Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone

11314161819

Comments

  • Reply 301 of 379
    shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member


    No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.

  • Reply 302 of 379
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Soli I stole your pic, so sue me lol

    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    No, they didn't. You can't look at that and tell me that's anything but "subjectively different enough", not actually different.

    They did change enough to make it instantly recognizable as a Samsung tablet.

    shaun, uk wrote: »
    No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.

    You're getting awfully close to crossing a line, if you haven't already. You might want to cool it on the name calling.
  • Reply 303 of 379
    ankleskaterankleskater Posts: 1,287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


     

    Competition breads innovation and keeps prices down.


     


    I don't expect to have an objective discussion as there are just too many blinkered people on here.



     


    Competition might engender price wars but rarely *breeds* sustainable innovation.


     


    Look at the PC industry. Dell, HP and Lenovo (IBM) have been competing for decades now. How much innovation has resulted? Generation after generation of PCs and servers simply adopted the latest processors from Intel and latest version of Windows from Microsoft. When Linux gained some momentum, then these companies started offering Linux servers. Competition amongst them did not drive any of them to innovate.


     


    Look at the auto industry. Again, same pattern.


     


    In both cases, innovation has mostly come from "outside".


     


    This is what makes Apple unique - an established company that has enough of an innovative spirit to upend the industry, including its own business. Look at how it killed off the iPod Mini. Can anyone come up with an example of a company killing off its most successful product in a given category, when there was no viable competition?


     


    Has competition compelled HP, Dell, Asus or anyone to come up with the equivalent of MacBook Air, unibody design or the iPad?


     


    So no, competition does not usually breed true innovation. Not the revolutionary, sustainable kind. Instead, competition often kills off weaker players and eventually leads to a static ecosystem in which pricing becomes the primary battleground, while products undergo only incremental, organic improvement rather than major leaps in innovation.

  • Reply 304 of 379
    ankleskaterankleskater Posts: 1,287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


    No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    You're getting awfully close to crossing a line, if you haven't already. You might want to cool it on the name calling.


     


    Agree. If, Shaun, you find folks here so objectionable, why dwell here? And you are not using the word sycophant in its correct context.

  • Reply 305 of 379
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member

    Again you misunderstand.  I never claimed that fair use is any part of patent law.

    What you said was:
    "The fair use doctrine (not clause, btw) is a good example showing that while authors and inventors have many exclusive rights, the right to exclude is not absolute."

    Now, authors are covered by copyrights and inventors are covered by patents. So you clearly were saying that fair use applied to patents.

    But, then, you and logic apparently don't even have a nodding acquaintance.
  • Reply 306 of 379


    I agree with most people here that Samsung copied design elements of the iPhone and the iPad for its own products. I disagree with you in that I think that the copied design elements should not be patentable. A design patent should cover combinations of elements that are not obvious. So I think the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 should not be banned from being sold in the US but I do believe that iPad clones like this should be.Chinese-ipad-Clone-01.jpg

  • Reply 307 of 379
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post




    Huh?


     


    I am specifically disagreeing with your statement that "innovation is not about invention, it is about the ability to make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists."


     


    But never mind, I think you just want to appear to be winning a point. That's not so important, IMO. Hopefully, whether you admit to it or not, you now understand how innovation and inventiveness are similar and different. ;)



     


    what part of 


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


    If you put original or inventive methods or processes into practice, you are being innovative. If you create a novel widget or process, you are being inventive.



     


    is different than


     


     




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Hiro View Post


     


    The difference is innovation is not about invention, it is about the ability to make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists.  



     


    "make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists" seems an awful lot like "put original or inventive methods or processes into practice"


     


     


    So I used different words than followed up with, they mean essentially the same thing.  About the only room for interpretation is that my made ubiquitous requires your put into practice to be widely successful, not simply done to any degree.  


     


    Can you just dispense with the violent part of violent agreement now? 


     

  • Reply 309 of 379
    fuwafuwafuwafuwa Posts: 163member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


    No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.



    Do you know what a real competition looks like? Flooding market with cheap knock offs is not a real competition, it hurts the competition. Only sycophants think IP theft is good for competition.

  • Reply 310 of 379

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    What you said was:

    "The fair use doctrine (not clause, btw) is a good example showing that while authors and inventors have many exclusive rights, the right to exclude is not absolute."

    Now, authors are covered by copyrights and inventors are covered by patents. So you clearly were saying that fair use applied to patents.

    But, then, you and logic apparently don't even have a nodding acquaintance.


    Even assuming that I misspoke, do you care to address the main points, which concern Posner?  Or are you conceding on that one?

  • Reply 311 of 379
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Even assuming that I misspoke, do you care to address the main points, which concern Posner?  Or are you conceding on that one?

    IOW, you were completely wrong.

    No, I'm not going to address the points because you've demonstrated that the points you make are constantly wrong and mostly ridiculous.

    I gave only a single quote. Posner has repeatedly stated his objection to patent exclusivity - which makes his decisions ripe for being overturned.

    Nonetheless, it's irrelevant. In case you hadn't notice, Posner had nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about KOH granting an injunction against the Nexus.
  • Reply 312 of 379

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    I



    Nonetheless, it's irrelevant. In case you hadn't notice, Posner had nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about KOH granting an injunction against the Nexus.


     


     


    ISTM that you are the one who brought him up...


     


     


     


     


    Quote:


    I gave only a single quote. Posner has repeatedly stated his objection to patent exclusivity - which makes his decisions ripe for being overturned.



     


     


    First, any private statements he may have made are irrelevant to whether his decisons are sound as a matter of law.  


     


    second, I'll take your word for it - exactly to the same extent that I take your word for having earned a "Doctorate in Science".  LOL

  • Reply 313 of 379
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,095member


    Thanks for the link. Nice to see a plain-English explanation of the claims from those patents, especially from someone at least minimally qualified to understand them. If you assume the explanations are accurate there's a high-likelihood of these being stricken on re-exam. Heck, a huge percentage of patents used in litigation are invalidated in part or whole anyway. Doesn't really help the current situation of course if the patents are later found invalid in some way. The damage will be done long before that.

  • Reply 314 of 379
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


    Nothing is ever truly original. Inspiration comes in my ways. Palm OS versus Apple iOS. Interesting.


     


    Palm OS.jpgApple iOS.jpg



    vs Newton OS (for all intents and purposes, co-released with the original Palm Pilot OS):


    [with ninja props to @SolipsismX for picking the same graphic!]


     


    newton_os_2.0_all_icons.png


     


    And grid organized icons from Macintosh OS 1.0 circa 1984


     


    s10.jpg


     


    We can go back to Doug Englebart and 1968 from there with visits to PARC extending Englebart's work (but deciding it wasn't worth the business to field-- oops!)

  • Reply 315 of 379
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


     


    That's my point, to a greater or lesser extent most products are copies of something else. Nothing is truly original.


     


    If you're going to get personal then maybe I should mention how Apple has copied the designs of DIETER RAMS over many years.


     


    Rip off or inspiration?


     


    I can't be bothered to copy the pics across so you can look at the similarities for yourself at http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future



     


    There was another thread where you trotted out he same images and got soundly overruled there too.   There are plain differences between static copying and design school inspiration.  The fact you can't admit those in your attempts to twist arguments is sad because it only shows blind adherence to a pathetic dogma.

  • Reply 316 of 379
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    This video isn't related to anything but it's about invention and sometimes posters make comments that seem like they are out of a Mitchell & Webb skit...


    [VIDEO]
  • Reply 317 of 379
    ankleskaterankleskater Posts: 1,287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Hiro View Post


     

    "make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists" seems an awful lot like "put original or inventive methods or processes into practice"


     


     


    So I used different words than followed up with, they mean essentially the same thing.  About the only room for interpretation is that my made ubiquitous requires your put into practice to be widely successful, not simply done to any degree.  


     


    Can you just dispense with the violent part of violent agreement now? 


     





    Awful lot alike? Not the same thing at all!


     


    Innovation is NOT "about the ability to make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists".  It is NOT an ability. It is NOT about ubiquity. It is NOT about "extra non-inventive twists".


     


    Since this is the 3rd time I am saying this, I am giving up on you. Don't want to turn into one of those here who just repeat themselves over and over. I am simply not that dedicated to helping others.

  • Reply 318 of 379
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    shaun, uk wrote: »
    You simply don't want to understand what I'm saying. There are lots of tablets that look like the iPad, including the Samsung tablets. THAT IS NOT THE POINT.

    IP theft isn't the point? Then why're they suing?
    The point is would a reasonable person be confused into buying a Samsung tablet when they wanted to buy an iPad.

    That falls under the question of damages. That's secondary to the main objective.
    I maintain that you would have to be a complete moron to do that given that every tablet I've seen is clearly branded on the front and/or back of the product.

    Samsung's. Lawyers. And yes, I just repeated it since the point you think you're making is moot, meaning we're back to our original argument.
    I don't care if the Samsung looks like the iPad. I really don't care.

    To partially quote someone,
    THAT IS… …THE POINT.
    I hope Apple lose this case and all the other cases because I don't want to see an iPad monopoly.

    I hope you don't honestly think this is their intention.
    Competition breads innovation and keeps prices down.

    I hope you don't honestly think what we have right now is competition.

    [QUOTE}I don't expect to have an objective discussion as there are just too many blinkered people on here.[/quote]

    As an example, where would you go to have an objective discussion?
  • Reply 319 of 379
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    As an example, where would you go to have an objective discussion?

    MacRumors? ????
  • Reply 320 of 379
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,095member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    MacRumors? ????


    I'd never paid much mind to MacRumors, but since you mentioned it I paid a quick visit. They have a comment thread on the exact same article as posted here. Almost 1000 comments, both sides of the aisle, and largely free of ad-homs from a quick peruse. Interesting.


    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1396398

Sign In or Register to comment.