Apple wins broad injunction against Samsung in The Netherlands over bounce-back patent

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 51
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

     

     

    You don't seem to get it, *if* no new model infringe then that is precisely the outcome Apple wants because Samsung's already declining ability to come up with appealing reasons to buy their garbage will be further reduced.


     

    Is Samsung still selling phones in the Netherlands?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 51
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    So you consider being correct as trolling? From my experience island hermit is by far not a troll.

     

    freediverx is just pissed off because I called him lazy.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 51
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post

     

    Actually they do.  They have not stopped using Apple's tech because they could get away with it. This is a feature they created a workaround for but decided not to use it because they thought they wouldn't be forced to stop.  


     

    You answered my question.

     

    None.

     

    Do you really think that workaround wouldn't be implemented in all new models... tomorrow.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 51
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,019member
    It includes all future infringing produces. That is way a sales ban is important. Not like the patent trials where they are so far behind on models. Now that Koh's decision was overturned, I really hope we see a ban.

    Right.

    Question: How many of the new models infringe?

    Answer: None

    All of the devices infringe data detectors. I'm hopeful they get a ban for it. I'm fine with them skirting a ban by removing Apple's IP. That is the point.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 51
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post





    All of the devices infringe data detectors. I'm hopeful they get a ban for it. I'm fine with them skirting a ban by removing Apple's IP. That is the point.

     

    You wouldn't know that's the point by reading these comments. It seems that a lot of people think that this about stopping the sale of Samsung phones.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 51
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,424member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    If you read all of it you would've read this.


    Quote:

    Samsung created its own alternative to Apple's "bounce back" or "rubber banding" concept that involves a "blue flash" to indicate that the user has reached the end of a scrolling list.


     

    You seem to be an admirer of Samsung's deceptive practices. Here's the FULL quote:

     

    "Samsung created its own alternative to Apple's "bounce back" or "rubber banding" concept that involves a "blue flash" to indicate that the user has reached the end of a scrolling list. However, both Samsung and Google continued work together to deliver infringing versions of Apple's work instead."

     

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 51
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

     

     

    "the infringement ban has been extended to all devices that similarly infringe, including any future devices or renamed products Samsung can create in the future."


    Okay.

    Which current devices similarly infringe on this?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 51
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    All of the devices infringe data detectors. I'm hopeful they get a ban for it. I'm fine with them skirting a ban by removing Apple's IP. That is the point.

    This isn't about data detectors, and just because a device infringes on a patent doesn’t mean that there will be a sales ban.

    Judges don't hand out injunctions lightly because the sale of a of a infringing product might hurt the offended company but it will definitely hurt the accused company.

    What if the device is found not to infringe? How do you make up for the lost sales caused by the injuction?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 51
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    QFT:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

     


    Judges don't hand out injections lightly 

    LOL!

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 51
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,424member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post



    Judges don't hand out injections lightly because the sale of a of a infringing product might hurt the offended company but it will definitely hurt the accused company.

     

     

    Judges are wielding syringes now?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 51
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    freediverx wrote: »
    You seem to be an admirer of Samsung's deceptive practices. Here's the FULL quote:

    "Samsung created its own alternative to Apple's "bounce back" or "rubber banding" concept that involves a "blue flash" to indicate that the user has reached the end of a scrolling list. However, both Samsung and Google continued work together to deliver infringing versions of Apple's work instead."

     

    I left out the part you bolded because it's unrelated to the patent in question. That was a jab by the author.

    I'm a admirer of the truth. Samsung has done despicable things, but that doesn't give you the right to spread untruths nor attack another poster who's simply stating the obvious.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 51
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    freediverx wrote: »
    Judges are wielding syringes now?

    Lol, freaking autocorrect.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 51
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,928member
    I wish the World gets together and say to Sammy: enough of your thievery. The profit from Your sales of stolen tech should be prorated and returned to its rightful owners.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 51
    ryannejryannej Posts: 15member
    I'm just happy to see "Apple wins - Samsung loses." The more wins the better. No matter where it is, it's well deserved. Sadly, this news doesn't get too much into the mainstream for folks to see what kind of slugs Samsung really are.

    Hrm. There's a new one. Samslug.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 51
    How about compensation for all the infringing models that shipped? Not to mention, this was willful infringement, in the US Apple would be getting triple damages...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 51
    d4njvrzfd4njvrzf Posts: 797member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post





    All of the devices infringe data detectors. I'm hopeful they get a ban for it. I'm fine with them skirting a ban by removing Apple's IP. That is the point.

    With the way Data Detectors are implemented in Android, it's not Android but rather the individual app developers that are "infringing." The system itself provides no engine for detecting and transforming data. Any app that renders telephone numbers as tappable links does so only because the developer coded an explicit search-and-replace routine to append "tel:" metadata to developer-specified strings using a technique that is as old as Unix (a.k.a regular expression processing). Apple would like to tell developers, "Thou shalt not search for these strings in your apps."

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 51
    d4njvrzfd4njvrzf Posts: 797member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

     

     

    You seem to be an admirer of Samsung's deceptive practices. Here's the FULL quote:

     

    "Samsung created its own alternative to Apple's "bounce back" or "rubber banding" concept that involves a "blue flash" to indicate that the user has reached the end of a scrolling list. However, both Samsung and Google continued work together to deliver infringing versions of Apple's work instead."

     


    The real revelation in this article is that there are apparently Android devices still shipping with the rubber-banding animation instead of the "flash" effect that has been part of stock android at least since Gingerbread.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 51
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,019member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post



    All of the devices infringe data detectors. I'm hopeful they get a ban for it. I'm fine with them skirting a ban by removing Apple's IP. That is the point.




    This isn't about data detectors, and just because a device infringes on a patent doesn’t mean that there will be a sales ban.



    Judges don't hand out injunctions lightly because the sale of a of a infringing product might hurt the offended company but it will definitely hurt the accused company.



    What if the device is found not to infringe? How do you make up for the lost sales caused by the injuction?

     

    I know this one isn't about data detectors. I believe there should be one in the US with regard to it and the other patents that Samsung has been found to infringe. The US should actually enforce a sales ban for these patents or they shouldn't have a patent system. 

     

    If they enforced a sales ban, Samsung would have these features ripped out before a ban would go into effect. I don't think for a second they would loose any sales. Right now, Apple has no real means to protect their IP since the sales ban was denied. Winning money is a start, but it is too little too late. The infringement needs to stop. Now that she got overturned, I'm hopeful they can get a ban. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 51
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,019member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post





    All of the devices infringe data detectors. I'm hopeful they get a ban for it. I'm fine with them skirting a ban by removing Apple's IP. That is the point.

    With the way Data Detectors are implemented in Android, it's not Android but rather the individual app developers that are "infringing." The system itself provides no engine for detecting and transforming data. Any app that renders telephone numbers as tappable links does so only because the developer coded an explicit search-and-replace routine to append "tel:" metadata to developer-specified strings using a technique that is as old as Unix (a.k.a regular expression processing). Apple would like to tell developers, "Thou shalt not search for these strings in your apps."


     

    It doesn't matter either way as Samsung is one of the app developers that infringes it. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 51
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    I know this one isn't about data detectors. I believe there should be one in the US with regard to it and the other patents that Samsung has been found to infringe. The US should actually enforce a sales ban for these patents or they shouldn't have a patent system. 

    If they enforced a sales ban, Samsung would have these features ripped out before a ban would go into effect. I don't think for a second they would loose any sales. Right now, Apple has no real means to protect their IP since the sales ban was denied. Winning money is a start, but it is too little too late. The infringement needs to stop. Now that she got overturned, I'm hopeful they can get a ban. 

    Are you not paying attention? The trial that Samsung just lost included the data detector patent.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.