How is that any different comparing old (thick) laptop vs new (thin) laptop. Laptops of old used to be thick and heavy. Modern laptops are thin and light.
Samsung's old tablets were thick. It's newer tablets are thin and light. Whats new there?
Samsung's old phones were feature phones. Every iterations of its features phones, the screen sizes were increasing. It was inevitable, one day to have the entire phone as a screen without the keyboard.
In fact, LG was first to introduce a keyboard less "smartphone concept" at IFA 2006 in, of all places, Germany, the very country that is banning the sale of the Galaxy Tab, ironically.
Apple's case is based on prior art. All LG has to do is submit its prior art lawsuit against Apple to have Apple's phones blocked as violating prior art property. Remember, this ban was based on design and not patent.
Therefore, if LG feels like it (wants to be a douche), they have every reason to do so.
The Samsung F450i ran Symbian, a smartphone based on Nokia's N95.
The Samsung Blackjack series ran Windows Mobile, smartphones based on the Palm Treo and the Motorola Q series.
The LG Prada was a feature phone, it ran Java software but there was no platform specific software available for it, thus it failed the basic definition of a smartphone.
Before one resorts to name calling, one should perhaps get their own house in order.
is a 2-D object -- I doubt whether that is patentable,
An iPad is an implementation of a 3D computing device -- Obviously, the Trade Dress of the iPad is patentable.
So, enough of this rectangle crap!
I've got to get busy helping to bail Apple out of the mess they created with FCPX!
BTW, have you read where Google may back out of the MMI deal...
...Sad, really -- because Larry Ellison could do some great things with MMI (in addition to Android).
They didn't lose in comparison to the iPad they lost to a design drawing. One of many since you can patent designs even if you don't implement them in the final product.
The temporary injunction upheld by the court on Friday bars Samsung Germany from selling the Galaxy 10.1 tablet in Germany.
But retailers such as consumer electronics chain Media Markt will still be able to sell the device by selling off existing stock or getting new supplies from the South Korean group's parent Samsung International.?
You have to understand that everything Apple does is blatantly obvious, Apple is just overly quick to bring products to market to beat out the competition, which is why the iPhone 4 has been on flagship smartphone for 15 months and it took Apple a mere 20 years to get the iPad out. And just ignore all the comments about how Apple will fail because they aren't doing exactly what the others have done before them because that's all in the past.
And let's not forget, it's all just marketing, and sheep falling for said marketing.
As someone has already stated, if Apple goes after innovative and unique designs like the Asus Transformer then your complaint will become valid. Until then it's just anti-Apple rhetoric ...
Yes, this is what it all comes down to. Despite the Google shills -- (Gatorguy, Menno, Jetz, etc. -- and rabid fandroids -- AbsoluteDesignz, Brainless, etc. -- doggedly sticking to their talking points about rounded rectangles (which the former, at least, know is a willful misrepresentation of the truth), the bottom line here is that justice was done. Samsung copied the look of Apple's actual designs in hardware and software as closely as they possibly could, and the court recognized that.
Yes, this is what it all comes down to. Despite the Google shills -- (Gatorguy, Menno, Jetz, etc. -- and rabid fandroids -- AbsoluteDesignz, Brainless, etc. -- doggedly sticking to their talking points about rounded rectangles (which the former, at least, know is a willful misrepresentation of the truth), the bottom line here is that justice was done. Samsung copied the look of Apple's actual designs in hardware and software as closely as they possibly could, and the court recognized that.
so you're saying Android 3.0 looks like iOS for tablets?
The drawing in question has never been an actual Apple product nor will it ever be...it's a drawing.
Would you be as gun ho if Apple sued someone over this:
They can probably sue Sony over that...would that be okay?
(yes I know they are laptop designs, but hey, look and feel man, look and feel)
ooooo how about this:
yes, that is an actual design patent.
Question though...how can anyone confuse an Apple iPad with a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 (that's the argument right?) based on the design patent they never used in the final product, aka, a drawing?
The temporary injunction upheld by the court on Friday bars Samsung Germany from selling the Galaxy 10.1 tablet in Germany.
But retailers such as consumer electronics chain Media Markt will still be able to sell the device by selling off existing stock or getting new supplies from the South Korean group's parent Samsung International.?
Thanks for reading the thread before creating an account just to post anti-Apple stuff.
If you'd read it, you'd see that any self-respecting retailer isn't going to:
1. Import a product illegal in the country that even random people on the street now know is illegal.
2. Go to that amount of trouble to sell a product that no one was going to buy, anyway.
so you're saying Android 3.0 looks like iOS for tablets?
The drawing in question has never been an actual Apple product nor will it ever be...it's a drawing.
Would you be as gun ho if Apple sued someone over this:
...
They can probably sue Sony over that...would that be okay?
(yes I know they are laptop designs, but hey, look and feel man, look and feel)
ooooo how about this:
...
yes, that is an actual design patent.
Question though...how can anyone confuse an Apple iPad with a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 (that's the argument right?) based on the design patent they never used in the final product, aka, a drawing?
Thanks for reading the thread before creating an account just to post anti-Apple stuff.
If you'd read it, you'd see that any self-respecting retailer isn't going to:
1. Import a product illegal in the country that even random people on the street now know is illegal.
2. Go to that amount of trouble to sell a product that no one was going to buy, anyway.
For heaven's sake, have some common sense.
Apple did create a lot of free advertising for them. I'm pretty sure that the Tab's will get many more looks than they might otherwise have had without Apple's attention. Any press is better than no press.
It seems Samsung has a history of simply copying without permission. Even Vanna White has successfully sued them for infringing her Right of Publicity.
Apple did create a lot of free advertising for them. I'm pretty sure that the Tab's will get many more looks than they might otherwise have had without Apple's attention. Any press is better than no press.
Samsung lawyers:"well we couldn't prevent this injunction but you did get some free press for a product you can't sell, that's always good right?"
Oh, you ARE joking. Phew. Sorry, I've become desensitized to most jokes about UI design. People actually believe what used to only be satire.
No I am not. I am just applying the same logic. I feel both Apple was joking when they tried to file such design, and later that that judge showed even more wicked sense of humor when she actually banned product based on something like this.
Comments
Oh, you ARE joking. Phew. Sorry, I've become desensitized to most jokes about UI design. People actually believe what used to only be satire.
I think he's mocking what people say regarding iPhone competitors.
How is that any different comparing old (thick) laptop vs new (thin) laptop. Laptops of old used to be thick and heavy. Modern laptops are thin and light.
Samsung's old tablets were thick. It's newer tablets are thin and light. Whats new there?
Samsung's old phones were feature phones. Every iterations of its features phones, the screen sizes were increasing. It was inevitable, one day to have the entire phone as a screen without the keyboard.
In fact, LG was first to introduce a keyboard less "smartphone concept" at IFA 2006 in, of all places, Germany, the very country that is banning the sale of the Galaxy Tab, ironically.
Apple's case is based on prior art. All LG has to do is submit its prior art lawsuit against Apple to have Apple's phones blocked as violating prior art property. Remember, this ban was based on design and not patent.
Therefore, if LG feels like it (wants to be a douche), they have every reason to do so.
The Samsung F450i ran Symbian, a smartphone based on Nokia's N95.
The Samsung Blackjack series ran Windows Mobile, smartphones based on the Palm Treo and the Motorola Q series.
The LG Prada was a feature phone, it ran Java software but there was no platform specific software available for it, thus it failed the basic definition of a smartphone.
Before one resorts to name calling, one should perhaps get their own house in order.
This is exactly why the entire system of patents is sad in general. Apple drew a rectangle and patented it
A rectangle:
+-+
| |
| |
| |
+-+
is a 2-D object -- I doubt whether that is patentable,
An iPad is an implementation of a 3D computing device -- Obviously, the Trade Dress of the iPad is patentable.
So, enough of this rectangle crap!
I've got to get busy helping to bail Apple out of the mess they created with FCPX!
BTW, have you read where Google may back out of the MMI deal...
...Sad, really -- because Larry Ellison could do some great things with MMI (in addition to Android).
A rectangle:
+-+
| |
| |
| |
+-+
is a 2-D object -- I doubt whether that is patentable,
An iPad is an implementation of a 3D computing device -- Obviously, the Trade Dress of the iPad is patentable.
So, enough of this rectangle crap!
I've got to get busy helping to bail Apple out of the mess they created with FCPX!
BTW, have you read where Google may back out of the MMI deal...
...Sad, really -- because Larry Ellison could do some great things with MMI (in addition to Android).
They didn't lose in comparison to the iPad they lost to a design drawing. One of many since you can patent designs even if you don't implement them in the final product.
?STILL FOR SALE
The temporary injunction upheld by the court on Friday bars Samsung Germany from selling the Galaxy 10.1 tablet in Germany.
But retailers such as consumer electronics chain Media Markt will still be able to sell the device by selling off existing stock or getting new supplies from the South Korean group's parent Samsung International.?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...78828820110909
You have to understand that everything Apple does is blatantly obvious, Apple is just overly quick to bring products to market to beat out the competition, which is why the iPhone 4 has been on flagship smartphone for 15 months and it took Apple a mere 20 years to get the iPad out. And just ignore all the comments about how Apple will fail because they aren't doing exactly what the others have done before them because that's all in the past.
And let's not forget, it's all just marketing, and sheep falling for said marketing.
BTW, have you read where Google may back out of the MMI deal...
No I hadn't. Wouldn't be a complete shock to me if they did, but where did you see a news article claiming they're considering that?
As someone has already stated, if Apple goes after innovative and unique designs like the Asus Transformer then your complaint will become valid. Until then it's just anti-Apple rhetoric ...
Yes, this is what it all comes down to. Despite the Google shills -- (Gatorguy, Menno, Jetz, etc. -- and rabid fandroids -- AbsoluteDesignz, Brainless, etc. -- doggedly sticking to their talking points about rounded rectangles (which the former, at least, know is a willful misrepresentation of the truth), the bottom line here is that justice was done. Samsung copied the look of Apple's actual designs in hardware and software as closely as they possibly could, and the court recognized that.
Yes, this is what it all comes down to. Despite the Google shills -- (Gatorguy, Menno, Jetz, etc. -- and rabid fandroids -- AbsoluteDesignz, Brainless, etc. -- doggedly sticking to their talking points about rounded rectangles (which the former, at least, know is a willful misrepresentation of the truth), the bottom line here is that justice was done. Samsung copied the look of Apple's actual designs in hardware and software as closely as they possibly could, and the court recognized that.
so you're saying Android 3.0 looks like iOS for tablets?
The drawing in question has never been an actual Apple product nor will it ever be...it's a drawing.
Would you be as gun ho if Apple sued someone over this:
They can probably sue Sony over that...would that be okay?
(yes I know they are laptop designs, but hey, look and feel man, look and feel)
ooooo how about this:
yes, that is an actual design patent.
Question though...how can anyone confuse an Apple iPad with a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 (that's the argument right?) based on the design patent they never used in the final product, aka, a drawing?
So much for the ?permanent? ban.
?STILL FOR SALE
The temporary injunction upheld by the court on Friday bars Samsung Germany from selling the Galaxy 10.1 tablet in Germany.
But retailers such as consumer electronics chain Media Markt will still be able to sell the device by selling off existing stock or getting new supplies from the South Korean group's parent Samsung International.?
Thanks for reading the thread before creating an account just to post anti-Apple stuff.
If you'd read it, you'd see that any self-respecting retailer isn't going to:
1. Import a product illegal in the country that even random people on the street now know is illegal.
2. Go to that amount of trouble to sell a product that no one was going to buy, anyway.
For heaven's sake, have some common sense.
so you're saying Android 3.0 looks like iOS for tablets?
The drawing in question has never been an actual Apple product nor will it ever be...it's a drawing.
Would you be as gun ho if Apple sued someone over this:
...
They can probably sue Sony over that...would that be okay?
(yes I know they are laptop designs, but hey, look and feel man, look and feel)
ooooo how about this:
...
yes, that is an actual design patent.
Question though...how can anyone confuse an Apple iPad with a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 (that's the argument right?) based on the design patent they never used in the final product, aka, a drawing?
You just proved Solipsism's point.
Thanks for reading the thread before creating an account just to post anti-Apple stuff.
If you'd read it, you'd see that any self-respecting retailer isn't going to:
1. Import a product illegal in the country that even random people on the street now know is illegal.
2. Go to that amount of trouble to sell a product that no one was going to buy, anyway.
For heaven's sake, have some common sense.
Apple did create a lot of free advertising for them. I'm pretty sure that the Tab's will get many more looks than they might otherwise have had without Apple's attention. Any press is better than no press.
You just proved Solipsism's point.
yea....I don't see how.
Apple did create a lot of free advertising for them. I'm pretty sure that the Tab's will get many more looks than they might otherwise have had without Apple's attention. Any press is better than no press.
Samsung lawyers:"well we couldn't prevent this injunction but you did get some free press for a product you can't sell, that's always good right?"
Samsung:"you're fired"
Samsung lawyers:"well we couldn't prevent this injunction but you did get some free press for a product you can't sell, that's always good right?"
Samsung:"you're fired"
You think all the news articles were restricted to Germany? It got attention throughout Europe, and lesser coverage worldwide.
In addition they can sell them even there. They just can't be imported and distributed by the German subsidiary.
You think all the news articles were restricted to Germany? It got attention throughout Europe, and lesser coverage worldwide.
In addition they can sell them even there. They just can't be imported and distributed by the German subsidiary.
I think the press they got is pretty dim consolation. I also know for sure that it wasn't free, like you suggested. Lawyers are expensive.
I think the press they got is pretty dim consolation. I also know for sure that it wasn't free, like you suggested. Lawyers are expensive.
The press coverage was free. . .
The press coverage was free. . .
Mention that in the samsung boardroom and they'll hand you a large stack of lawyer bills. They got a little press but it sure as hell wasn't free.
Oh, you ARE joking. Phew. Sorry, I've become desensitized to most jokes about UI design. People actually believe what used to only be satire.
No I am not. I am just applying the same logic. I feel both Apple was joking when they tried to file such design, and later that that judge showed even more wicked sense of humor when she actually banned product based on something like this.