It clearly IS copying the iPad?s look?without seeing the iPad, they?d never have made it look the way it does. Tablets don?t HAVE to look like iPads, and not all of them do.
But it?s not copying nearly as closely as some. I?m not surprised they lost.
And in defending patents/trade dress/etc, legally I don?t think Apple CAN choose to let the ?little guy? get away with it. They have to defend their creations from everyone. Sometimes they lose.
And you think the Ipad was the first rectangular, black, glass screened tablet-like computer device ever? Just because something is rectangular, black, has buttons...doesn't mean it copied the iPad. There isn't much other form factor for tablets.
I'm just glad that Apple didn't create the first television. They all look exactly the same, yet I don't see Vizio/Samsung/Sony/Panazonic/etc suing each other for having similar looking products!
In Foss's description of the suit he notes that the spanish judge was in a community of 25,500 people, one who likely sees many world class lawsuits (sarcasm). I would think that apple might want to appeal this finding and take the suit up to a more regional or national level where the legal system is likely less related to the petitioner.
Courts can be capricious particularly when they get out of their comfort zone.
I would think that this company would have filed in the most friendly court it could find.
What world class suit? It has been judged where Apple has filled the complaint
Apple has an absolute right to attempt a defense of any IP rights they believe they have in a civil court. It's the filing of a criminal complaint that's particularly worrisome to me. That smacks of over-the-top bullying. According to FOSSPatents they threatened other small producers of tablets with criminal filings, and rather than fight the others rolled over. NT-K wouldn't go away quietly. Kudos to them.
Civil charges are completely understandable. Threatening to see that company owners are put in jail over criminal charges if they don't cow-tow to Apple is way beyond reasonable IMHO.
Even the normally Apple-friendly Florian has harsh words for Apple:
"Considering that this was not a case of product piracy but just a dispute over whether or not Apple has exclusive design rights covering n-tk's Andoid-based products, I think it's absolutely outrageous that Apple tried to attack its rival under criminal law. . .
I think Apple should use better judgment in the future. This story from Spain makes Apple look very bad."
"moral damages"... Yup, sounds like a company of Fandroids
They really should just file their "socialist" FSF manifesto with the Spanish courts as proof of "moral damages". That's the subtext behind this lawsuit, some kind of moral crusade, originally started by Richard Stallman against evil greedy capitalists like Apple would seek to limit our "freedom" to copy content and ideas. That's what it's really about, isn't it?
I've seen no evidence that this has anything to do with the FSF.
Instead, it seems to be an innocent David fighting an ugly Goliath, and winning big time.
The moral damages would be for the claim that Apple knowingly, intentionally used the courts, advancing bullshit claims in order to hurt competitors and increase Apple's profits.
I am glad that the courts will help stop this sleazy corporate abuse by mega-giants like Apple.
Apple needs to start competing fairly, and stop using bullshit lawsuits as offensive weapons. It is just plain sleazy.
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
In Foss's description of the suit he notes that the spanish judge was in a community of 25,500 people, one who likely sees many world class lawsuits (sarcasm). I would think that apple might want to appeal this finding and take the suit up to a more regional or national level where the legal system is likely less related to the petitioner.
Courts can be capricious particularly when they get out of their comfort zone.
I would think that this company would have filed in the most friendly court it could find.
And what, Apple's lawyers were too stupid to file their original suit in what they considered the friendliest venue for the suit?
And in defending patents/trade dress/etc, legally I don?t think Apple CAN choose to let the ?little guy? get away with it. They have to defend their creations from everyone. Sometimes they lose.
Apple has no obligation under any legal system to file bullshit criminal claims.
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
Which quote are you referring to?
And why not just stick to the topic at hand, instead of sh=t-talking other posters?
Yep. I think this underscores the need for companies to closely review their law suits before spending money on them. God knows the courts are clogged with frivolous lawsuits.
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all. To me this would seem like an overly depressing and time consuming when you have more important stuff to deal with. Leave it to the lawyers to determine who to sue and why. Same goes with Samsung. While their latest moves are desperate they actions that I'd think any multi-national company respond even if knowing they won't win.
Hard to tell. Though I can't see SJ having been directly involved his combative instinct might have directed the legal dept. Not that Cook is a push-over. But ultimately Apple's business model dictates that they must protect their IP. The one thing they can never allow is that it becomes a free-for-all where Apple innovates and everybody else copies. But the lines are blurry, and they keep moving.
I've searched the web for more (specific) information regarding exactly what criminal charges were alleged/made/asserted by Apple. Every story seems to be a rehash of the Expansión story and the EuropaPress.es article with quotes from Florian Mueller's blog thrown in for good measure. Does anyone know?
Based on the few designs I've seen I don't agree with Apple's lawsuit against Nuevas Tecnologias y Energias Catala. Stay classy, Apple.
I tend to agree. I undestand the lawsuit against Samsung given how similar it is to the iPad. But in this case, neither the hardware nor the UI (from the picture in the story) have what I would consider to be striking resemblance to iPad/iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all. To me this would seem like an overly depressing and time consuming when you have more important stuff to deal with. Leave it to the lawyers to determine who to sue and why. Same goes with Samsung. While their latest moves are desperate they actions that I'd think any multi-national company respond even if knowing they won't win.
Given is statements to his biographer, I suspect Jobs was pushing for these lawsuits. The strategy seems clear... They go after Samsung because of what appears to be blatent copying. Then also go after a smattering of smaller companies who you think you can crush in court to establish precedent in multiple jurisdictions which you can leverage in arguing future cases.
Given is statements to his biographer, I suspect Jobs was pushing for these lawsuits. The strategy seems clear... They go after Samsung because of what appears to be blatent copying. Then also go after a smattering of smaller companies who you think you can crush in court to establish precedent in multiple jurisdictions which you can leverage in arguing future cases.
That makes sense from a strategical standpoint, but I can't say I agree with killing off small fish that aren't blatantly copying. If that is the case then I'm glad Apple has lost this round against NT-K.
That makes sense from a strategical standpoint, but I can't say I agree with killing off small fish that aren't blatantly copying. If that is the case then I'm glad Apple has lost this round against NT-K.
I see this as low risk experimental suing - if they loose and get countersued the risks are not that huge, though of course others can use the case as precedent. If they win however, it is another small victory that in the end can become part of an intimidating threat against larger entities.
All at the expense of the smaller companies which unfortunately makes it look like bullying.
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
They took out the flea, iKol, now it's time to go for the horsefly.
Comments
It clearly IS copying the iPad?s look?without seeing the iPad, they?d never have made it look the way it does. Tablets don?t HAVE to look like iPads, and not all of them do.
But it?s not copying nearly as closely as some. I?m not surprised they lost.
And in defending patents/trade dress/etc, legally I don?t think Apple CAN choose to let the ?little guy? get away with it. They have to defend their creations from everyone. Sometimes they lose.
And you think the Ipad was the first rectangular, black, glass screened tablet-like computer device ever? Just because something is rectangular, black, has buttons...doesn't mean it copied the iPad. There isn't much other form factor for tablets.
I'm just glad that Apple didn't create the first television. They all look exactly the same, yet I don't see Vizio/Samsung/Sony/Panazonic/etc suing each other for having similar looking products!
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all.
Given the vindictive vitriol he has been quoted as spewing, my guess is 100%.
He claimed that he would spend $40,000,000,000.00, every penny Apple had at the time, in order to use the courts to hurt competitors.
"moral damages"... Yup, sounds like a company of Fandroids
Why people talk without knowing nothing about what they're talking?
Moral damages in Spanish law are asked as damages to the public image. It has nothing to do with FSF, fandroids or anything
In Foss's description of the suit he notes that the spanish judge was in a community of 25,500 people, one who likely sees many world class lawsuits (sarcasm). I would think that apple might want to appeal this finding and take the suit up to a more regional or national level where the legal system is likely less related to the petitioner.
Courts can be capricious particularly when they get out of their comfort zone.
I would think that this company would have filed in the most friendly court it could find.
What world class suit? It has been judged where Apple has filled the complaint
Civil charges are completely understandable. Threatening to see that company owners are put in jail over criminal charges if they don't cow-tow to Apple is way beyond reasonable IMHO.
Even the normally Apple-friendly Florian has harsh words for Apple:
"Considering that this was not a case of product piracy but just a dispute over whether or not Apple has exclusive design rights covering n-tk's Andoid-based products, I think it's absolutely outrageous that Apple tried to attack its rival under criminal law. . .
I think Apple should use better judgment in the future. This story from Spain makes Apple look very bad."
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...t-against.html
"moral damages"... Yup, sounds like a company of Fandroids
They really should just file their "socialist" FSF manifesto with the Spanish courts as proof of "moral damages". That's the subtext behind this lawsuit, some kind of moral crusade, originally started by Richard Stallman against evil greedy capitalists like Apple would seek to limit our "freedom" to copy content and ideas. That's what it's really about, isn't it?
I've seen no evidence that this has anything to do with the FSF.
Instead, it seems to be an innocent David fighting an ugly Goliath, and winning big time.
The moral damages would be for the claim that Apple knowingly, intentionally used the courts, advancing bullshit claims in order to hurt competitors and increase Apple's profits.
I am glad that the courts will help stop this sleazy corporate abuse by mega-giants like Apple.
Apple needs to start competing fairly, and stop using bullshit lawsuits as offensive weapons. It is just plain sleazy.
In Foss's description of the suit he notes that the spanish judge was in a community of 25,500 people, one who likely sees many world class lawsuits (sarcasm). I would think that apple might want to appeal this finding and take the suit up to a more regional or national level where the legal system is likely less related to the petitioner.
Courts can be capricious particularly when they get out of their comfort zone.
I would think that this company would have filed in the most friendly court it could find.
And what, Apple's lawyers were too stupid to file their original suit in what they considered the friendliest venue for the suit?
And in defending patents/trade dress/etc, legally I don?t think Apple CAN choose to let the ?little guy? get away with it. They have to defend their creations from everyone. Sometimes they lose.
Apple has no obligation under any legal system to file bullshit criminal claims.
They have no obligation to do that, ever.
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
Or, in ConradJoe's case, 20 years.
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
Which quote are you referring to?
And why not just stick to the topic at hand, instead of sh=t-talking other posters?
Always good to stand up to the big guy and win.
Yep. I think this underscores the need for companies to closely review their law suits before spending money on them. God knows the courts are clogged with frivolous lawsuits.
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all. To me this would seem like an overly depressing and time consuming when you have more important stuff to deal with. Leave it to the lawyers to determine who to sue and why. Same goes with Samsung. While their latest moves are desperate they actions that I'd think any multi-national company respond even if knowing they won't win.
Hard to tell. Though I can't see SJ having been directly involved his combative instinct might have directed the legal dept. Not that Cook is a push-over. But ultimately Apple's business model dictates that they must protect their IP. The one thing they can never allow is that it becomes a free-for-all where Apple innovates and everybody else copies. But the lines are blurry, and they keep moving.
Based on the few designs I've seen I don't agree with Apple's lawsuit against Nuevas Tecnologias y Energias Catala. Stay classy, Apple.
I tend to agree. I undestand the lawsuit against Samsung given how similar it is to the iPad. But in this case, neither the hardware nor the UI (from the picture in the story) have what I would consider to be striking resemblance to iPad/iOS.
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all. To me this would seem like an overly depressing and time consuming when you have more important stuff to deal with. Leave it to the lawyers to determine who to sue and why. Same goes with Samsung. While their latest moves are desperate they actions that I'd think any multi-national company respond even if knowing they won't win.
Given is statements to his biographer, I suspect Jobs was pushing for these lawsuits. The strategy seems clear... They go after Samsung because of what appears to be blatent copying. Then also go after a smattering of smaller companies who you think you can crush in court to establish precedent in multiple jurisdictions which you can leverage in arguing future cases.
Given is statements to his biographer, I suspect Jobs was pushing for these lawsuits. The strategy seems clear... They go after Samsung because of what appears to be blatent copying. Then also go after a smattering of smaller companies who you think you can crush in court to establish precedent in multiple jurisdictions which you can leverage in arguing future cases.
That makes sense from a strategical standpoint, but I can't say I agree with killing off small fish that aren't blatantly copying. If that is the case then I'm glad Apple has lost this round against NT-K.
That makes sense from a strategical standpoint, but I can't say I agree with killing off small fish that aren't blatantly copying. If that is the case then I'm glad Apple has lost this round against NT-K.
I see this as low risk experimental suing - if they loose and get countersued the risks are not that huge, though of course others can use the case as precedent. If they win however, it is another small victory that in the end can become part of an intimidating threat against larger entities.
All at the expense of the smaller companies which unfortunately makes it look like bullying.
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all.
Did you not read his biography?
Did you not read his biography?
I'm only one-third through. Can you give us an index term or a general section of the book?
Why isn't this ConradJoe (Teckstud) guy banned yet? I'd think purposely falsifying a quote in an attempt to derail a thread would be cause enough for a 2 day suspension.
They took out the flea, iKol, now it's time to go for the horsefly.