Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, Nexus S 4G added to Apple's infringement complaint

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 83
    jacksonsjacksons Posts: 244member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post


    Nobody has a brand as valuable as Apple's. Period.



    If you decide to omit (in order):



    Google

    Microsoft

    Wal Mart

    IBM

    Vodafone

    Bank of America

    General Electric



    http://www.cnbc.com/id/42180604/And_...rand_Is…



    Then yes. Fanbois... Sheeesh!
  • Reply 42 of 83
    Some of these Apple guys are badly informed. They are badly informed because in part they don't care what others are doing. Consequently, they tend to think that Apple invented whatever it sells.

    R&D? Samsung is the second in terms of the number of patents (IBM, first). Samsung is also currently suing Apple for using a number of technological patents (seemingly what actually patentable) without permission in US, Korea, Japan and Germany.
  • Reply 43 of 83
    blursdblursd Posts: 123member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by androider View Post


    Some of these Apple guys are badly informed. They are badly informed because in part they don't care what others are doing. Consequently, they tend to think that Apple invented whatever it sells.

    R&D? Samsung is the second in terms of the number of patents (IBM, first). Samsung is also currently suing Apple for using a number of technological patents (seemingly what actually patentable) without permission in US, Korea, Japan and Germany.



    Learn to speak English, and maybe your argument will make more sense. Even syllogistically it's completely unsound ...



    Some Apple people are badly informed

    They are badly informed because they like Apple.

    Therefore they think Apple is right, but it isn't.



    That's pretty much a near perfect example of a syllogistic fallacy - that meaning there is an inherent flaw in the logic being used that renders the argument invalid.
  • Reply 44 of 83
    joseph ljoseph l Posts: 197member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by androider View Post


    Samsung is also currently suing Apple for using a number of technological patents (seemingly what actually patentable) without permission in US, Korea, Japan and Germany.





    Samsung is the one who copies Apple, and NOT the other way around! Haven't you seen the pictures?



    Samsung couldn't innovate if their life depended on it. They just exist to copy everything that Apple ever does. And every one of their products is pure crap, without any exceptions.
  • Reply 45 of 83
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    Samsung is the one who copies Apple, and NOT the other way around!



    Did you even read his post?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    Samsung couldn't innovate if their life depended on it.



    Samsung is the 2nd biggest patent holder in the US. Apple is not even in top 50.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    And every one of their products is pure crap, without any exceptions.




    Like this one? http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/28/s...y-s-ii-review/
  • Reply 46 of 83
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    Samsung is the one who copies Apple, and NOT the other way around! Haven't you seen the pictures?



    Samsung couldn't innovate if their life depended on it. They just exist to copy everything that Apple ever does. And every one of their products is pure crap, without any exceptions.



    In your Apple world, looks is the only thing that is important. Underyling technology? Who cares right?



    Samsung obviously knows a thing or two about what went inside Apple's products. They practically make over 30% of the components in them.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    Samsung is the one who copies Apple, and NOT the other way around! Haven't you seen the pictures?



    Samsung couldn't innovate if their life depended on it. They just exist to copy everything that Apple ever does. And every one of their products is pure crap, without any exceptions.





    That is your opinion. Back it up with facts. Then I'll believe you.
  • Reply 47 of 83
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    This lawsuit is about targeting Google's Android, not necessarily Samsung.



    It's clear Apple is scared of Google to attack them head on because they can easily cut off any iOS devices from accessing their services.



    If Samsung wins this lawsuit, they can sue Apple back for libel and tarnishing their brand image as a "copier" decreasing the fair value of their products. They can recoup the fair market difference as compensation.



    I'm just loving this escalation in the lawsuit.



    Objectively speaking, Apple has more at stake here than Samsung. If they win this lawsuit, they can have the potential to stop one of Android biggest proponent and slow down its advancement into the market. That is, perhaps, what Apple's real intentions are. (It's quite clear when they included the Nexus S 4G into the alleged modified infringement case)
  • Reply 48 of 83
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member
    So basically This is Apple's Argument:



    "Our brand is so popular that people are incapable of spending 2 seconds of their lives at the store flipping the phone/tablet over and looking for the giant apple logo on the back. "



    "Instead they find SAMSUNG or GOOGLE. To our customers this is a very hard concept to grasp and often we lose sales because of such a mistake, so please make them do something else."
  • Reply 49 of 83
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jexus View Post


    So basically This is Apple's Argument:



    "Our brand is so popular that people are incapable of spending 2 seconds of their lives at the store flipping the phone/tablet over and looking for the giant apple logo on the back. "



    "Instead they find SAMSUNG or GOOGLE. To our customers this is a very hard concept to grasp and often we lose sales because of such a mistake, so please make them do something else."



    That is not Apple's argument.

    There is such a thing as a design knockoff, which is a deliberate attempt to copy a successful design. Ever seen a Rolex or Tag watch knockoff from China, sold for a fraction of the cost of the real thing? It's designed to look like a real Rolex or Tag. Just because it doesn't say "Rolex" or "Tag Heuer" doesn't excuse it.



    So, you can either defend Samsung by denying that they've copied Apple's design, or you can agree with Apple, but defend Samsung's right to shamelessly copy Apple.
  • Reply 50 of 83
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,776member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Care to explain why?







    Read Apple's new arguments for its "first introduction of a touch screen type phone on the market". Apple wasnt the first. LG was first. I'm just pointing that out.







    They just did. Direct quote from the modified accusation.



    "Before Apple?s introduction of the first iPhone product, no other company was offering a phone with these features. Prior mobile phones were often bulkier and contained physical keypads. Some had a rocker-style navigation button and sets of buttons for numbers and calling features. Others had a front panel with a partial or full QWERTY keyboard and a screen. None had the clean lines of the iPhone, which immediately caused it to stand apart from the competition."



    Judging from the looks of the LG phone Apple is right. LG has several buttons but it looks nothing like the first iPhone. Apple never said it was first to touch screens in your quote. It said people were copying the look and feel of Apple's iPhone. That's the truth.
  • Reply 51 of 83
    vizirvizir Posts: 3member
    the look and feel of the iphone. ok lets see they have the captivate in there















    i must be a genius if i'm the only one who can see that the captivate doesn't look like an iphone.
  • Reply 52 of 83
    vizirvizir Posts: 3member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post


    "Before Apple’s introduction of the first iPhone product, no other company was offering a phone with these features. Prior mobile phones were often bulkier and contained physical keypads. Some had a rocker-style navigation button and sets of buttons for numbers and calling features. Others had a front panel with a partial or full QWERTY keyboard and a screen. None had the clean lines of the iPhone, which immediately caused it to stand apart from the competition."



    Judging from the looks of the LG phone Apple is right. LG has several buttons but it looks nothing like the first iPhone. Apple never said it was first to touch screens in your quote. It said people were copying the look and feel of Apple's iPhone. That's the truth.



    so, LG made a phone which reduced the # of buttons down to 3-4. Apple went a step further and reduced them to 1. Samsung (in some phones, like the galaxy s) went another step further and reduced the buttons down to 0 (replacing the buttons with light up touch sensitive areas).



    So, either Apple copied from LG or Samsung didn't copy Apple in at least some of the designs.



    edit: Don't forget the old windows CE phones and dell axims and ipaqs. hell, palm...
  • Reply 53 of 83
    j.r.j.r. Posts: 27member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Vizir View Post


    i must be a genius if i'm the only one who can see that the captivate doesn't look like an iphone.



    Or you're an idiot who didn't take two seconds to find a picture of the Captivate with the app drawer open.











    That music player icon looks awfully familiar...



  • Reply 54 of 83
    vizirvizir Posts: 3member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by J.R. View Post


    Or you're an idiot who didn't take two seconds to find a picture of the Captivate with the app drawer open.











    That music player icon looks awfully familiar...







    there are only so many ways to display icons. grid like on a rectangular screen. look at palm os (not the new webOS).



    as for the music icon, 1 icon? is that the basis of this?
  • Reply 55 of 83
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    This lawsuit is about targeting Google's Android, not necessarily Samsung.



    It's clear Apple is scared of Google to attack them head on because they can easily cut off any iOS devices from accessing their services.



    Yes to the first, no to the second. Google doesn't make money directly from Android which is mostly open-source, and as a result it could be difficult for Apple to get damages from Google for Android phones. It's possible, even probable that Google have their exposure to android carefully limited by use of subsidiaries. Also Apple don't particularly want to earn a fixed 1$ or even 10$ on every android phone, what they want is to kill off the people making high end Android phones that compete head on with iPhones. They couldn't care less what happens at the bottom of the market.



    So the reason that they're not going after Google isn't because they're scared of Google, or because the loss of Google services would be too expensive, it would be far less expensive to them than the loss of search on iPhones would be to Google.



    They're going after Samsung and HTC because those are their biggest competitors in the smartphone and tablet markets, and because they would be even if Android ceased all development.
  • Reply 56 of 83
    majjomajjo Posts: 574member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Antinous View Post




    There is considerable reluctance on the part of its foes to ascribe any innovation to Apple. Or to find any weakness in its competitors.



    And the apple fanboys are quick to ascribe everything their competitors come up with as a 'cheap knockoff of the iphone.'



    The reality is never that black and white.



    I see a case for Apple against Touchwiz and the Galaxy S reference hardware, but they are adding on phones that are of a completely different form factor than the iPhone, and ones that don't even use the Touchwiz UI. I don't think they have a case against those devices.
  • Reply 57 of 83
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    I remember before Jobs introduced iPad 2 in March, Samsung was going to release a Galaxy tablet computer. After iPad 2 is shown to the world, a Samsung exec said they will withdraw the releasing and will redesign it. Galaxy Tab 10.1 is a result of this. So it is obvious Samsung redesigned it by just copying the iPad 2.
  • Reply 58 of 83
    bongobongo Posts: 158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by J.R. View Post


    Or you're an idiot who didn't take two seconds to find a picture of the Captivate with the app drawer open.











    That music player icon looks awfully familiar...







    Dude. Thats the CD icon which was there way before the iphone. Sheesh.
  • Reply 59 of 83
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bongo View Post


    Dude. Thats the CD icon which was there way before the iphone. Sheesh.



    Er... That's the whole point. Apple created and has been using this icon for about 10 years. Samsung just blatantly ripped it off and put it in their phone interface.
  • Reply 60 of 83
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Vizir View Post


    so, LG made a phone which reduced the # of buttons down to 3-4. Apple went a step further and reduced them to 1. Samsung (in some phones, like the galaxy s) went another step further and reduced the buttons down to 0 (replacing the buttons with light up touch sensitive areas).



    So, either Apple copied from LG or Samsung didn't copy Apple in at least some of the designs.



    edit: Don't forget the old windows CE phones and dell axims and ipaqs. hell, palm...



    The button thing is really a red herring, though I appreciate you're just responding to somebody else. What made the iPhone astonishingly better than previous offerings like the LG Prada etc was multi-touch and gestures. Previous touch-screen phones had really only treated the screen as a big configurable keyboard, where buttons might move around and be associated with icons but were still fundamentally buttons - with maybe a stylus for some handwriting or graffiti system.



    The iPhone changed that completely, and I think it's probably true to say that now if you tried to launch a tablet without multitouch you'd be mocked on every single tech site there is.



    How much of that innovation was patented or even patentable is the question at hand, and I don't think that it's clear-cut. I personally hate software patents, but they exist and Apple is entitled to play according to the rules as they are and not as I would like them to be. I'm not sure whether Apple can win this suit or not, but it's their right to launch it - and Samsung is hardly a defenceless little flower that lacks the resources to defend itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.