Samsung exec says patent struggle with Apple is 'unreasonable'

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 144
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post


    Yeah you will.  The next time you buy an Apple product, you will be buying several Samsung products.  


     


    But one of Samsung's biggest customers is our own, dearly beloved Apple.



    True. But I doubt this condition will last for long.


    Apple is not burning their bridges (as Samsung has done.) But they seem to be working deliberately and decisively to move away from Samsung as a supplier. My guess is that Samsung will be getting a far smaller share of Apple's business within the next year or so. After all, Samsung is not much of an innovator. They sell commodity electronic components. Whichever companies Apple awards their business and assistance to will become formidable competitors and hugely disruptive to Samsung for years to come.

  • Reply 62 of 144
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member


    It is obvious that Samsung had their own designs for Galaxy Tab and Galaxy phones before Apple designs were released.  Their OS is not iOS.  They have very different dimentions in every products than Apple's.  Theirs are made of mainly plastic whereas Apple's glass and aluminum.  So what makes you think that Samsung copied Apple?


     


    I think you have a point in similarities about the accessories and packaging in Samsung products, but are they really serious infringements of something that Apple has to ban entire products?  There is no confusion from the consumers, but if Apple really care about this, why not ask Samsung to change the accessory and packaging designs?


     


    One other question that I have wanted to ask you since the beginning.  Is this a discussion site for Apple shareholders?  (Appleinisder = Appleshareholder?)  Why this arrogant Apple practice (copycat calling&suing copycat) is good thing to consumers, if you are not shareholders?  If you really care about Apple as a consumer, you should be asking Apple to innovate as they did in 2007 rather than cheering up this nonsense.  Just me thought.

  • Reply 63 of 144
    technarchytechnarchy Posts: 296member
    It doesn't matter who you are, when you steal someone's stuff, they will be pissed at you.

    Why Samsung is shocked by this fact, I don't know.
  • Reply 64 of 144
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bilboteabagins View Post


    Your child like use of the word "allegedly" lowers the level of discourse. Look it up, use it properly, stop being a sheep.



    It seems your proscription would best be applied to your own post.

  • Reply 65 of 144
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post



    It doesn't matter who you are, when you steal someone's stuff, they will be pissed at you.

    Why Samsung is shocked by this fact, I don't know.


    Tell me exactly what Samsung has stolen from Apple.

  • Reply 66 of 144
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by hjb View Post

    Tell me exactly what Samsung has stolen from Apple.


     


    Intellectual property - hardware


    Intellectual property - software


    Trade dress

  • Reply 67 of 144
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hjb View Post


    It is obvious that Samsung had their own designs for Galaxy Tab and Galaxy phones before Apple designs were released.  Their OS is not iOS.  They have very different dimentions in every products than Apple's.  Theirs are made of mainly plastic whereas Apple's glass and aluminum.  So what makes you think that Samsung copied Apple?


     


    I think you have a point in similarities about the accessories and packaging in Samsung products, but are they really serious infringements of something that Apple has to ban entire products?  There is no confusion from the consumers, but if Apple really care about this, why not ask Samsung to change the accessory and packaging designs?


     


    One other question that I have wanted to ask you since the beginning.  Is this a discussion site for Apple shareholders?  (Appleinisder = Appleshareholder?)  Why this arrogant Apple practice (copycat calling&suing copycat) is good thing to consumers, if you are not shareholders?  If you really care about Apple as a consumer, you should be asking Apple to innovate as they did in 2007 rather than cheering up this nonsense.  Just me thought.



    No offense, but I would expect few serious responses to your questions. You do not appear to understand patent law, design patents, or trade dress.


    Apple has the design patent. The iPhone was shown before the Galaxy Tab was released. The OS is immaterial. The dimensions are not "very different," although the dimensions are immaterial as well, apart from the overall design. The material choice can be part of trade dress, but is only a piece of the overall design. etc.


     


    I'm sure many people here are AAPL shareholders (I am.)


    Nonetheless, I doubt that's the strongest bias AppleInsider visitors have for or against Apple. Most people probably just really like or dislike Apple, or certain things about Apple and their products for a variety of reasons.

  • Reply 68 of 144


    Personally, I think patents are for the sissy who's product can't hold market share. All these companies hiding behind patent infringement lawsuits are like children yelling back and forth... "I had it first!... No, I had it first... NO I had it first...." grow up and realize that patents don't make a great product... people do. bunch of babies holding on to a deprecated system.

  • Reply 69 of 144
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by platypus View Post

    Personally, I think patents are for the sissy who's product can't hold market share.


     


    Note to self, Edison was a "sissy" whose products wouldn't have otherwise taken off…  






    …bunch of babies holding on to a deprecated system.



     


    And he'll go on to say he's fine with trademarks and copyrights.


     


    Or that "everyone should share everything and then it'll be a magical land where innovation and free markets reign! We would have cured cancer if it hadn't been for patents!"


     


    Can we just agree that your position is wrong and leave it at that? 

  • Reply 70 of 144
    sennensennen Posts: 1,466member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post





    And this is really just a yellow M:

    image

    If you oversimplify things, then of course design patents and trademarks seem ridiculous.

    I'd say Apple's iPhone and iPad designs were pretty unique until everyone else started making their products look the same. The uniqueness certainly wears off when everybody copies something.

    Yeah all the Android-using manufacturers and ultra-book manufacturers are getting along really well and they all want to copy what Apple is doing. Just because there's no in-fighting amongst a gang of thieves doesn't mean the victim has no right shouting about their theft.


     


    Marvin, whilst a mod here, is not backward in criticising Apple, and nails it right here.

  • Reply 71 of 144
    hjb wrote: »
    If you really care about Apple as a consumer, you should be asking Apple to innovate as they did in 2007 rather than cheering up this nonsense.  Just me thought.
    Think about what you just said. What incentive would Apple have - or anyone for that matter - to invest a large sum of money in research and development to create the innovation that consumers desire, if it is unable to reap the full economic benefits of its investment. I fail to see how copying someone else's designs or stealing someone else's intellectual property helps innovation. How can you equate copying to innovation?
  • Reply 72 of 144
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,328member
    platypus wrote: »
    Personally, I think patents are for the sissy who's product can't hold market share. All these companies hiding behind patent infringement lawsuits are like children yelling back and forth... "I had it first!... No, I had it first... NO I had it first...." grow up and realize that patents don't make a great product... people do. bunch of babies holding on to a deprecated system.

    What an apt username.
  • Reply 73 of 144
    sennensennen Posts: 1,466member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hc6815 View Post


    anyone care to explain what you mean by "more than just rectangles"? Don't give me explanations related to software, operating system, etc. I know those are part of the lawsuit, but they're completely separate from the design aspect, which seems to be the main focus of this discussion.


     


    in the design aspect, what do you mean by more than just rectangles?

     



     


    I suggest you go search through any of the hundreds of previous threads on the topic.

  • Reply 74 of 144
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post


    No offense, but I would expect few serious responses to your questions. You do not appear to understand patent law, design patents, or trade dress.


    Apple has the design patent. The iPhone was shown before the Galaxy Tab was released. The OS is immaterial. The dimensions are not "very different," although the dimensions are immaterial as well, apart from the overall design. The material choice can be part of trade dress, but is only a piece of the overall design. etc.


     


    I'm sure many people here are AAPL shareholders (I am.)


    Nonetheless, I doubt that's the strongest bias AppleInsider visitors have for or against Apple. Most people probably just really like or dislike Apple, or certain things about Apple and their products for a variety of reasons.



    If you look the Samsung digital photo frame marketed in 2006.  It really resembles Galaxy Tab and Ipad.  The frame itself is not unrelated products if you see the specs.  I guess, they developed from the frame when they saw the market which Apple seemed to have created.  The Apple's Ipad design patent does not look like Ipad nor Galaxy Tab.  It really look like Knight Riders tablet (Tablet Newspapers 1994) and a bunch of tablet computers prior to 2004, see the recent UK rulling.


     


    For this iPhone design patent, I do not see much resemblance.  Samsung had their own designs (rectangular shape with rounded corners with UIs before iPhone released)  In the image comparason, you are comparing home screen with iPhone and application drawer on Android, which is not Samsung's.  In real world, they look different (in fact home screen of all android phones out there are look different)


     


    So, what is material in this?

  • Reply 75 of 144
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by diplication View Post





    Think about what you just said. What incentive would Apple have - or anyone for that matter - to invest a large sum of money in research and development to create the innovation that consumers desire, if it is unable to reap the full economic benefits of its investment. I fail to see how copying someone else's designs or stealing someone else's intellectual property helps innovation. How can you equate copying to innovation?


     


    Sorry if I offended you.  


     


    But then how much Apple wants?  $110 billion is not enough?  How much Apple is investing R&D on their income?  I read somewhere that Samsung is investing tens of billiions every year, but how much by Apple?


     


    Again what exactly Samsung copied Apple?  If Samsung copied (I dont know yet), what Apple has been doing?  Are you sure Apple is not copying.  If yes, how do you know?


     


    Are you saying Samsung is not innovating?

  • Reply 76 of 144
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    hc6815 wrote: »
    the before and after iphone/ipad picture doesn't prove samsung copied apple. if you read samsung's trial brief, you'll see samsung's internal design plans document dated 2006, before the iphone came out, that shows that Samsung had been planning rectangular, curved corner designs for their phones before the iphone came out, and thus didn't change their designs completely in response to Apple's iphone release in 2007

    The F700 I presume you are referring to was a rectangle with a slide out keyboard, the design patent Samsung lodged would include this i.e. it is not like an iPhone.

    I guess it's back to the drawing board for you, the F700 doesn't toe the official Samsung Internet trolling line.
  • Reply 77 of 144
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,772member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    image

    "Look... me and the McDonald's people got this little misunderstanding. See, they're McDonald's... I'm McDowell's. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds."



    That about sums it up. Thumbs Up!

  • Reply 78 of 144
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,772member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by diplication View Post





    Think about what you just said. What incentive would Apple have - or anyone for that matter - to invest a large sum of money in research and development to create the innovation that consumers desire, if it is unable to reap the full economic benefits of its investment. I fail to see how copying someone else's designs or stealing someone else's intellectual property helps innovation. How can you equate copying to innovation?


    That was almost too easy. Surely the poster could've thought of this ohh so obvious argument himself.

  • Reply 79 of 144
    hjb wrote: »
    Sorry if I offended you.  

    But then how much Apple wants?  $110 billion is not enough?  How much Apple is investing R&D on their income?  I read somewhere that Samsung is investing tens of billiions every year, but how much by Apple?

    Again what exactly Samsung copied Apple?  If Samsung copied (I dont know yet), what Apple has been doing?  Are you sure Apple is not copying.  If yes, how do you know?

    Are you saying Samsung is not innovating?
    Not offended at all, you misread my tone. I didn't mention Samsung at all, or infer that they were not innovating. I was responding to your comment that could be paraphrased as stating that Apple should forget about protecting their intellectual property and go back to innovating. To me it seems that innovation is stifled without protection, I can't see any other way around it. It doesn't matter to me which side Apple or Samsung is on, copying is just not conducive to innovation.

    In this post you seem to suggest a somewhat socialist idea that innovation should be rewarded, but only up to a determined level of profit. I'm not making a judgement on this, just trying to understand.
  • Reply 80 of 144
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    image

    "Look... me and the McDonald's people got this little misunderstanding. See, they're McDonald's... I'm McDowell's. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds."


     



     


     


    If Samsung actually called themselves aApple or their products IFon, then I agree with you.  Or you mean you can not have beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions in your bugger in US?

Sign In or Register to comment.