My personal feeling is that Google and Android have taken quite a bit from Apple and the iPhone. It's pretty hard to say otherwise based on their handsets pre-iPhone.
Besides that though, I'd rather plunk down my hard earned money for phone created by a company whose core business model is designing great hardware and software, then selling it to anyone who wants it. (It doesn't even necessarily have to be Apple) Google's core business however is very different. They create (for the most part) services and offer them for free so they can harvest your personal information and then sell it. THAT is the real product that they sell. I avoid Google wherever I can. They creep me out. like Facebook.
The 4 patents are listed above in the article I believe the biggest one was regarding Siri. The tablet that they got the injunction against already has a newer version out, but I believe that their is a fee for Samsung to have to pay Apple now. Samsung won a case last week where Apple will have to pay them money. Now this Samsung Google Nexus phone, when I looked it up all I could find is an older phone from last year, from October of 2011. Not being familiar with android personally is there a newer version of this out? Color me confused with so many android phones and names. I keep seeing news articles saying Nexus "device" which isn't right from what I can find it's only the phone.
Nexus is the common product name for Android-based devices which are Google co-developed flagship products such as Nexus One by HTC Corporation, Galaxy Nexus by Samsung, Nexus S by Samsung and Nexus 7 tablet by Asus.
The advantage of Android-based Nexus products is that the devices are typically high-end, fully featured devices with "stock" Android which means you are in theory purchasing a market-leading device that will actually receive software updates and lacks most, if not all, carrier bloatware as a result. In my opinion, Android-based Nexus products are the closest the Android platform is (without modification) to the Apple iOS experience.
I headed over to Engadget for a few laughs, a site which I rarely visit anymore, because the comment sections are infested with ignorant trash and human garbage, but it was pretty funny and also pretty predictable to read some of the whiny and hateful comments being made by the butthurt Fandroids there. Hopefully there are more bans and injunctions coming in the future, it makes me feel good to see other ignorant people mad.
And you are just as low as them now for the comments you just said. Face it, Apple is afraid of competition and so they try to sue anyone that gets in their way.
Thanks for pointing that out. I'll modify my statement then: Google has never sued any competitor.
Regardless as to how want to cleverly replace nouns until the statement is technically correct your premise has no barring on anything. I've never sued anyone but that doesn't mean I'm more altruistic, fair or more in-the-right than someone who has sued another.
A company that feels their IP is being violated should seek legal action so each case needs to be considered individually. That means the number of times a company has sued or has been sued should ever be made part of any reasonable discussion.
So what are the specific issues in this instance? UI stuff? Packaging? Cables/accessories? The handset hardware itself actually seems reasonably different for once!
(Obviously I realize that the whole thing exists in imitation of Apple regardless... but that’s not the same as specific claims that would lead to an injunction.)
Read the article. the patents are there for you to see.
I gotta hand it to Apple. Kudos on the timing. And just as the Galaxy Nexus drops to $350 too.....
the Judge is the only one that gets credit for this. She's had this motion for a while and handed down her decision today. Apple was no part of the timing
Google literally has dozens of pending lawsuits of which this is only one.
Which lawsuits has Google initiated? Certainly not dozens, nor even half a dozen. There's one (perhaps two?) against a government agency, and apparently a couple over the years against companies who were not competition for reasons other than keeping them out of their "market". Did they inherit some on-going cases with the MM purchase? Yes they did. For you to extend that into a claim that Google filed suit is disingenuous. Find the cases that Google themselves filed and then do another count. Try to get past 4 in over a dozen years.
can someone explain the "$96 million bond" part? they have to pay $96 million to cover damages of what?! and while you are at it, explain "the injunction later be found unjust" part?
So this is a prelim injunction. Basically Apple went to the Judge and said "hey so why should Samsung be able to sell their phones and make phone when they stole our tech" and the Judge agreed that yes it was very possible that that would be the final vote at the actual case and is barring Samsung from selling this phone. But right now that is just the Judge's opinion and the jury could decide otherwise. And if they decide that then in hindsight it was wrong to have barred the sales of the phone. So Apple has to bank money with the court that will be used to pay Samsung if Apple loses. It's a common practice in this kind of case.
Apparently not. If Google thought the Notification Center was a copy of Google's prior art they should sue. As far as I know Google hasn't sued, nor have Google's legal entities sued them for patent infringement regarding the Notification Center.
exactly. And it isn't really like they took the look and feel or the coding that makes it work.
so many folks are yelling about how Android's grid isn't the same as iOS cause you have to hit an icon to make it pop up so turn it around and look at the two versions of notification. in Android you have your little badge bar and then you swipe down to see details. in iOS you see badges on the actual app etc. not the same structure.
google did file for a patent like 4 years ago but it hasn't been granted yet. Which is a factor in why they haven't sued because you can't sue over a patent you don't actually have. But one wonders why it hasn't been granted yet and exactly what they are claiming in the patent. And whether Apple, which has a lot of patents in their portfolio might have a similar one pre the Google application.
Face it, Apple is afraid of competition and so they try to sue anyone that gets in their way.
Nope, when you invent things, you patent certain things, so that you will have legal protection in case somebody else comes along and decides to implement your ideas without your permission or compensation. That's how things work in civilized, modern societies.
If people couldn't protect their ideas, then nobody would ever spend any time and money on coming up with any new ideas, if other people could simply rip them off afterwards with little or no effort at all. No company would bother to spend years of research and a ton of money on making new products, nobody would bother to discover any new medicines etc. Millions of people would die if we lived by ignorant Fandroid rules.
Regardless as to how want to cleverly replace nouns until the statement is technically correct your premise has no barring on anything. I've never sued anyone but that doesn't mean I'm more altruistic, fair or more in-the-right than someone who has sued another.
A company that feels their IP is being violated should seek legal action so each case needs to be considered individually. That means the number of times a company has sued or has been sued should ever be made part of any reasonable discussion.
Of course it is. Otherwise you'd have to deny the existence of individuals and/or companies who use the courts for a living. Slip and fall claims, phantom car accident injuries, the neighbor who sues over the tree in your yard, extending all the way to companies like Core Wireless whose entire business plan revolves around mandatory infringement suits at Microsoft and Nokia's behest. Some people and companies have a reputation for litigation rather than negotiation, quick to call the attorney for any perceived slight or trivial injury. Others do not even tho they may suffer the same harm or the same insult. Google's approach is pretty clear. Courtrooms aren't their first choice when disagreements occur.
Nope, when you invent things, you patent certain things, so that you will have legal protection in case somebody else comes along and decides to implement your ideas without your permission or compensation. That's how things work in civilized, modern societies.
If people couldn't protect their ideas, then nobody would ever spend any time and money on coming up with any new ideas, if other people could simply rip them off afterwards with little or no effort at all. No company would bother to spend years of research and a ton of money on making new products, nobody would bother to discover any new medicines etc. Millions of people would die if we lived by ignorant Fandroid rules.
Then explain to me why Apple infringed on the Jail Break community and Android and is playing catchup and using Google's ideas?
Then explain to me why Apple infringed on the Jail Break community and Android and is playing catchup and using Google's ideas?
I've never claimed that Apple has never borrowed any ideas from other sources. If anybody believes that they have legitimate claims against Apple, then they are free to sue. I don't have any issues with that, as long as we're not talking about FRAND patents.
[" url="/t/151011/apple-wins-injunction-against-samsung-galaxy-nexus-smartphone/80#post_2137577"]
I've never claimed that Apple has never borrowed any ideas from other sources. If anybody believes that they have legitimate claims against Apple, then they are free to sue. I don't have any issues with that, as long as we're not talking about FRAND patents.
I would even say they have every right to sue over FRAND patents as long as the licensing is fair and reasonable. If Apple has infringed upon another companies technology that company has every right to fair and reasonable compensation.
Lets face it, Apple wouldn't be investing millions to continue to innovate and release the iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... if there wasn't healthy competition from Android phones. Competition = good for the consumer like you and me. Stop being a nerd.
Of course it is. Otherwise you'd have to deny the existence of individuals and/or companies who use the courts for a living. Slip and fall claims, phantom car accident injuries, the neighbor who sues over the tree in your yard, extending all the way to companies like Core Wireless whose entire business plan revolves around mandatory infringement suits at Microsoft and Nokia's behest. Some people and companies have a reputation for litigation rather than negotiation, quick to call the attorney for any perceived slight or trivial injury. Others do not even tho they may suffer the same harm or the same insult. Google's approach is pretty clear. Courtrooms aren't their first choice when disagreements occur.
Then you argue the merits of their claims, not the number of claims themselves.
PS: Would you not consider a Moto lawsuit part of Google at this point?
Comments
My personal feeling is that Google and Android have taken quite a bit from Apple and the iPhone. It's pretty hard to say otherwise based on their handsets pre-iPhone.
Besides that though, I'd rather plunk down my hard earned money for phone created by a company whose core business model is designing great hardware and software, then selling it to anyone who wants it. (It doesn't even necessarily have to be Apple) Google's core business however is very different. They create (for the most part) services and offer them for free so they can harvest your personal information and then sell it. THAT is the real product that they sell. I avoid Google wherever I can. They creep me out. like Facebook.
Nexus is the common product name for Android-based devices which are Google co-developed flagship products such as Nexus One by HTC Corporation, Galaxy Nexus by Samsung, Nexus S by Samsung and Nexus 7 tablet by Asus.
The advantage of Android-based Nexus products is that the devices are typically high-end, fully featured devices with "stock" Android which means you are in theory purchasing a market-leading device that will actually receive software updates and lacks most, if not all, carrier bloatware as a result. In my opinion, Android-based Nexus products are the closest the Android platform is (without modification) to the Apple iOS experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn
"Google sues tiny indie label"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/06/google_sues_blues_label/
Sorry, still not a competitor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
I headed over to Engadget for a few laughs, a site which I rarely visit anymore, because the comment sections are infested with ignorant trash and human garbage, but it was pretty funny and also pretty predictable to read some of the whiny and hateful comments being made by the butthurt Fandroids there. Hopefully there are more bans and injunctions coming in the future, it makes me feel good to see other ignorant people mad.
And you are just as low as them now for the comments you just said. Face it, Apple is afraid of competition and so they try to sue anyone that gets in their way.
Regardless as to how want to cleverly replace nouns until the statement is technically correct your premise has no barring on anything. I've never sued anyone but that doesn't mean I'm more altruistic, fair or more in-the-right than someone who has sued another.
A company that feels their IP is being violated should seek legal action so each case needs to be considered individually. That means the number of times a company has sued or has been sued should ever be made part of any reasonable discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
So what are the specific issues in this instance? UI stuff? Packaging? Cables/accessories? The handset hardware itself actually seems reasonably different for once!
(Obviously I realize that the whole thing exists in imitation of Apple regardless... but that’s not the same as specific claims that would lead to an injunction.)
Read the article. the patents are there for you to see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
I gotta hand it to Apple. Kudos on the timing. And just as the Galaxy Nexus drops to $350 too.....
the Judge is the only one that gets credit for this. She's had this motion for a while and handed down her decision today. Apple was no part of the timing
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
As it should be. Innovate, don't recreate.
Google literally has dozens of pending lawsuits of which this is only one.
Which lawsuits has Google initiated? Certainly not dozens, nor even half a dozen. There's one (perhaps two?) against a government agency, and apparently a couple over the years against companies who were not competition for reasons other than keeping them out of their "market". Did they inherit some on-going cases with the MM purchase? Yes they did. For you to extend that into a claim that Google filed suit is disingenuous. Find the cases that Google themselves filed and then do another count. Try to get past 4 in over a dozen years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedude
can someone explain the "$96 million bond" part? they have to pay $96 million to cover damages of what?! and while you are at it, explain "the injunction later be found unjust" part?
So this is a prelim injunction. Basically Apple went to the Judge and said "hey so why should Samsung be able to sell their phones and make phone when they stole our tech" and the Judge agreed that yes it was very possible that that would be the final vote at the actual case and is barring Samsung from selling this phone. But right now that is just the Judge's opinion and the jury could decide otherwise. And if they decide that then in hindsight it was wrong to have barred the sales of the phone. So Apple has to bank money with the court that will be used to pay Samsung if Apple loses. It's a common practice in this kind of case.
In his defense, the article was heavily edited after he posted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
Apparently not. If Google thought the Notification Center was a copy of Google's prior art they should sue. As far as I know Google hasn't sued, nor have Google's legal entities sued them for patent infringement regarding the Notification Center.
exactly. And it isn't really like they took the look and feel or the coding that makes it work.
so many folks are yelling about how Android's grid isn't the same as iOS cause you have to hit an icon to make it pop up so turn it around and look at the two versions of notification. in Android you have your little badge bar and then you swipe down to see details. in iOS you see badges on the actual app etc. not the same structure.
google did file for a patent like 4 years ago but it hasn't been granted yet. Which is a factor in why they haven't sued because you can't sue over a patent you don't actually have. But one wonders why it hasn't been granted yet and exactly what they are claiming in the patent. And whether Apple, which has a lot of patents in their portfolio might have a similar one pre the Google application.
Quote:
Originally Posted by specter2009
Face it, Apple is afraid of competition and so they try to sue anyone that gets in their way.
Nope, when you invent things, you patent certain things, so that you will have legal protection in case somebody else comes along and decides to implement your ideas without your permission or compensation. That's how things work in civilized, modern societies.
If people couldn't protect their ideas, then nobody would ever spend any time and money on coming up with any new ideas, if other people could simply rip them off afterwards with little or no effort at all. No company would bother to spend years of research and a ton of money on making new products, nobody would bother to discover any new medicines etc. Millions of people would die if we lived by ignorant Fandroid rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Regardless as to how want to cleverly replace nouns until the statement is technically correct your premise has no barring on anything. I've never sued anyone but that doesn't mean I'm more altruistic, fair or more in-the-right than someone who has sued another.
A company that feels their IP is being violated should seek legal action so each case needs to be considered individually. That means the number of times a company has sued or has been sued should ever be made part of any reasonable discussion.
Of course it is. Otherwise you'd have to deny the existence of individuals and/or companies who use the courts for a living. Slip and fall claims, phantom car accident injuries, the neighbor who sues over the tree in your yard, extending all the way to companies like Core Wireless whose entire business plan revolves around mandatory infringement suits at Microsoft and Nokia's behest. Some people and companies have a reputation for litigation rather than negotiation, quick to call the attorney for any perceived slight or trivial injury. Others do not even tho they may suffer the same harm or the same insult. Google's approach is pretty clear. Courtrooms aren't their first choice when disagreements occur.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Posner has a terrible record as far as I'm concerned. Look. I don't care how many books or arguments he's made:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/us/15cncwarren.html?_r=1&ref=richardaposner
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/books/review/Ferguson-t.html?ref=richardaposner
In addition, he loses all credibility with me for his Keynesian positions.
You loose all credibility with me for this nutty post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Nope, when you invent things, you patent certain things, so that you will have legal protection in case somebody else comes along and decides to implement your ideas without your permission or compensation. That's how things work in civilized, modern societies.
If people couldn't protect their ideas, then nobody would ever spend any time and money on coming up with any new ideas, if other people could simply rip them off afterwards with little or no effort at all. No company would bother to spend years of research and a ton of money on making new products, nobody would bother to discover any new medicines etc. Millions of people would die if we lived by ignorant Fandroid rules.
Then explain to me why Apple infringed on the Jail Break community and Android and is playing catchup and using Google's ideas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by specter2009
Then explain to me why Apple infringed on the Jail Break community and Android and is playing catchup and using Google's ideas?
I've never claimed that Apple has never borrowed any ideas from other sources. If anybody believes that they have legitimate claims against Apple, then they are free to sue. I don't have any issues with that, as long as we're not talking about FRAND patents.
I would even say they have every right to sue over FRAND patents as long as the licensing is fair and reasonable. If Apple has infringed upon another companies technology that company has every right to fair and reasonable compensation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubernabei
Lets face it, Apple wouldn't be investing millions to continue to innovate and release the iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S... if there wasn't healthy competition from Android phones. Competition = good for the consumer like you and me. Stop being a nerd.
talk about a reality distortion field.
Then you argue the merits of their claims, not the number of claims themselves.
PS: Would you not consider a Moto lawsuit part of Google at this point?