Very interesting read, without getting into it too much, i have to say that when the samsung galaxy s came out, a guy i worked with bought one & 5 or 6 people asked him if it was an iPhone & not only that, he got it because he thought it looked like an iPhone that was cheaper.
With that in mind, it tells me that samsung clearly copied the iPhone design, we know samsung know what they are doing & are we honestly surprised by all the legal battles?.
the comments have been good too some really interesting opinions, lots of funny stuff like Menno getting owned repetitively & he still comes back, lots of straw grasping stuff, its made a fun read tho :P
just watched the youtube vid posted by Menno, pretty cool stuff, but that video clearly didn't have a working tablet, it was just a clipboard & they super imposed the animated screen over it.
i guess thats just as good as making a real tablet right ?
... The comparison to Glenn Beck is entirely accurate. I don't think DED is a Facist, but he's irrational in his hatred of other operating systems and I'm far from the first (or the most well known) to say so. ...
If there's anyone involved in this discussion who behaves like Glenn Beck, historically or in this thread, that would be you.
Then why aren't they "defending" themselves against Bada? against WebOS? against the playbook?
There is no point defending against the dead. There is nothing wrong with picking battles. Apple can and should go after those who can hurt Apple if they continue to disseminate products en masse with Apple's IP in them.
Further, we don't know if WebOS and Bada actually threaten Apple's IP as per the exact details of Apple's complaint.
Your'e just assuming things in a typical IANAL fashion.
Interesting how there are all these "common, functional, and obvious" ways of going about things that never seem to happen before Apple does it. In fact, there's typically a period right after Apple introduces a new product (iPod, iPhone, iPad, Air) when a fair number of tech pundits/Apple haters/competitors declare that the new design is stupid and wrong and will never amount to much. Sealed batteries, high prices, "insufficient" specs, walled gardens..... those never seem to strike a lot of people as common, functional, or obvious until Apple starts to have a lot of success, at which point the same people declare that nothing Apple has done is innovative, they just got to where everyone was "obviously" going a bit early.
Remember when the iPad was just a big iPod Touch? When it had a comically large bezel? When abandoning the stylus was a critical shortcoming? When a sealed battery made it practically disposable and terrible value for the money? When the lack of a full array of ports rendered it all but useless? And the glossy screen made it unusable? And just generally there was no point because no one needed a stupid big media tablet for "consumption"?
But when Samsung slavishly copies exactly those horrible mistakes, it's because those horrible mistakes are common, functional, and obvious. OK.
Post of the freakin year. This is why I just can't understand how people could side with Android, and phones/ tabs like these Samsung rip-offs in any legal capacity.
To add to your comments about the iPad and all it's "mistakes", remember when the iPhone came out?
"It's to expensive to ever make it", "The screen will get smudges so no one will buy it", "won't make it because it doesn't have a hardware keyboard", blah blah blah
Or how about the AppStore. "It's not open" "Nobody will ever pay for apps", "Devs will never want to give up a percentage"
Like F'ing clock work though everybody and their dog is making a full screen phone with software keyboard, creating closed stores for their app delivery model.
If everything Apple does is so freaking obvious, why is Apple ALWAYS the first one to do it?
Claims of doctored evidence are absurd. If you actually look at the claims that Apple is making and the legal doctrines they are based on then the supposed doctoring is not relevant.
Whether it is relevant to their argument is beside the point. When you file such a document you make a statement that the contents are truthful to the best of your knowledge. If Apple knowingly put in false information, that is an act of perjury and their whole case could be tossed, or at least the injunctions. Even if the case stands, the court would likely be much stricter with them since they didn't pay nice.
That said, I suspect we have not been told the full truth and one of two things has happened
1. The photos presented as from the court document were 'shopped to make Apple look bad and get tons of hits by either the website or their source and are not what is in the original
2. The photos are there but some accompanying text that explains why has been left out. Again to paint a false image of Apple for the money such an article could create
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stupidhero
How do you explain apple using the app drawer instead of the galaxy home screen then?
Because their argument is that the app drawer was copied from the iOS home screen.
Trade dress complaints don't require strict like for like on elements. Which is why they can also include using a yellow flower for the photo gallery although it is not exactly the same yellow flower or background
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations
maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.
IP actions and monopolies are cats and dogs. Not to mention that it is not illegal to have a monopoly. Only how you get it and what you do with it. Apple's mobile monopoly is due to one factor -- bloody awesome sales. That doesn't change if they do or don't protect their IP.
Now if they decided to require everyone that wants in iPhone etc in the future to get a Mac computer because they are going to support Windows anymore, that would be an abuse. Someone could perhaps argue that not having a Windows compat SDK so you have to get a Mac to develop apps is an abuse. Because they crossed market lines.
Whether it is relevant to their argument is beside the point. When you file such a document you make a statement that the contents are truthful to the best of your knowledge. If Apple knowingly put in false information, that is an act of perjury and their whole case could be tossed, or at least the injunctions. Even if the case stands, the court would likely be much stricter with them since they didn't pay nice.
You're assuming that is is not acceptable to submit the evidence in such fashion. I would argue that it is permissible. By resizing the photos of the Samsung device the irrelevant factor of size is removed from the comparison, allowing observers to focus on the relevant question: are the Samsung devices purposefully designed to confuse customers and trade on Apple's designs? And, are they successful in doing so?
If size is irrelevant then surely resizing to make the comparison easier is acceptable.
Of course, it would be nice if they disclosed the resizing
My problem is not the touchwiz suit. My problem is that they are suing ALL android devices, and NOT all touchwiz devices.
And you don't know what Android is like. Don't try.
I'm talking about Samsung slavishly copying Apple's look and feel, both in hardware and in software, when other manufacturers have not. You know... the topic of this article. Excuse me if I don't follow you off on your silly tangent.
Message to Apple: Let it go...move on...you already have about 95% of the tablet market. Why are you fighting so much for the remaining 5%? Yeah, I know....you have every right to protect your inventions.....but jeez, maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.
The reason is very simple. The law does not work that way. If you do not protect your patent you lose it.
Apple needs early adjudication of its claims so it can put a stop to Samsung’s copying of Apple’s designs and technology now.
What technology? Technology-wise Apple is 1-2 years behind Samsung. Apple is scared of competition. Samsung phones are far superior: 4G, dual core 1.2ghz processors, super amoled+ screens up to 4.5", NFC, newer Wi-fi, BT, Haptic feedback, SWYPE kyboard, thinner - all these results better usability.
As for "overall design" it's simple: does Apple have patent for a rectangular tablet design with 1" basel, rounded corners, home button in the middle lower part, and grid positioned application icons? It does not. No patent - no grounds for a law suite. The design is too simple/minimalistic to make the case without a patent. I see the device design is also a fashion/trend issue. For instance, some designer came up with bellbottoms: it became a fashion trend. Similar trends exist in industrial design, for that reason TVs and laptops now look the same.
Apple, stop whining, compete, innovate, make better phones: couple more phone models, bigger screens, more carriers, modern specs, innovative features, and more frequent releases. I want great american company to succeed even more. But for now I have no choice but pickup the amazing Galaxy S II next month:
Irrelevant. If the app drawer looks like the iPhone home screen then its still a copy. Naturally Apple is going to make their evidence as convincing as possible, but the methods they are using are not inappropriate and don't change the issue itself.
Well, it is relevant because the app drawer is not the 'overall look and feel'.
You're assuming that is is not acceptable to submit the evidence in such fashion. I would argue that it is permissible. By resizing the photos of the Samsung device the irrelevant factor of size is removed from the comparison, allowing observers to focus on the relevant question: are the Samsung devices purposefully designed to confuse customers and trade on Apple's designs? And, are they successful in doing so?
If size is irrelevant then surely resizing to make the comparison easier is acceptable.
Of course, it would be nice if they disclosed the resizing
size irrelevant? then I suppose TVs are also in breach of. whatever Apple claims?
Tell you what: you find me an Apple enthusiast that posts on Android sites with pictures of hardware, angry rebuttals to any intimation that the iOS doesn't rule and breathless love letters to Cupertino and I'll agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet.
Tell you what: you find me an Apple enthusiast that posts on Android sites with pictures of hardware, angry rebuttals to any intimation that the iOS doesn't rule and breathless love letters to Cupertino and I'll agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet.
Yea, right, sure, I am gonna run and "find you Apple enthusiast"!
Tell you what: if you would not challenge me to "find you" something, "I would agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet".
Message to Apple: Let it go...move on...you already have about 95% of the tablet market. Why are you fighting so much for the remaining 5%? Yeah, I know....you have every right to protect your inventions.....but jeez, maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.
It makes sense to move fast and early, so you're not losing a much bigger fight later. It sends a message to the market. Apple is willing to fight for their 'design IP'. After all, most of their products don't say "Made by Apple"? they say "Designed by Apple". Design is their core?
And, you can't see that these are a direct mirror-copy of Apple's style? Now is exactly the time to push back. Stem the flood before it happens...
Before Samsung was copying Apple's designs, they were copying Nokia's design style…!! The "Samsung phones before iPhone" could all easily be mistaken for Nokia handsets from the period…
The effect there is that we ultimately think there's nothing to really differentiate the handsets, and the market gets diluted.
I think Apple is smart getting in front of it now. Samsung can try to compete, but with devices that don't mimic every design detail of the iPhone/iPad…
Apple, stop whining, compete, innovate, make better phones: couple more phone models, bigger screens, more carriers, modern specs, innovative features, and more frequent releases. I want great american company to succeed even more. But for now I have no choice but pickup the amazing Galaxy S II next month:
What technology? Apple A5 dual-core SOC is pretty impressive? just one thing among many Apple-designed innovations.
Come on, I remember phones before iPhone. iPhone was not the "natural progression" of the industry. It was a market-changing, market-defining leap forward, designed by Apple...
Full disclosure, please. Do you work for Samsung or one of its affiliates/beneficiaries??
Yes, the current market-tech is awesome? but let Samsung apply it using THEIR style and designs? not this flagrant imitation of Apple's style (although they do say imitation is the highest form of flattery).
I'd apply the same litany of complaints right back to Samsung? stop whining and copying, and start innovating!
They're suing to shut the other companies down. To deny imports and for excessive damages. They're not suing to get licenses, and they're not going after the worst vioations of their IP, but rather the companies that are giving them the most competition.
Or are you also going to ignore the fact that not every android phone runs touchwiz, and not every phone looks anywhere near an iphone.
Presumption of intent is just assumption, not "fact". So these declarations are "made up" by you. I guess to you, they're as obvious as the designs in contention themselves, yes?
And I don't see anything about lawsuits extending to any and every android phone. Why are you talking about phones that don't look anything like the iPhone? This lawsuit doesn't. The core point of the lawsuit under discussion is the blatant copying of Apple's design, down to the small details; all the aggregate things taken together that make an iPhone and iPad a "unique product".
There may be other lawsuits underway that address specific underlying technologies and patents (and why would you have a problem with that? Patent violations are patent violations in any regard), but it isn't THIS one?
I also see no mention anywhere of Apple pursuing "excessive damages", or blocking all opportunity for licensing. It's like you're almost making this stuff up, based entirely on presumption. Seriously...
Yea, right, sure, I am gonna run and "find you Apple enthusiast"!
Tell you what: if you would not challenge me to "find you" something, "I would agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet".
No, it's cool, I get it. Desperately insecure about your choices, so much so that you have to actively seek out those that might chose differently so you can dance and yell.
But it's OK. Soon, your testicles will drop, and you'll get a place of your own, and you'll feel good enough about yourself to just do what you want without having to make sure everyone is watching.
It's also pretty clear from the framing of your own statements above that you have a severe bias ...
... you must see that it's kind of foolish for you to expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you start off with this diatribe against the bias of the author.
Har! This one wins the prize for unintentional self-parody.
But I'll follow the Prof's advice: I won't take ANYTHING he says seriously...
Apple will SUE any competition that starts gaining share in their target market. Their patents are broad enough that they can do this. They also ignore any companies that don't pose a huge risk (even ignoring samsung's own Bada) because they are using the courts as a blunt weapon and not as something to "force companies to innovate". Apple is trying to shut the companies down. They pretty much HAVE to fight. The only thing that would protect Samsung (maybe) is going to windowsphone7. Not because it is free of any patent violations, but because Apple would get countersued with stuff it can't dismiss.
It really kills you that Apple is so successful, and Android is a fraud. Android was criminal from the beginning - the company started out copying the Blackberry, with a million buttons and the other technology of the time. Than after the iPhone came out, they sold themselves to Google, and Google ditched the Blackberry-copy plans, and went full on ahead to copy the iPhone.
Do you really think for a minute that Samsung would make the phones and tablets they do if the iPhone had never happened? Do you really think Samsung (or HTC, or Motorola, or anyone else) would have come up with anything even close to what they produce now without the iPhone to copy?
There's absolutely do doubt Samsung copied the iPhone and iPad. There is always the question, though, of whether the courts will make them pay for it. You can argue the legal issues forever, but it's obvious Samsung blatantly copied Apple.
Comments
With that in mind, it tells me that samsung clearly copied the iPhone design, we know samsung know what they are doing & are we honestly surprised by all the legal battles?.
the comments have been good too some really interesting opinions, lots of funny stuff like Menno getting owned repetitively & he still comes back, lots of straw grasping stuff, its made a fun read tho :P
just watched the youtube vid posted by Menno, pretty cool stuff, but that video clearly didn't have a working tablet, it was just a clipboard & they super imposed the animated screen over it.
i guess thats just as good as making a real tablet right ?
... The comparison to Glenn Beck is entirely accurate. I don't think DED is a Facist, but he's irrational in his hatred of other operating systems and I'm far from the first (or the most well known) to say so. ...
If there's anyone involved in this discussion who behaves like Glenn Beck, historically or in this thread, that would be you.
Then why aren't they "defending" themselves against Bada? against WebOS? against the playbook?
There is no point defending against the dead. There is nothing wrong with picking battles. Apple can and should go after those who can hurt Apple if they continue to disseminate products en masse with Apple's IP in them.
Further, we don't know if WebOS and Bada actually threaten Apple's IP as per the exact details of Apple's complaint.
Your'e just assuming things in a typical IANAL fashion.
Interesting how there are all these "common, functional, and obvious" ways of going about things that never seem to happen before Apple does it. In fact, there's typically a period right after Apple introduces a new product (iPod, iPhone, iPad, Air) when a fair number of tech pundits/Apple haters/competitors declare that the new design is stupid and wrong and will never amount to much. Sealed batteries, high prices, "insufficient" specs, walled gardens..... those never seem to strike a lot of people as common, functional, or obvious until Apple starts to have a lot of success, at which point the same people declare that nothing Apple has done is innovative, they just got to where everyone was "obviously" going a bit early.
Remember when the iPad was just a big iPod Touch? When it had a comically large bezel? When abandoning the stylus was a critical shortcoming? When a sealed battery made it practically disposable and terrible value for the money? When the lack of a full array of ports rendered it all but useless? And the glossy screen made it unusable? And just generally there was no point because no one needed a stupid big media tablet for "consumption"?
But when Samsung slavishly copies exactly those horrible mistakes, it's because those horrible mistakes are common, functional, and obvious. OK.
Post of the freakin year. This is why I just can't understand how people could side with Android, and phones/ tabs like these Samsung rip-offs in any legal capacity.
To add to your comments about the iPad and all it's "mistakes", remember when the iPhone came out?
"It's to expensive to ever make it", "The screen will get smudges so no one will buy it", "won't make it because it doesn't have a hardware keyboard", blah blah blah
Or how about the AppStore. "It's not open" "Nobody will ever pay for apps", "Devs will never want to give up a percentage"
Like F'ing clock work though everybody and their dog is making a full screen phone with software keyboard, creating closed stores for their app delivery model.
If everything Apple does is so freaking obvious, why is Apple ALWAYS the first one to do it?
Claims of doctored evidence are absurd. If you actually look at the claims that Apple is making and the legal doctrines they are based on then the supposed doctoring is not relevant.
Whether it is relevant to their argument is beside the point. When you file such a document you make a statement that the contents are truthful to the best of your knowledge. If Apple knowingly put in false information, that is an act of perjury and their whole case could be tossed, or at least the injunctions. Even if the case stands, the court would likely be much stricter with them since they didn't pay nice.
That said, I suspect we have not been told the full truth and one of two things has happened
1. The photos presented as from the court document were 'shopped to make Apple look bad and get tons of hits by either the website or their source and are not what is in the original
2. The photos are there but some accompanying text that explains why has been left out. Again to paint a false image of Apple for the money such an article could create
How do you explain apple using the app drawer instead of the galaxy home screen then?
Because their argument is that the app drawer was copied from the iOS home screen.
Trade dress complaints don't require strict like for like on elements. Which is why they can also include using a yellow flower for the photo gallery although it is not exactly the same yellow flower or background
maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.
IP actions and monopolies are cats and dogs. Not to mention that it is not illegal to have a monopoly. Only how you get it and what you do with it. Apple's mobile monopoly is due to one factor -- bloody awesome sales. That doesn't change if they do or don't protect their IP.
Now if they decided to require everyone that wants in iPhone etc in the future to get a Mac computer because they are going to support Windows anymore, that would be an abuse. Someone could perhaps argue that not having a Windows compat SDK so you have to get a Mac to develop apps is an abuse. Because they crossed market lines.
Whether it is relevant to their argument is beside the point. When you file such a document you make a statement that the contents are truthful to the best of your knowledge. If Apple knowingly put in false information, that is an act of perjury and their whole case could be tossed, or at least the injunctions. Even if the case stands, the court would likely be much stricter with them since they didn't pay nice.
You're assuming that is is not acceptable to submit the evidence in such fashion. I would argue that it is permissible. By resizing the photos of the Samsung device the irrelevant factor of size is removed from the comparison, allowing observers to focus on the relevant question: are the Samsung devices purposefully designed to confuse customers and trade on Apple's designs? And, are they successful in doing so?
If size is irrelevant then surely resizing to make the comparison easier is acceptable.
Of course, it would be nice if they disclosed the resizing
Again, you're not talkinga bout the same thing.
Here I'll make it big and red for you.
APPLE HAS A VALID COMPLAINT FOR TOUCHWIZ
My problem is not the touchwiz suit. My problem is that they are suing ALL android devices, and NOT all touchwiz devices.
And you don't know what Android is like. Don't try.
I'm talking about Samsung slavishly copying Apple's look and feel, both in hardware and in software, when other manufacturers have not. You know... the topic of this article. Excuse me if I don't follow you off on your silly tangent.
Thompson
Message to Apple: Let it go...move on...you already have about 95% of the tablet market. Why are you fighting so much for the remaining 5%? Yeah, I know....you have every right to protect your inventions.....but jeez, maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.
The reason is very simple. The law does not work that way. If you do not protect your patent you lose it.
Apple needs early adjudication of its claims so it can put a stop to Samsung’s copying of Apple’s designs and technology now.
What technology? Technology-wise Apple is 1-2 years behind Samsung. Apple is scared of competition. Samsung phones are far superior: 4G, dual core 1.2ghz processors, super amoled+ screens up to 4.5", NFC, newer Wi-fi, BT, Haptic feedback, SWYPE kyboard, thinner - all these results better usability.
As for "overall design" it's simple: does Apple have patent for a rectangular tablet design with 1" basel, rounded corners, home button in the middle lower part, and grid positioned application icons? It does not. No patent - no grounds for a law suite. The design is too simple/minimalistic to make the case without a patent. I see the device design is also a fashion/trend issue. For instance, some designer came up with bellbottoms: it became a fashion trend. Similar trends exist in industrial design, for that reason TVs and laptops now look the same.
Apple, stop whining, compete, innovate, make better phones: couple more phone models, bigger screens, more carriers, modern specs, innovative features, and more frequent releases. I want great american company to succeed even more. But for now I have no choice but pickup the amazing Galaxy S II next month:
Irrelevant. If the app drawer looks like the iPhone home screen then its still a copy. Naturally Apple is going to make their evidence as convincing as possible, but the methods they are using are not inappropriate and don't change the issue itself.
Well, it is relevant because the app drawer is not the 'overall look and feel'.
You're assuming that is is not acceptable to submit the evidence in such fashion. I would argue that it is permissible. By resizing the photos of the Samsung device the irrelevant factor of size is removed from the comparison, allowing observers to focus on the relevant question: are the Samsung devices purposefully designed to confuse customers and trade on Apple's designs? And, are they successful in doing so?
If size is irrelevant then surely resizing to make the comparison easier is acceptable.
Of course, it would be nice if they disclosed the resizing
size irrelevant? then I suppose TVs are also in breach of. whatever Apple claims?
Tell you what: you find me an Apple enthusiast that posts on Android sites with pictures of hardware, angry rebuttals to any intimation that the iOS doesn't rule and breathless love letters to Cupertino and I'll agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet.
Yea, right, sure, I am gonna run and "find you Apple enthusiast"!
Tell you what: if you would not challenge me to "find you" something, "I would agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet".
Message to Apple: Let it go...move on...you already have about 95% of the tablet market. Why are you fighting so much for the remaining 5%? Yeah, I know....you have every right to protect your inventions.....but jeez, maybe you should wait until there are real competitors out there so that the Feds don't regulate this market as a monopoly.
It makes sense to move fast and early, so you're not losing a much bigger fight later. It sends a message to the market. Apple is willing to fight for their 'design IP'. After all, most of their products don't say "Made by Apple"? they say "Designed by Apple". Design is their core?
And, you can't see that these are a direct mirror-copy of Apple's style? Now is exactly the time to push back. Stem the flood before it happens...
Before Samsung was copying Apple's designs, they were copying Nokia's design style…!! The "Samsung phones before iPhone" could all easily be mistaken for Nokia handsets from the period…
The effect there is that we ultimately think there's nothing to really differentiate the handsets, and the market gets diluted.
I think Apple is smart getting in front of it now. Samsung can try to compete, but with devices that don't mimic every design detail of the iPhone/iPad…
Apple, stop whining, compete, innovate, make better phones: couple more phone models, bigger screens, more carriers, modern specs, innovative features, and more frequent releases. I want great american company to succeed even more. But for now I have no choice but pickup the amazing Galaxy S II next month:
What technology? Apple A5 dual-core SOC is pretty impressive? just one thing among many Apple-designed innovations.
Come on, I remember phones before iPhone. iPhone was not the "natural progression" of the industry. It was a market-changing, market-defining leap forward, designed by Apple...
Full disclosure, please. Do you work for Samsung or one of its affiliates/beneficiaries??
Yes, the current market-tech is awesome? but let Samsung apply it using THEIR style and designs? not this flagrant imitation of Apple's style (although they do say imitation is the highest form of flattery).
I'd apply the same litany of complaints right back to Samsung? stop whining and copying, and start innovating!
They're suing to shut the other companies down. To deny imports and for excessive damages. They're not suing to get licenses, and they're not going after the worst vioations of their IP, but rather the companies that are giving them the most competition.
Or are you also going to ignore the fact that not every android phone runs touchwiz, and not every phone looks anywhere near an iphone.
Presumption of intent is just assumption, not "fact". So these declarations are "made up" by you. I guess to you, they're as obvious as the designs in contention themselves, yes?
And I don't see anything about lawsuits extending to any and every android phone. Why are you talking about phones that don't look anything like the iPhone? This lawsuit doesn't. The core point of the lawsuit under discussion is the blatant copying of Apple's design, down to the small details; all the aggregate things taken together that make an iPhone and iPad a "unique product".
There may be other lawsuits underway that address specific underlying technologies and patents (and why would you have a problem with that? Patent violations are patent violations in any regard), but it isn't THIS one?
I also see no mention anywhere of Apple pursuing "excessive damages", or blocking all opportunity for licensing. It's like you're almost making this stuff up, based entirely on presumption. Seriously...
Yea, right, sure, I am gonna run and "find you Apple enthusiast"!
Tell you what: if you would not challenge me to "find you" something, "I would agree you aren't the most pathetic person on the internet".
No, it's cool, I get it. Desperately insecure about your choices, so much so that you have to actively seek out those that might chose differently so you can dance and yell.
But it's OK. Soon, your testicles will drop, and you'll get a place of your own, and you'll feel good enough about yourself to just do what you want without having to make sure everyone is watching.
It's also pretty clear from the framing of your own statements above that you have a severe bias ...
... you must see that it's kind of foolish for you to expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you start off with this diatribe against the bias of the author.
Har! This one wins the prize for unintentional self-parody.
But I'll follow the Prof's advice: I won't take ANYTHING he says seriously...
Apple will SUE any competition that starts gaining share in their target market. Their patents are broad enough that they can do this. They also ignore any companies that don't pose a huge risk (even ignoring samsung's own Bada) because they are using the courts as a blunt weapon and not as something to "force companies to innovate". Apple is trying to shut the companies down. They pretty much HAVE to fight. The only thing that would protect Samsung (maybe) is going to windowsphone7. Not because it is free of any patent violations, but because Apple would get countersued with stuff it can't dismiss.
It really kills you that Apple is so successful, and Android is a fraud. Android was criminal from the beginning - the company started out copying the Blackberry, with a million buttons and the other technology of the time. Than after the iPhone came out, they sold themselves to Google, and Google ditched the Blackberry-copy plans, and went full on ahead to copy the iPhone.
Do you really think for a minute that Samsung would make the phones and tablets they do if the iPhone had never happened? Do you really think Samsung (or HTC, or Motorola, or anyone else) would have come up with anything even close to what they produce now without the iPhone to copy?
There's absolutely do doubt Samsung copied the iPhone and iPad. There is always the question, though, of whether the courts will make them pay for it. You can argue the legal issues forever, but it's obvious Samsung blatantly copied Apple.