So much for all the Android fan's BS claims that the LG Prada and F700 were designed before iPhone.
I for one have in the past posted pics of the LG Prada but I never once accused Apple of stealing the design. While the Prada was released first the iPhone was probably in the development stage before it simply because Apple was new at manufacturing a cell phone and all that it entails. My position is that more than one company was developing touch screen devices, but while others settled for good enough Apple went the extra mile and made the iPhone amazing.
Where did you see Google accused of destroying any evidence in the Samsung/Apple case?
... and when did Google become a defendant in any Apple lawsuit?
And it's been revealed that Google suggested to Samsung not to make their devices so similar to Apple's. Motorola and others were and have been able to make devices that are very different looking from the iPhone. IMO Touch Wiz is the biggest offender, so many amateur devs were able to skin Android in very innovative ways so why couldn't Samsung do the same?
I for one have in the past posted pics of the LG Prada but I never once accused Apple of stealing the design. While the Prada was released first the iPhone was probably in the development stage before it simply because Apple was new at manufacturing a cell phone and all that it entails. My position is that more than one company was developing touch screen devices, but while others settled for good enough Apple went the extra mile and made the iPhone amazing.
Don't forget that Apple had a shitload of experience with mobile devices. The only part of the equation they hadn't mastered was the cellular components. But even then you can't suggest that that was why the iPhone would have been in development longer because the iPhone and Prada were not even close to being the same device in HW or SW. The iPhone had Mac OS X stripped down and then built up. It also had a multi-touch capacitance matrix out of the box. The only reason the Prada is compared to the iPhone is because it had a capacitance display, but it was a single touch which meant no pinching, zoom, or any other multitouch feature that made the iPhone stand out.
The fact this came to trial is just ridiculous. Its beyond stupid. So a month of discussing different versions of squares and corners and FRAND 3G patents.
What happens after this trial.
NOTHING.
Apple will sell a bunch of Iphone 5 (iphones)
Samsung will sell a Bunch of SGS III (galaxy phones)
If these companies were not so petty. This money that is being wasted could of been used for I dont know, innovation.
And you keep ignoring things like like all the other fandroids. Apple's overriding objective was to get Samsung to stop copying. Looking at the Galaxy SIII, they seem to have accomplished their goal.
Judge disagrees with Samsung, thinks Apple's claims have more merit = Judge MUST be corrupt/paid off, and should be thrown in jail.
LMAO
The decision couldn't have gone any other way. Samsung is being sued for copying from Apple. If Apple has defensible intellectual property and Samsung copied, they're guilty. But since Apple never produced the 'sony-inspired' phone, there's nothing to go on. There's nothing illegal about making prototypes based on other people's work. It's only when you commercialize it (as Samsung did) that you get into trouble.
The fact this came to trial is just ridiculous. Its beyond stupid. So a month of discussing different versions of squares and corners and FRAND 3G patents.
What happens after this trial.
NOTHING.
Apple will sell a bunch of Iphone 5 (iphones)
Samsung will sell a Bunch of SGS III (galaxy phones)
If these companies were not so petty. This money that is being wasted could of been used for I dont know, innovation.
Apple already spends on a ton on innovation; Samesung does not, that is the problem. Samesung only copies Apple and Apple does not like being Samesungs R&D centre
iPad with a kickstand? Sounds like Microsoft was snooping around again to come up with their recent design. MS has built their fortune on the copying and stealing from other companies. I don't suspect anything has changed with Ballmer at the helm.
I really hope some of the documents filed in the case do get exposed. Microsoft's licensing agreement with Samsung may get revealed, as may IBM's and Intel's among others. Those three particular parties have filed emergency motions to keep the agreements sealed. Hopefully Koh will let them see the light of day. She's already served notice that she intends to open the trial up to the media and public as much as possible.
ARM Holdings, BskyB, Rolls Royce Group, AstraZeneca, Burberry Group, GlaxoSmithKline and a few others including my local pub micro brewery would beg to differ.
Um.... BSkyB produces nothing physical; RR manufacturing in engines is done mostly outside the UK (except for one major plant); if you're referring to RR the car company, that is actually owned by a German car company, BMW; pretty much most pharma manufacturing is now outsourced to middle and low income countries (although Ireland is still big); and while I am not 100% sure, I am willing to bet that a vast majority of Burberry products are sourced from Asia and Central America.
As if things could get any stranger, the designer who supposedly created the Sony-inspired mock-up for Apple, Shin Nishibori. resigned from Apple in the past couple of weeks and says he won't testify since he's no longer an Apple employee and wasn't properly served.
It looks like Apple paid him huge on resignation, on obvious condition that he would not serve the court order in anyway, and shipped him to Hawai. Very fish.
It looks like Apple paid him huge on resignation, on obvious condition that he would not serve the court order in anyway, and shipped him to Hawai. Very fish.
As if there is no way for the court to determine he is necessary and require him to serve? That makes it sound like Hawaii has no "extradition" policy with the US. Hilarious!
It is no more so than plagiarizing a literary work.
Samsung plagiarized Apple's design.
That is a major selling point and differentiator of Apple products.
We arent' supposed to allow knockoffs in the U.S.
Yet, here is one and people are actually defending it.
The lawsuit has merit and Samsung has basically admitted to the plagiarism with the "but maybe they copied Sony, so that makes it OK" argument.
The fact that the Galaxy runs an inferior OS doesn't matter. It's the near identical industrial design that gets their proverbial "foot" in the customer's door.
It's sad to think that these Apple f4nbois and Ish33ps fail to see that the engines used inside their Porsches and Ferraries are actually a Civic engines used by the masses, ARM chips. There ain't gonna be any Iphones and Ipads without ARM Holdings "true" innovations under the hood Worse still, the ARM's chips installed these f4nbois and Ish33ps "Ferraries" and "Porsches" are not even ones with the latest or the best performance of the bunch either. And, Apple makes Iphone with longer screen not because they want to put a better screen that simulate 16:9 screen, but it's rather to accomodate a longer and thinner battery that can respectably withstand the power-drain that is a 4G LTE chip on extensive use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frac
ARM Holdings, BskyB, Rolls Royce Group, AstraZeneca, Burberry Group, GlaxoSmithKline and a few others including my local pub micro brewery would beg to differ.
I really hope some of the documents filed in the case do get exposed. Microsoft's licensing agreement with Samsung may get revealed, as may IBM's and Intel's among others. Those three particular parties have filed emergency motions to keep the agreements sealed. Hopefully Koh will let them see the light of day. She's already served notice that she intends to open the trial up to the media and public as much as possible.
That's one down. Judge Koh denied IBM's request to seal the license agreement between them and Samsung, so expect a Reuters article on the terms and probably tomorrow. Fingers crossed that Microsofts' gets published too after another decision to deny, but that one's a little iffier.
It's sad to think that these Apple f4nbois and Ish33ps fail to see that the engines used inside their Porsches and Ferraries are actually a Civic engines used by the masses, ARM chips. There ain't gonna be any Iphones and Ipads without ARM Holdings "true" innovations under the hood Worse still, the ARM's chips installed these f4nbois and Ish33ps "Ferraries" and "Porsches" are not even ones with the latest or the best performance of the bunch either. And, Apple makes Iphone with longer screen not because they want to put a better screen that simulate 16:9 screen, but it's rather to accomodate a longer and thinner battery that can respectably withstand the power-drain that is a 4G LTE chip on extensive use.
Hey fandroid, it's sad that you just joined this website to post your pro-android viewpoints but you are too ignorant to know that Apple was one of the 3 founders of ARM and have been using their chips and tech since 1990.
Another idiot who doesn't even know anything about marketing. You can market a turd with the best strategy and all the money in the world and if it doesn't sell it's still a turd.
The numbers have spoken, obviously you don't like Apple products, but it seems many people do.
Please don't tell them they are buying a turd just bc you have your own bias. Whoops you will anyway bc that's the type of person you are, only your opinion matters, not millions of satisfied customers.
There really should be an IQ test to post to the Internet. I'll all for freedom of speech but I'm also for restricting loud mouth idiots. I guess we can't have it both ways.
I hope so because the rumours of what MS makes from vendors using Android seems incredibly high.
Incredibly high in relation to what? MS patents are not SEP, they are opt-in tech, not required tech like SEPs.
Although it can be and has been argued that since MS has monopoly power in corporate email, exchange functionality should be licensed closer to FRAND rates than non-SEP patents.
The problem is that Google reversed engineered activesync or whatever MS uses instead of taking a license like Apple did. Now that Google is a threat to MS in the lucrative smartphone business, MS wants a license for all android phones. Since MS never committed their tech under FRAND terns, they can charge whatever they want.
It's google's fault for not licensing the tech, and now all the OEMs have to pay MS.
I don't doubt companies get inspiration from each other. But there is a difference between being inspired by someone's design principles and making them your own and blatant copying. The Samsung Galaxy Ace Plus is just a blatant copy of the iPhone 3G. Seeing phones like the Lumia, One X and even Samsung's Galaxy S III prove that there is not just one way to design a smartphone. That argument is so lame. And last time I checked Apple isn't suing Nokia, HTC over their phone designs, nor Samsung over the Galaxy S III design.
Even the print ads for Samsung were ripped off from Apple here in India. The hoardings advertising the Galaxy when it launched were exactly like the iPhone 3GS. If you can recall the 3GS splash page on Apple's website - it had 2 phones leaning on each other - one showing Voice Control and the other showing the compass. Samsung had the very same position for it's phones.
Pity, I always meant to take a picture, but never got around to it.
Comments
I for one have in the past posted pics of the LG Prada but I never once accused Apple of stealing the design. While the Prada was released first the iPhone was probably in the development stage before it simply because Apple was new at manufacturing a cell phone and all that it entails. My position is that more than one company was developing touch screen devices, but while others settled for good enough Apple went the extra mile and made the iPhone amazing.
And it's been revealed that Google suggested to Samsung not to make their devices so similar to Apple's. Motorola and others were and have been able to make devices that are very different looking from the iPhone. IMO Touch Wiz is the biggest offender, so many amateur devs were able to skin Android in very innovative ways so why couldn't Samsung do the same?
Don't forget that Apple had a shitload of experience with mobile devices. The only part of the equation they hadn't mastered was the cellular components. But even then you can't suggest that that was why the iPhone would have been in development longer because the iPhone and Prada were not even close to being the same device in HW or SW. The iPhone had Mac OS X stripped down and then built up. It also had a multi-touch capacitance matrix out of the box. The only reason the Prada is compared to the iPhone is because it had a capacitance display, but it was a single touch which meant no pinching, zoom, or any other multitouch feature that made the iPhone stand out.
Edit: reply to the person, who says UK does not make durable cars
And you keep ignoring things like like all the other fandroids. Apple's overriding objective was to get Samsung to stop copying. Looking at the Galaxy SIII, they seem to have accomplished their goal.
The decision couldn't have gone any other way. Samsung is being sued for copying from Apple. If Apple has defensible intellectual property and Samsung copied, they're guilty. But since Apple never produced the 'sony-inspired' phone, there's nothing to go on. There's nothing illegal about making prototypes based on other people's work. It's only when you commercialize it (as Samsung did) that you get into trouble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
The fact this came to trial is just ridiculous. Its beyond stupid. So a month of discussing different versions of squares and corners and FRAND 3G patents.
What happens after this trial.
NOTHING.
Apple will sell a bunch of Iphone 5 (iphones)
Samsung will sell a Bunch of SGS III (galaxy phones)
If these companies were not so petty. This money that is being wasted could of been used for I dont know, innovation.
Apple already spends on a ton on innovation; Samesung does not, that is the problem. Samesung only copies Apple and Apple does not like being Samesungs R&D centre
iPad with a kickstand? Sounds like Microsoft was snooping around again to come up with their recent design. MS has built their fortune on the copying and stealing from other companies. I don't suspect anything has changed with Ballmer at the helm.
I really hope some of the documents filed in the case do get exposed. Microsoft's licensing agreement with Samsung may get revealed, as may IBM's and Intel's among others. Those three particular parties have filed emergency motions to keep the agreements sealed. Hopefully Koh will let them see the light of day. She's already served notice that she intends to open the trial up to the media and public as much as possible.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120730152649225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frac
ARM Holdings, BskyB, Rolls Royce Group, AstraZeneca, Burberry Group, GlaxoSmithKline and a few others including my local pub micro brewery would beg to differ.
Um.... BSkyB produces nothing physical; RR manufacturing in engines is done mostly outside the UK (except for one major plant); if you're referring to RR the car company, that is actually owned by a German car company, BMW; pretty much most pharma manufacturing is now outsourced to middle and low income countries (although Ireland is still big); and while I am not 100% sure, I am willing to bet that a vast majority of Burberry products are sourced from Asia and Central America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
As if things could get any stranger, the designer who supposedly created the Sony-inspired mock-up for Apple, Shin Nishibori. resigned from Apple in the past couple of weeks and says he won't testify since he's no longer an Apple employee and wasn't properly served.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Key-witness-in-Apple-Samsung-trial-leaves-Apple-doesnt-want-to-testify_id32795
It looks like Apple paid him huge on resignation, on obvious condition that he would not serve the court order in anyway, and shipped him to Hawai. Very fish.
As if there is no way for the court to determine he is necessary and require him to serve? That makes it sound like Hawaii has no "extradition" policy with the US. Hilarious!
Stealing industrial design is not petty.
It is no more so than plagiarizing a literary work.
Samsung plagiarized Apple's design.
That is a major selling point and differentiator of Apple products.
We arent' supposed to allow knockoffs in the U.S.
Yet, here is one and people are actually defending it.
The lawsuit has merit and Samsung has basically admitted to the plagiarism with the "but maybe they copied Sony, so that makes it OK" argument.
The fact that the Galaxy runs an inferior OS doesn't matter. It's the near identical industrial design that gets their proverbial "foot" in the customer's door.
It's sad to think that these Apple f4nbois and Ish33ps fail to see that the engines used inside their Porsches and Ferraries are actually a Civic engines used by the masses, ARM chips. There ain't gonna be any Iphones and Ipads without ARM Holdings "true" innovations under the hood Worse still, the ARM's chips installed these f4nbois and Ish33ps "Ferraries" and "Porsches" are not even ones with the latest or the best performance of the bunch either. And, Apple makes Iphone with longer screen not because they want to put a better screen that simulate 16:9 screen, but it's rather to accomodate a longer and thinner battery that can respectably withstand the power-drain that is a 4G LTE chip on extensive use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frac
ARM Holdings, BskyB, Rolls Royce Group, AstraZeneca, Burberry Group, GlaxoSmithKline and a few others including my local pub micro brewery would beg to differ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
I really hope some of the documents filed in the case do get exposed. Microsoft's licensing agreement with Samsung may get revealed, as may IBM's and Intel's among others. Those three particular parties have filed emergency motions to keep the agreements sealed. Hopefully Koh will let them see the light of day. She's already served notice that she intends to open the trial up to the media and public as much as possible.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120730152649225
ooohh...
That's one down. Judge Koh denied IBM's request to seal the license agreement between them and Samsung, so expect a Reuters article on the terms and probably tomorrow. Fingers crossed that Microsofts' gets published too after another decision to deny, but that one's a little iffier.
I hope so because the rumours of what MS makes from vendors using Android seems incredibly high.
Hey fandroid, it's sad that you just joined this website to post your pro-android viewpoints but you are too ignorant to know that Apple was one of the 3 founders of ARM and have been using their chips and tech since 1990.
Go to bed, your momma says
Another idiot who doesn't even know anything about marketing. You can market a turd with the best strategy and all the money in the world and if it doesn't sell it's still a turd.
The numbers have spoken, obviously you don't like Apple products, but it seems many people do.
Please don't tell them they are buying a turd just bc you have your own bias. Whoops you will anyway bc that's the type of person you are, only your opinion matters, not millions of satisfied customers.
There really should be an IQ test to post to the Internet. I'll all for freedom of speech but I'm also for restricting loud mouth idiots. I guess we can't have it both ways.
Incredibly high in relation to what? MS patents are not SEP, they are opt-in tech, not required tech like SEPs.
Although it can be and has been argued that since MS has monopoly power in corporate email, exchange functionality should be licensed closer to FRAND rates than non-SEP patents.
The problem is that Google reversed engineered activesync or whatever MS uses instead of taking a license like Apple did. Now that Google is a threat to MS in the lucrative smartphone business, MS wants a license for all android phones. Since MS never committed their tech under FRAND terns, they can charge whatever they want.
It's google's fault for not licensing the tech, and now all the OEMs have to pay MS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
I don't doubt companies get inspiration from each other. But there is a difference between being inspired by someone's design principles and making them your own and blatant copying. The Samsung Galaxy Ace Plus is just a blatant copy of the iPhone 3G. Seeing phones like the Lumia, One X and even Samsung's Galaxy S III prove that there is not just one way to design a smartphone. That argument is so lame. And last time I checked Apple isn't suing Nokia, HTC over their phone designs, nor Samsung over the Galaxy S III design.
Even the print ads for Samsung were ripped off from Apple here in India. The hoardings advertising the Galaxy when it launched were exactly like the iPhone 3GS. If you can recall the 3GS splash page on Apple's website - it had 2 phones leaning on each other - one showing Voice Control and the other showing the compass. Samsung had the very same position for it's phones.
Pity, I always meant to take a picture, but never got around to it.