consumers obviously benefit from having devices that they can actually afford as opposed to nothing at all, that is why Apple is never going to win a total, clear victory against Samsung or any other Android vendor. No country is going to leave a significant portion of their consumers unable to buy devices that they want. It is bad for the consumers (read voters in a democracy) and also bad for the economy (i.e. vendors who want to make money selling devices that their consumers want/need and can afford). And it is difficult to claim that Apple is somehow harmed by other companies serving market segments that Apple doesn't even want (other than maybe to sell them I-Pods).

Instead, the Android alternative has "encouraged" (forced) Apple to at least try to come up with somewhat cheaper devices for emerging markets. That move is good for the consumers and developing economies in those regions, and in the long term - as more consumers in those areas enter the middle and upper classes - good for Apple.

Men may move you, but your post doesn't me.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #67 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistercow View Post

Probably one of the silliest things I've ever read.  You call Samsung's business practices shameful, but as long as you have 2 degrees of separation you're okay with it?  Just fyi, indirectly giving Samsung business is the same as directly giving them business.

Exactly the same, apart from it's not.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #68 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Man View Post

Judge Koh must be sick and tired of dealing with these two squabbling firms, yet ironically they each still do business with one another, I do not get it!

Sick and tired? If I were the judge, I would be relishing the chance to put the world to rights.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #69 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Well, I'll tell you this when it comes to Samsung: I have a Samsung HDTV and a Samsung Blu-Ray player.  I've been pretty happy with both, for the most part.  But it's time to replace my HDTV, as it's old, there are better models out there now, and it has a dead pixel (though to be fair, when sitting on the couch, you can't see it; I only notice it when I'm standing a few feet away).

I will NOT be replacing it with another Samsung, though.  The days of them getting any of my money for any of their products are officially over.  Sure, I'll still have random Samsung components in a new iPhone or whatever.  That can't be helped.  But where I can help it, I will avoid them at all costs.

Leaning toward either an LG or a Vizio right now.

Good for you.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #70 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

I know it wasn't made for this trial.  I wonder if there were Samsung products in the video too. If there weren't, I understand that it's not fair.

Waaah! waah! Not fairrrr!

Go impregnate a goat, ya constipated middle-class rush lover.

Only joking. Just dying to use that insult on someone. Will retract if asked.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #71 of 78
Yes, that Shuffle is an iTunes stifled low tech option yet still sold well.
If anyone else brought it out it would have been laughable.

In a similar way Apple does similar with the base iPads. They are limited in Apples inimitable way and stay popular.
The iPhone by 'staying as it was' has gone the same way.

It really shows consumers simply do not want to have to choose, a very good thing for Apple.
post #72 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanie248 View Post
 

ClemyNX

maybe, being a US made video and being shown to US citizens, they wanted to predominantly use American products** in the video they made themselves , for themselves. 

What is "American product"?

Apple is an American company but the products are made in China from non-US parts.

post #73 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post
 

What is "American product"?

Apple is an American company but the products are made in China from non-US parts.

oh , brilliant, you really caught me out there with your nit-picking and petty-ness. Amazing!! 

 

go beat up a kitten or something.

post #74 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

What's awesome about them? The screen is the best in some models, but heir designs are often ugly compared to others.

It's all about the screen quality! That's the only thing that matters in a TV!
15" 2.3 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, Unibody Macbook Pro

iPhone 5 (Slate, 64 GB) [au by KDDI, Japan] (I'm going Docomo with the iPhone 6!)
iPad Air (Wifi, 32 GB)
Reply
15" 2.3 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, Unibody Macbook Pro

iPhone 5 (Slate, 64 GB) [au by KDDI, Japan] (I'm going Docomo with the iPhone 6!)
iPad Air (Wifi, 32 GB)
Reply
post #75 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

No. But I like the display on my iPhone 5. 1smile.gif

I like the display on my iPhone 5 as well, but my Samsung LED TV 2013 UNF8000) is the best looking TV I've yet owned. Similar to our iPhones, excellent color clarity. It's just a whole lot larger.
15" 2.3 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, Unibody Macbook Pro

iPhone 5 (Slate, 64 GB) [au by KDDI, Japan] (I'm going Docomo with the iPhone 6!)
iPad Air (Wifi, 32 GB)
Reply
15" 2.3 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, Unibody Macbook Pro

iPhone 5 (Slate, 64 GB) [au by KDDI, Japan] (I'm going Docomo with the iPhone 6!)
iPad Air (Wifi, 32 GB)
Reply
post #76 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post


Waaah! waah! Not fairrrr!

Go impregnate a goat, ya constipated middle-class rush lover.

Only joking. Just dying to use that insult on someone. Will retract if asked.

 

Uhm... ok....

 

:\

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post


It's all about the screen quality! That's the only thing that matters in a TV!

 

Almost. If the stand and bezels are ugly I won't buy it, even if it's the best screen there is.

Panasonic TVs look nice.

post #77 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post


It's all about the screen quality! That's the only thing that matters in a TV!

 

Nope.

 

Like with automobiles, there are enough models from enough companies that are pretty much top level that other considerations also play a role.

 

For instance, I've been looking for a new (non-Samsung) HDTV, as I said.  And when I got my Samsung, I liked the way it looked.  Now, compared to some of the models from other companies I've been looking at, it looks bulky and just outdated.  I'd like to get a new model that not only is technically sound, but also sound from a design standpoint.

 

For me, there are a number of concerns:

 

-- Picture quality

-- Design

-- Price

-- Number and kind of ports

-- Whether or not it is 3D (I don't want 3D, so don't want to pay for it, if possible)

-- That it's not a Samsung

 

Etc.

 

So, for me, there are concerns beyond PQ.

post #78 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post

It's all about the screen quality! That's the only thing that matters in a TV!

Then everyone would have a plasma.
"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Judge Koh overrules Samsung objection to patent video depicting Apple products
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Judge Koh overrules Samsung objection to patent video depicting Apple products