Massive Android activations not viewed as concern for Apple

12345679»

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 167
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post


    Have you ever used an android phone other then thirty seconds at a display kiosk. Your example is app icons mainly the ones that where added by manufacturers on their skins. You did not however talk about the native android icons found on Vanilla android. Look at the nexus line..



    Did you read my post?



    I specifically said that the OEMs added in the bulk of the egregious infringement. HTC seems to have gotten a particularly crappy end of the stick here, because they deserved attack far less than Samsung, but Apple perhaps wasn't comfortable suing such a big supplier without making a serious effort at negotiating first. I strongly suspect HTC got sued partly to try to convince Samsung to play ball.



    Given that HTC had no serious patent defence of its own it was a good tactical first battleground for Apple - once Apple had forced HTC to license the utility patents it would have a stick with which to beat other OEMs.



    Once Apple is going to litigate it makes sense to throw every phone from that OEM that infringes any patent into the mix, they can always narrow it later.
  • Reply 162 of 167
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post


    That is highly incorrect. Android was being developed as a blackberry like os before iOS was released on the iphone in 2007. However if you actually use android os other then the fact Apps can be placed on the home screen and both are optimized for touch based screen the similarities stop there. Android stores applications in an app draw not across the home screen. If you are to just open your eyes you can see the difference between these OSs is are mainly features of sambian and BlackBerry OS. Google simply took what they had and addressed it to a change in demand and made it a touch based os. You can say that iOS paved the path for android to become be what it is today. But to say that it copied is just ignorance.



    The skins added by OEMs, especially TouchWiz, are the main culprit.
  • Reply 163 of 167
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post


    Yep - it would be classed as a trademark infringement, Apple would be granted an injunction and Samsung would have to stop shipping till they replaced the icons. Conceivably also damages might be awarded for the infringement. Unlike patents where injunctions are no longer assured, with trademarks they still are. Apple could choose to license the trademarks to Samsung of course, but somehow I can't see them doing so.



    Does Apple only hold a trademark? Not also a copyright?



    Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I thought copyrights are more serious, as they have automatic damages for each offense.
  • Reply 164 of 167
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


    Does Apple only hold a trademark? Not also a copyright?



    Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I thought copyrights are more serious, as they have automatic damages for each offense.



    I don't know if they have a copyright on the icons, but if they do they haven't litigated on that basis yet. Possibly the copying isn't exact enough for copyright.
  • Reply 165 of 167
    inkswampinkswamp Posts: 337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post


    Google denied OS upgrades were accounted as activations when Jobs said it on a keynote and you have more about activations here:



    http://gigaom.com/mobile/andy-rubin-...devices-a-day/



    That's an interesting article but it's not a source for what you said:



    Quote:

    Upgrades, rom installations or devices withouth google services doesn't account for activations



    Do you have a source that backs up that claim?
  • Reply 166 of 167
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post


    I don't know if they have a copyright on the icons, but if they do they haven't litigated on that basis yet. Possibly the copying isn't exact enough for copyright.



    Well, it varies.



    In the EU, Apple has patents on the icons.



    But some are just trademarked.



    Actually, most look to be trademarked and not covered in a patent.



    Though that might be just a regional thing, it's evident that Apple got their stuff in first. Not to mention their use two years prior to filing...



    NEVER ask me to do that much hyperlinking again.



    The bold+underlined one is the one you guys were talking about.
  • Reply 167 of 167
    gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,083member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inkswamp View Post


    That's an interesting article but it's not a source for what you said:







    Do you have a source that backs up that claim?



    Really? What do you need, Rubin saying it to you directly?
Sign In or Register to comment.