Samsung won the 'cloning' lawsuits. Both in Germany and the UK. That was the court case where Apple violated the order and lied about it badly enough to have to carry a message on their homepage for a month.
Plus, haven't they settled out at a total of under $1B so far for patent infringement?
"Kinda" is one way to put it. More secure certainly does not equal better. It just means more secure. And just because a claim of more secure is made does not mean it is true either. Everyone wants to have the best most secure and easiest to use phone OS. iOS has set the bar fairly high for most of that, and it will be seen if this or any following efforts clear that bar or not. Security can always be improved, but the only way to truly ensure security is to compromise user experience, it is a balancing act. If anyone disagrees on this point they truly do not understand what security is and what needs to be done to ensure it.
The only trolly part of that post was your response. If you go on to read the thread you'll find I prove that I'm right unequivocally citing judgements explicitly.
The only trolly part of that post was your response. If you go on to read the thread you'll find I prove that I'm right unequivocally citing judgements explicitly.
Hardly the actions of a troll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Order handed down. Apple complied fully. Judge said, “No, do it again.” Apple protested, rightly, having already done it. Judge threatened fines for complying fully with the ruling. Apple forced to change.
Every report on the lawsuit says this.
Am I confused that once a ruling is decided upon it cannot magically be changed at a whim, much less after it has already been carried out? I doubt it.
Not a single claim made was incorrect.
Prove it. This didn’t happen, by the way. They explicitly said they lost the British case.
No… the notice was part of the ruling.
Which is why it’s so confusing that you would get it THIS wrong.
Credit where credit is due.
I did read all the way to the end, which I am likely to do if there is hearty and intelligence conversation / discourse. I have flagged my OS to not "react" without further data points in the future.
I did read all the way to the end, which I am likely to do if there is hearty and intelligence conversation / discourse. I have flagged my OS to not "react" without further data points in the future.
MJC
No hard feelings. It's clear from even a couple days on this site (I did lurk a little beforehand) that there are way more trolls than I thought, just their posts usually get deleted before I see them.
Anyhow, I don't intend to rile anyone up or even get in an argument. Going to avoid TS in future and just argue my point politely and carefully
Why would Samsung agree to this settlement? They made tens of billions with the galaxy S line and were fined only little less than1 Billion (final amount still to be determined). It would just be bad business.
The Court required an attempt at settlement. If settlement is not possible, then the court can then step in and create a solution. That solution may not be amenable to Samsung, such as further injunctions.
Oh you say, but injunctions against obsolete products do nothing to Samsung's bottom line.
The problem for Samsung is that Apple is quite prepared to bring new IP infringement against Samsung, and the court may then find that Samsung's inability to settle previously cause for immediate injunctions against current and future product sales in the U.S. to provide relief for Apple's infringement claims against a unwilling party.
That has teeth, and that is the end goal that Apple has been moving; injunctions that provide incentives to Samsung to stop infringement.
The Court required an attempt at settlement. If settlement is not possible, then the court can then step in and create a solution. That solution may not be amenable to Samsung, such as further injunctions.
Oh you say, but injunctions against obsolete products do nothing to Samsung's bottom line.
The problem for Samsung is that Apple is quite prepared to bring new IP infringement against Samsung, and the court may then find that Samsung's inability to settle previously cause for immediate injunctions against current and future product sales in the U.S. to provide relief for Apple's infringement claims against a unwilling party.
That has teeth, and that is the end goal that Apple has been moving; injunctions that provide incentives to Samsung to stop infringement.
Don't get me wrong; I actually despite samsung ethics. But they proved one can just copy/steal in this industry and get away with it. 1 Billion is nothing compare to the money they made. These battles will last for years. Enough time for them to develop their own IP.
My point is that they aren't/won't get away with it in the long run; their will be a cost. Your point is that it is still very profitable for them to do this. I agree; for now.
But IP isn't in stasis, and if Apple and others aren't able to protect legitimate IP now and in the future, then most likely there will be legislative intervention that will make it more difficult for IP infringers to profit, i.e., injunctions at lower thresholds and more timely.
One should note that Samsung is even more vulnerable to commoditization and a race to the bottom than Apple is, and many of those low end Android OEM's will be just as happy to infringe Samsung's IP.
Will this ultimately be Samsung's fate; to be copied by large Chinese OEM's?
Henry Ford should sue every car maker for cloning his idea. Before him, cars looked like horse carriages. Just like every apple fanatics claim the same about phones before the iPhone. He could even sue apple for cloning his assembly line approach.. (If he behaved as bad and spoiled as Apple does!)
LG & Prada should even sue Apple, for cloning their LG Prada. (Yes iPhone is a clone of the LG Prada). Samsung could just as well say they copied the LG Prada. As say they copy Apple. I would even say that Samsung phones look MORE like LG Prada clones than an iPhone clone.
Apple basically cloned the touch screen cell phones, and made it as simple as possible. Yet not smart, no MMS, no Apps, no nothing, just music, sms and calls.
Even my SE K750i were capable of apps, email, sms, mms.
Even my Windows Mobile version FIVE touch screen phone, were capable of all that, remember this is pre-iPhone times. And I'm talking about a cell phone OS in version FIVE. BEFORE the iPhone. Sure it had 4 physical buttons underneath the screen. But with time they would naturally disappear on later models (as touch = flexibility). ALL PHONE MAKERS WANT THAT! It's natural evolution of tech! Flexibility! You don't think Apple would like to get rid of that ugly ass button in the bottom of your iPhone? THEY SURE WOULD! It's natural evolution of tech! How can you even patent that? How are you able to patent simplicity? Because baseline is, that's what they're doing. Only reason they are suing Samsung, is because Samsung is the biggest player! = the most money. Plus the fact Samsung makes (or made) the processors for Apple, which could make you believe this is just because they want those processors for FREE! Or cheaper, just like a discount!
If they tried to sue HTC or LG instead. It would be the other way around! Then Apple would owe them money! HTC and LG made phones like iPhone.. BEFORE Apple! Know your history of tech! Apple never made squat! Remember this "Good artists copy, great artists STEAL"? Great quote!!!
All Apple's products is based upon the simplest possible design. It's so obvious when looking at Apple products!
I owned a Windows touch screen phone. BEFORE Apple even came to the cell phone market. Apple just simplified the smart phone design. It's just as simple a design as you get. (Okay it could be a wee bit simpler, but not much). Are you really able to patent simplicity? It's seems like it with the logic of Apple...
Stanley Kubrick should even sue apple for making the iPad, yes in the movie "2001: A space odyssey" a tablet computer is featured. See these gadgets have been in our imagination for decades. How can you sue on this? And how can you even patent designs that have already been made up in movies?
I'm NO fanboi. At the moment, I don't like ANY of the three major mobile OS makers..
I'm just sick and tired of hearing ALL THAT BS. About Samsung cloning Apple.
Go look your self in the mirror iPhone! You might see a LG Prada / HTC Touch rip off!!
If Apple made the laws in this world, there would be just ONE (biased) manufacturer of ANYTHING! Only one manufacturer of chairs, tables, cars, drinks, computers, cpus, ram, hard disks, medicine, tooth brushes, mirrors, candles, light bulbs, TVs, DVD players, DVDs, refrigerators, washing machines, carpets, bricks, calendars, aircraft, boats, paper, clothes, you name it!
And ALL companies would have monopoly in their area. In no fear of ANY competition!
I would LOVE to have monopoly on producing common sugar! And I would leverage the price, so everyone who wants products with sugar would have to sponsor ME!
But that wouldn't be a fun world to live in, would it? FFS it's just competition. And competition makes better products! Apple just seems like the spoiled crying teenage player in this game of competition. Why? Because Apple steal all their product ideas? I bet so! It's hard to be innovative, when you go about stealing all your ideas! I have nothing against that. It's called competition. Who makes the better product wins. And that forces Apple to innovate! A skill they are not very good at. So of course they FEAR that the competing products becomes better. How you prevent this? Yes, you put a big ass financial / law suit stone in their shoes!
And yes innovation is a high selling point of Apple. Truth is, they are just quick at stealing new tech, that way it SEEMS like they were the inventors. But NOOO.. Even the "App store" is a "Ubuntu Software Center" rip off... Apple hasn't been innovative since they had "the Woz" / made the first Apple computers! THAT was innovation! Bet they should sue every PC maker in the world instead. Would make a lot more sense to do so.
Henry Ford should sue every car maker for cloning his idea. Before him, cars looked like horse carriages. Just like every apple fanatics claim the same about phones before the iPhone.
Only reason they are suing Samsung, is because Samsung is the biggest player! = the most money.
Rules #26 & 27.
Plus the fact Samsung makes (or made) the processors for Apple, which could make you believe this is just because they want those processors for FREE! Or cheaper, just like a discount!
No rule, you’re just completely insane.
Know your history of tech! Apple never made squat!
I owned a Windows touch screen phone. BEFORE Apple even came to the cell phone market. Apple just simplified the smart phone design. It's just as simple a design as you get. (Okay it could be a wee bit simpler, but not much). Are you really able to patent simplicity? It's seems like it with the logic of Apple...
Rules #21, 22, 23, & 24.
Stanley Kubrick should even sue apple for making the iPad, yes in the movie "2001: A space odyssey" a tablet computer is featured.
See these gadgets have been in our imagination for decades. How can you sue on this? And how can you even patent designs that have already been made up in movies?
So of course they FEAR that the competing products becomes better. How you prevent this? Yes, you put a big ass financial / law suit stone in their shoes!
Comments
Everyone is getting into the game...
http://www.naturalnews.com/043568_secure_smartphone_Swiss_companies_government_surveillance.html
Of course they will never get back their ultra secretive banking system, so why not.
I guess you forgot that you’re breaking the law right now and that you’ve just given us your IP address.
Seems like the action of someone with mental difficulties.
Samsung won the 'cloning' lawsuits. Both in Germany and the UK. That was the court case where Apple violated the order and lied about it badly enough to have to carry a message on their homepage for a month.
Plus, haven't they settled out at a total of under $1B so far for patent infringement?
Oh look, It's a new troll.
Oh look, It's a new troll.
The only trolly part of that post was your response. If you go on to read the thread you'll find I prove that I'm right unequivocally citing judgements explicitly.
Hardly the actions of a troll.
The only trolly part of that post was your response. If you go on to read the thread you'll find I prove that I'm right unequivocally citing judgements explicitly.
Hardly the actions of a troll.
Order handed down. Apple complied fully. Judge said, “No, do it again.” Apple protested, rightly, having already done it. Judge threatened fines for complying fully with the ruling. Apple forced to change.
Every report on the lawsuit says this.
Am I confused that once a ruling is decided upon it cannot magically be changed at a whim, much less after it has already been carried out? I doubt it.
Not a single claim made was incorrect.
Prove it. This didn’t happen, by the way. They explicitly said they lost the British case.
No… the notice was part of the ruling.
Which is why it’s so confusing that you would get it THIS wrong.
Credit where credit is due.
I did read all the way to the end, which I am likely to do if there is hearty and intelligence conversation / discourse. I have flagged my OS to not "react" without further data points in the future.
MJC
Credit where credit is due.
I did read all the way to the end, which I am likely to do if there is hearty and intelligence conversation / discourse. I have flagged my OS to not "react" without further data points in the future.
MJC
No hard feelings. It's clear from even a couple days on this site (I did lurk a little beforehand) that there are way more trolls than I thought, just their posts usually get deleted before I see them.
Anyhow, I don't intend to rile anyone up or even get in an argument. Going to avoid TS in future and just argue my point politely and carefully
Going to avoid TS in future and just argue my point politely and carefully
Or correctly. Might try that, too.
Or correctly. Might try that, too.
You ran away from our last discussion, maybe don't try trolling in another thread.
You ran away from our last discussion…
How pathetic.
I guess you forgot that you’re breaking the law right now and that you’ve just given us your IP address.
Seems like the action of someone with mental difficulties.
I will quote that one guy with mental disorder everybody is sick of: "Shut up and go way"!
Why would Samsung agree to this settlement? They made tens of billions with the galaxy S line and were fined only little less than1 Billion (final amount still to be determined). It would just be bad business.
The Court required an attempt at settlement. If settlement is not possible, then the court can then step in and create a solution. That solution may not be amenable to Samsung, such as further injunctions.
Oh you say, but injunctions against obsolete products do nothing to Samsung's bottom line.
The problem for Samsung is that Apple is quite prepared to bring new IP infringement against Samsung, and the court may then find that Samsung's inability to settle previously cause for immediate injunctions against current and future product sales in the U.S. to provide relief for Apple's infringement claims against a unwilling party.
That has teeth, and that is the end goal that Apple has been moving; injunctions that provide incentives to Samsung to stop infringement.
The Court required an attempt at settlement. If settlement is not possible, then the court can then step in and create a solution. That solution may not be amenable to Samsung, such as further injunctions.
Oh you say, but injunctions against obsolete products do nothing to Samsung's bottom line.
The problem for Samsung is that Apple is quite prepared to bring new IP infringement against Samsung, and the court may then find that Samsung's inability to settle previously cause for immediate injunctions against current and future product sales in the U.S. to provide relief for Apple's infringement claims against a unwilling party.
That has teeth, and that is the end goal that Apple has been moving; injunctions that provide incentives to Samsung to stop infringement.
Don't get me wrong; I actually despite samsung ethics. But they proved one can just copy/steal in this industry and get away with it. 1 Billion is nothing compare to the money they made. These battles will last for years. Enough time for them to develop their own IP.
My point is that they aren't/won't get away with it in the long run; their will be a cost. Your point is that it is still very profitable for them to do this. I agree; for now.
But IP isn't in stasis, and if Apple and others aren't able to protect legitimate IP now and in the future, then most likely there will be legislative intervention that will make it more difficult for IP infringers to profit, i.e., injunctions at lower thresholds and more timely.
One should note that Samsung is even more vulnerable to commoditization and a race to the bottom than Apple is, and many of those low end Android OEM's will be just as happy to infringe Samsung's IP.
Will this ultimately be Samsung's fate; to be copied by large Chinese OEM's?
Probably.
Henry Ford should sue every car maker for cloning his idea. Before him, cars looked like horse carriages. Just like every apple fanatics claim the same about phones before the iPhone. He could even sue apple for cloning his assembly line approach.. (If he behaved as bad and spoiled as Apple does!)
LG & Prada should even sue Apple, for cloning their LG Prada. (Yes iPhone is a clone of the LG Prada). Samsung could just as well say they copied the LG Prada. As say they copy Apple. I would even say that Samsung phones look MORE like LG Prada clones than an iPhone clone.
Apple basically cloned the touch screen cell phones, and made it as simple as possible. Yet not smart, no MMS, no Apps, no nothing, just music, sms and calls.
Even my SE K750i were capable of apps, email, sms, mms.
Even my Windows Mobile version FIVE touch screen phone, were capable of all that, remember this is pre-iPhone times. And I'm talking about a cell phone OS in version FIVE. BEFORE the iPhone. Sure it had 4 physical buttons underneath the screen. But with time they would naturally disappear on later models (as touch = flexibility). ALL PHONE MAKERS WANT THAT! It's natural evolution of tech! Flexibility! You don't think Apple would like to get rid of that ugly ass button in the bottom of your iPhone? THEY SURE WOULD! It's natural evolution of tech! How can you even patent that? How are you able to patent simplicity? Because baseline is, that's what they're doing. Only reason they are suing Samsung, is because Samsung is the biggest player! = the most money. Plus the fact Samsung makes (or made) the processors for Apple, which could make you believe this is just because they want those processors for FREE! Or cheaper, just like a discount!
If they tried to sue HTC or LG instead. It would be the other way around! Then Apple would owe them money! HTC and LG made phones like iPhone.. BEFORE Apple! Know your history of tech! Apple never made squat! Remember this "Good artists copy, great artists STEAL"? Great quote!!!
All Apple's products is based upon the simplest possible design. It's so obvious when looking at Apple products!
I owned a Windows touch screen phone. BEFORE Apple even came to the cell phone market. Apple just simplified the smart phone design. It's just as simple a design as you get. (Okay it could be a wee bit simpler, but not much). Are you really able to patent simplicity? It's seems like it with the logic of Apple...
Stanley Kubrick should even sue apple for making the iPad, yes in the movie "2001: A space odyssey" a tablet computer is featured. See these gadgets have been in our imagination for decades. How can you sue on this? And how can you even patent designs that have already been made up in movies?
I'm NO fanboi. At the moment, I don't like ANY of the three major mobile OS makers..
I'm just sick and tired of hearing ALL THAT BS. About Samsung cloning Apple.
Go look your self in the mirror iPhone! You might see a LG Prada / HTC Touch rip off!!
If Apple made the laws in this world, there would be just ONE (biased) manufacturer of ANYTHING! Only one manufacturer of chairs, tables, cars, drinks, computers, cpus, ram, hard disks, medicine, tooth brushes, mirrors, candles, light bulbs, TVs, DVD players, DVDs, refrigerators, washing machines, carpets, bricks, calendars, aircraft, boats, paper, clothes, you name it!
And ALL companies would have monopoly in their area. In no fear of ANY competition!
I would LOVE to have monopoly on producing common sugar! And I would leverage the price, so everyone who wants products with sugar would have to sponsor ME!
But that wouldn't be a fun world to live in, would it? FFS it's just competition. And competition makes better products! Apple just seems like the spoiled crying teenage player in this game of competition. Why? Because Apple steal all their product ideas? I bet so! It's hard to be innovative, when you go about stealing all your ideas! I have nothing against that. It's called competition. Who makes the better product wins. And that forces Apple to innovate! A skill they are not very good at. So of course they FEAR that the competing products becomes better. How you prevent this? Yes, you put a big ass financial / law suit stone in their shoes!
And yes innovation is a high selling point of Apple. Truth is, they are just quick at stealing new tech, that way it SEEMS like they were the inventors. But NOOO.. Even the "App store" is a "Ubuntu Software Center" rip off... Apple hasn't been innovative since they had "the Woz" / made the first Apple computers! THAT was innovation! Bet they should sue every PC maker in the world instead. Would make a lot more sense to do so.
MY TWO CENTS!
Rule #7, 21, 22, 23, & 24.
Rule #8.
Rules #22 & 23.
It's natural evolution of tech!
Rule #22.
Rules #26 & 27.
No rule, you’re just completely insane.
Rules #7, 8, 9, 21, 22, & 23.
Rule #3.
Rule #24.
Rules #21, 22, 23, & 24.
Rules #7 & 8.
Rules #7 & 8.
Rule #2.
Then prove it, psychopath.
If Apple made the laws in this world, there would be just ONE (biased) manufacturer of ANYTHING!
Rules #26 & 27.
Rules #26 & 27.
Rules #26 & 27.
Rules #3, 7, & 8.
Rules #2, 3, 7, & 8.
Rules #2, 26, & 27.
Rules #2, 26, & 27.
Rules #3, 7, 8, & 21.
Rules #3 & 21.
Rules #3, 7, 8, 21, & 22.
Congratulations. You have won the “Make Every Single Sentence Of Your Post Conform To The Rules Of The Troll List” essay contest.
Your prize is shutting up forever and going away.
You've already reported this item. Thanks for helping to make our community better.
Seems like he's being paid per word, and extra if he included "I'm no fanboi"