Apple, Samsung present closing arguments in California patent trial

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 139
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,702member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


    If anyone wants to be entertained, read this Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 review from an Android fansite. This is what Samsung is shitting out with the iPad as a template. Amazing. 


    How anyone can root for and support this company, pretending it represents quality and innovation, is beyond me. 


     


    http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08/21/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-review-an-embarrassing-lazy-arrogant-money-grab/


     


     


     


     


     


    You need to watch the video of him pushing down on the back plastic. Its unreal. These are the products that Apple haters root for simply because they compete against Apple's products. Is this the type of product brought to market from a company that gives a ****? This shit is the same price as the iPad, yet haters call the iPad 'overpriced' a product with screen quality, build quality, and performance that completely decimates this piece of shit. 





    I read and watched it all.  I bookmarked this link to show the next Android fanboy / Scamscum shill that tries to defend such a bad product.  I've only casually seen the Note at the store but never really tried it.  It's usually a wasteland of Android tablets that no one tries so it's kind of sad to be even in the area.  Even I was taken a bit off-guard about the how truly bad Samsung's latest and "greatest", especially coming from an Android fansite.



    This is exactly what I've been telling people and fandroids and I get skewered for it.  They are just iHaters and hate for the sake of hating.  For them to even TRY defending Samsung and pretending their products "blows Apple out of the water" is laughable and really does say tons about the posters and their low standards.  Sad, pathetic group of people.



    When you're paying $500 for a tablet (like an iPad), to pay that much for Samsung's offering and have it made of cheap plastic, shoddy construction, lower quality screens, etc... that is just an insult of biblical proportions and really shows how little Samsung cares about their products and consumers.

  • Reply 42 of 139
    tylerk36tylerk36 Posts: 1,037member


    Great california then 49 more states to go.  LOL.

  • Reply 43 of 139
    zozmanzozman Posts: 393member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Samsung is going to win this one.



    Its really possible, I don't have much faith in the legal system, jury or your peers eh :p


     


    "Here look at the monkey, look at the silly monkey!" 

  • Reply 44 of 139
    adamcadamc Posts: 576member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post




    WTF??  It was a valid comparison.  If it weren't for Apple, Samsung and everyone else would be making Blackberry / Nokia clones.  

     



    His hatred for Apple has blinded his common sense.

  • Reply 45 of 139
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Zozman View Post


    Its really possible, I don't have much faith in the legal system, jury or your peers eh :p


     


    "Here look at the monkey, look at the silly monkey!" 



     


    Well, part of the problem in a highly technical case like this is that a "jury of peers" doesn't actually exist, unless they choose only from a particularly technical group of people.

  • Reply 46 of 139
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Samsung is going to win this one.



     


    Just like they won against Nokia, grinding them to dust with their cheap plastic knock-offs.


     


    Hey do you think Samsung will win the one in Europe where they are using their SOFTWARE patent where they INVENTED the smiley?


     


    :)


     


    :)


     


    Do you think?


     


    Huh?


     


    Will their smiley patent win?


     


    :)


     


    :)


     


    How could Europe allow this?


     


    Samsung INVENTED the smiley only in Europe are they dumb enough to allow a software patent this stupid.

  • Reply 47 of 139
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    Here is my prediction:

    Any phone that did not have a Samsung logo on it will be found to be infringing.  Here is my reason, although some of Apple's ideas were not original by themselves, all the design elements put together made Apple's iPhone unique.

    It was also very clear that Samsung was copying every market leader from Palm Treo to BlackBerry.  Yes, Samsung made many different types of phones, but Samsung made "More" of iPhone looking phones after they realize the iPhone was a huge success.

    From my research, if a design has a function, it cannot be a trade dress.  For example, the size of the screen cannot be a trade dress.  Or the location of the home button

    I didn't see any Samsung phones without a logo on the front. So according to your logic Samsung isn't infringing on Apples design.
    Also all Samsung phones presented have design elements that differ from Apples.
    So the whole isn't an exact copy.
    It shouldn't be possible to patent a generic form and Apples representatives talk about copying "the look and feel", and that's not very specific at all.
    An exact copy is easily established, just measure the device and compare it to the 'original', if it's off by a certain scaling factor but otherwise identical, it's a copy, otherwise, it's not.
    I am pretty sure none of Samsungs devices is a real copy.
    I'am sure one or two people confused Samsung for Apple and bought the wrong device, but since the logo is clearly present and the product isn't bought in an Apple shop no one could attribute the mistakes to Samsung and a counterfeiting case cannot be made.
    From what I read, all things considering, I would say that Apple has no valid case against Samsung.

    J.
  • Reply 48 of 139
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post





    I didn't see any Samsung phones without a logo on the front. So according to your logic Samsung isn't infringing on Apples design.

    Also all Samsung phones presented have design elements that differ from Apples.

    So the whole isn't an exact copy.

    It shouldn't be possible to patent a generic form and Apples representatives talk about copying "the look and feel", and that's not very specific at all.

    An exact copy is easily established, just measure the device and compare it to the 'original', if it's off by a certain scaling factor but otherwise identical, it's a copy, otherwise, it's not.

    I am pretty sure none of Samsungs devices is a real copy.

    I'am sure one or two people confused Samsung for Apple and bought the wrong device, but since the logo is clearly present and the product isn't bought in an Apple shop no one could attribute the mistakes to Samsung and a counterfeiting case cannot be made.

    From what I read, all things considering, I would say that Apple has no valid case against Samsung.

    J.


     


    Agreed.


     


    This BS from Apple is about stifling healthy competition and all they want is monopoly, this is NOT about protecting their IPs.  


     


    Otherwise, Apple would have been chasing this;


    http://micgadget.com/12958/the-best-iphone-4-knockoff-yet/

  • Reply 49 of 139


    Don't agree.


     


    Er, No.


    Reason: They are not after all smartphone manufacturers, only those who they believe (allegedly) infringe / copy. (Pending outcome of court cases etc)


     


    Sure it will come in time.


    Reason: It makes perfect business sense to go after the biggest global marketing company 1st. The smaller ones will be sure to follow I expect.


     


    'Reasons added'

  • Reply 50 of 139
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    hjb wrote: »
    Agreed.

    This BS from Apple is about stifling healthy competition and all they want is monopoly, this is NOT about protecting their IPs.  

    Otherwise, Apple would have been chasing this;
    http://micgadget.com/12958/the-best-iphone-4-knockoff-yet/

    I'am sure they would have if the device was successful.

    Apple probably isn't after a monopoly, that has all kinds of disadvantages.
    But it does help if you slow down a competitor, especially if the competitor is hugely successfull.
    I think Apple honestly believes that Samsung is infringing on its patents, and in some cases Apple is right.
    But this case is more about the boundarys of the patent system and the current insanity of it.
    Software patents and patents that are too generic (and without a proper implemention - say - blueprint or an actual product) should not be issued.
    This case also demonstrates that the issues at hand are way to complicated and substantial, and cannot be comprehended fully - even by the Judge - let alone the jury; and that in itself should be sufficient to drop the case.

    J.
  • Reply 51 of 139
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    jnjnjn wrote: »
    I didn't see any Samsung phones without a logo on the front. So according to your logic Samsung isn't infringing on Apples design.
    Also all Samsung phones presented have design elements that differ from Apples.
    So the whole isn't an exact copy.
    It shouldn't be possible to patent a generic form and Apples representatives talk about copying "the look and feel", and that's not very specific at all.
    An exact copy is easily established, just measure the device and compare it to the 'original', if it's off by a certain scaling factor but otherwise identical, it's a copy, otherwise, it's not.
    I am pretty sure none of Samsungs devices is a real copy.
    I'am sure one or two people confused Samsung for Apple and bought the wrong device, but since the logo is clearly present and the product isn't bought in an Apple shop no one could attribute the mistakes to Samsung and a counterfeiting case cannot be made.
    From what I read, all things considering, I would say that Apple has no valid case against Samsung.
    J.

    That entire post is nonsense.

    Simply slapping a logo on something doesn't mean you can violate patents (even design patents) with impunity.

    Look at Apple's design patents. They describe a very specific design. If Samsung violates them, then they should be found guilty, whether there's a logo or not. Even if they're slightly large or slightly smaller, they can be infringing. Even if they have a logo slapped on, they can be infringing.

    There are also utility patents involved. If Samsung is found to have violated them, a logo won't protect them.

    Finally, there's the real world evidence. Samsung's own attorneys couldn't tell the difference between the products at 10 feet. Samsung presented evidence that there is confusion among consumers at Best Buy. The logo is obviously not sufficient to prevent confusion.
  • Reply 52 of 139

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


     


     


    How many times have you posted this moronic post and those idiotic comparisons? Are you on Samsung's legal team and just mindlessly vomit out all the desperate horse-shit they've shown/said? You're seriously posting that Fiddler tablet shit again, after Apple built a replica and tore that argument to pieces? If this board had a shred of moderation you would have been banned ages ago. You're a broken record and contribute nothing of worth or intelligence. 


     


    Also, with all due respect, learn some english. I don't post on message boards in languages I don't speak, is it too much to ask you to do the same? Almost every word in that 1st sentence of yours is wrong. 



     


    What are you??? Fanboy nr. 1???!!!


    I specially love your last paragraph - it really shows that you are a very classy guy!!!

  • Reply 53 of 139
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    slurpy wrote: »
    If anyone wants to be entertained, read this Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 review from an Android fansite. This is what Samsung is shitting out with the iPad as a template. Amazing. 
    How anyone can root for and support this company, pretending it represents quality and innovation, is beyond me. 

    http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08/21/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-review-an-embarrassing-lazy-arrogant-money-grab/





    You need to watch the video of him pushing down on the back plastic. Its unreal. These are the products that Apple haters root for simply because they compete against Apple's products. Is this the type of product brought to market from a company that gives a ****? This shit is the same price as the iPad, yet haters call the iPad 'overpriced' a product with screen quality, build quality, and performance that completely decimates this piece of shit. 
    I loved this screen shot. So this is why the fandroids think Android is better than iOS? :lol:

    nexusae0_wm_2012-08-16-23.56.051.png
  • Reply 54 of 139
    hjb wrote: »
    Agreed.

    This BS from Apple is about stifling healthy competition and all they want is monopoly, this is NOT about protecting their IPs.  

    Otherwise, Apple would have been chasing this;
    http://micgadget.com/12958/the-best-iphone-4-knockoff-yet/

    This site's name should really be changed to AndroidInsider.
  • Reply 55 of 139
    845032845032 Posts: 76member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by uguysrnuts View Post





    This site's name should really be changed to AndroidInsider.


     


    Android market share is around 70%.


    Many people switched to android from apple.

  • Reply 56 of 139
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    Look at Apple's design patents. They describe a very specific design. If Samsung violates them, then they should be found guilty, whether there's a logo or not. Even if they're slightly massively larger or slightly incredibly smaller than any Apple device, they can be infringing. Even if they have a logo slapped on <or are 12" thick>, they can be infringing.


    Fixed.

  • Reply 57 of 139
    845032 wrote: »
    Android market share is around 70%.
    Many people switched to android from apple.

    Guess what: the number of people at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale is large. Someone needs to address their needs as well. It's great that Samsung is able to do that.

    Btw, Android's market share in counties like the US is nowhere near 70%. You get to a number like that only because of China and India.
  • Reply 58 of 139
    845032845032 Posts: 76member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    Btw, Android's market share in counties like the US is nowhere near 70%. You get to a number like that only because of China and India.


     


     


    Worldwide market share for smartphones, a market dominated by Apple and Android


    — Android (Google Inc.) — 104.8 million units, 68.1 percent share (46.9 percent a year earlier)


     


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/worldwide-market-share-for-smartphones-a-market-dominated-by-apple-and-android/2012/08/20/dc1bb65e-eb10-11e1-866f-60a00f604425_story.html


     


     


    68.1%. = around 70%.

  • Reply 59 of 139
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 845032 View Post


     


    Android market share is around 70%.


    Many people switched to android from apple.



     


    Hey dude, where you gonna be come iPhone launch day?


     


    How long do ya reckon it will take for the new iPhone to overtake total Galaxy S III sales?


     


    I'll give it slightly less than a week.


     


    Do ya remember when Nokia had 60% share of smartphone's back in 2006, back when Samsung was copying their Symbian dual sliders?


     


    Like this?


     


    i450


     


    http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i450-2076.php

  • Reply 60 of 139
    [quote name="Slurpy" url="/t/152060/apple-samsung-present-closing-arguments-in-california-patent-trial#post_2172779"]If anyone wants to be entertained, read this Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 review from an Android fansite. This is what Samsung is shitting out with the iPad as a template. Amazing. 
    How anyone can root for and support this company, pretending it represents quality and innovation, is beyond me. 

    [URL=http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08/21/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-review-an-embarrassing-lazy-arrogant-money-grab/]http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08/21/samsung-galaxy-note-10-1-review-an-embarrassing-lazy-arrogant-money-grab/[/URL]


    A great review.
    I wonder how many of the bigger gadget websites would post write so honestly if they weren't reliant on the huge amounts of ad revenue Samsung provides, and - constantly being accused of pro Apple bias for every bad remark regarding an Android product.

    All the Samsung support we see at this forum is mostly just Apple hate. I see very little love for Samsung and its output.

    Win or lose this case, Samsung has NO friends.
    They could have been a important, trusted and very well paid friend of Apple, but they copy, then taunt, threaten and accuse.

    WHY ? What do you think you are gaining Samsung ?
Sign In or Register to comment.