The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs…
Well, the law says otherwise.
Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.
"Innovate, don't litigate! Except also don't innovate because you don't deserve to own anything you do!"
"Innovate, don't litigate! Except also don't innovate because you don't deserve to own anything you do!" :no:
Oh those so called "inventions" were progress, but not all progress deserves a patent, nothing apple did was new or not obvious, or deserved a patent regrading those software patents, its why many of them don't exist in Europe because they had the sense to limit what a software patent should be. But in the U.S we don't have software patents, we just have patents. meaning Apple can hold wide ranging multi-touch patents they shouldn't. Its not just Apple, Amazon and Google own some pretty ridiculous wide ranging software patents. But that is changing. Hopefully we split software patents into their own category and limit the years they can be held.
And Apple has the money. They aren't going any where. I honestly think Sammy is gonna lose. But like you said they are enjoying the profits during this whole process.
Sammy already lost. It's only a matter of determining whether the decision will become permanent or not.
The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs, .
Actually, a jury decision says otherwise.
Not to mention common sense. Their own attorneys (who had been working with the products for months) were unable to tell the difference between a Tab and an iPad. Then you could consider the Samsung memo where they outlined all the features of the iPhone that they wanted to copy.
oeioeioei jfanning. Were you that kid, sitting on a wall, policeman passing by, telling you that you cannot sit on that wall and replying: "Sure you can, I'm sitting on it right now"?
Ya, and seconds later, screaming the words "Don't taise me bro!"
Nope, I am the guy that wants to know the answer to GTR's false claim? Can you answer it?
How do you know it's false? Can you answer it? How can he answer your question if he doesn't know which Samsung oven you own?
Show us which oven you own, and maybe we can find out if they copied it, and answer your question. The assumption here, based on experience, observation and history is that Samsung habitually copies other company's products for their own profit. To assert that a blanket statement regarding that is false, well…. I'd have to disagree.
So which Samsung oven do you own? (Truth be told, I didn't know Samsung manufactured ovens, but hey, why not? Plenty of those around to copy, right?)
Perhaps we'll find the exception to the observed generality that "Samsung Only Makes What It Has Copied"...
The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs, they deserved to get punished over that, because that was copying, no doubt about it.
But these "Utility patents" or better know as software patents are weak, and has been shown to be weak all across europe, asia, and even in the Uninted States.
Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.
I take it you think Amazon's "one click" patent (which Apple pays a license fee to use, by the way) should go away too…. since these "utility patents" are at least as strong as that one, conceptually speaking...
Look up on google to see what samsungs tablet & phones looked like before the iPad. Not even close! Really a bad looking set of phones & tablet. Then look at pictures of the Samsung phones & tablet after the iPhone. If you can't tell Samsung ripped apple off, you're just stupid.
(re: proposed shorter time limit for software patents)
"It's too hard to do my own work. I know! I'll force the people actually doing work to give me their stuff sooner! That way I don't have to bother!"
Too many software patent infringement cases are about people independently coming up with similar methods... and/or the goofy patenting of vague ideas instead of methods.
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Not to mention common sense. Their own attorneys (who had been working with the products for months) were unable to tell the difference between a Tab and an iPad.
As has been pointed out several times, it was not "attorneys", it was ONE older lady attorney.
A younger male attorney, seated further behind her, immediately pointed out which was which.
Quote:
Then you could consider the Samsung memo where they outlined all the features of the iPhone that they wanted to copy.
Unlike most people, I've actually gone through that 126 page list of suggested improvements.
First off, most were comparisons of ease of use, not about copying, and a lot seemed like the author was just trying to fill up his/her report to make it bulkier.
Over half of the recommendations were never implemented at all. Of the other half, about ten were related to Kies (Samsung's iTunes) which I don't use and cannot speak about.
Of the remaining phone related items, most were recommendations that didn't require an iPhone to come up with, as they were just common sense (e.g. "keyboard shouldn't cover the input fields"). In other words, defects like our handheld group's testers come up with on their own without needing a comparison to anything else.
In the end, I found these items that could vaguely be considered a direct "copy" of something Apple did, and even some of them are pretty non-iOS specific.
Show Bluetooth connection type while pairing (headphone, mouse, etc)
Show links for URLs, phone, email (this is a patent dispute)
End Call button should be larger (actually the S2 didn't do this, but other Android phones do).
Double-tapping shift locks uppercase mode (replaceable keyboards might be different).
Long press on key shows alternate language characters (again, not an Apple invention)
Email viewer should allow zoom in and out. (duh)
Facebook message editor should add camera button.
Camera app should have easier camera/camcorder switch.
Maps should sometimes have pin drop effect.
Time entries should allow scrollwheel input.
Voice memo should show something like a microphone instead of reel-to-reel recorder.
Add 3D lighting effect to some app icons. (Did Apple even invent that idea?)
Of those, #8 (camera app) is the only one that I would consider a direct copy of a uniquely Apple visual. (For a while, the Samsung camera app really looked like an iPhone clone.) Maybe #9 and #10 as well.
There are some good examples of Samsung's attempts to emulate the iPhone look and feel, but this list isn't really one of them. It's more like a laundry list of UI improvements that anyone could come up with, even if the iPhone had never existed.
<span style="font-size:13px;line-height:1.231;">Too many</span>
<span style="font-size:13px;line-height:1.231;"> software patent infringement cases are about people independently coming up with similar methods... and/or the goofy patenting of vague ideas instead of methods.</span>
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
As always, you're misrepresenting the patent system. You can't patent a 'vague idea'. If that happens, the patent can be readily invalidated.
As has been pointed out several times, it was not "attorneys", it was ONE older lady attorney.
A younger male attorney, seated further behind her, immediately pointed out which was which.
Not according to one of the reports from a blogger who was in the room. The report is that there was a delay before the younger attorney could identify it.
Regardless, there's absolutely no reason why even an older woman attorney should not be able to tell the difference.
<span style="font-size:13px;line-height:1.231;">Unlike most people, I've actually gone through that 126 page list of suggested improvements. </span>
<span style="font-size:13px;line-height:1.231;">First off, most were comparisons of ease of use, not about copying, and a lot seemed like the author was just trying to fill up his/her report to make it bulkier.</span>
Over half of the recommendations were never implemented at all. Of the other half, about ten were related to Kies (Samsung's iTunes) which I don't use and cannot speak about.
Of the remaining phone related items, most were recommendations that didn't require an iPhone to come up with, as they were just common sense (e.g. "keyboard shouldn't cover the input fields"). In other words, defects like our handheld group's testers come up with on their own without needing a comparison to anything else.
In the end, I found these items that could vaguely be considered a direct "copy" of something Apple did, and even some of them are pretty non-iOS specific.
Show Bluetooth connection type while pairing (headphone, mouse, etc)
Show links for URLs, phone, email (this is a patent dispute)
End Call button should be larger (actually the S2 didn't do this, but other Android phones do).
Double-tapping shift locks uppercase mode (replaceable keyboards might be different).
Long press on key shows alternate language characters (again, not an Apple invention)
Email viewer should allow zoom in and out. (duh)
Facebook message editor should add camera button.
Camera app should have easier camera/camcorder switch.
Maps should sometimes have pin drop effect.
Time entries should allow scrollwheel input.
Voice memo should show something like a microphone instead of reel-to-reel recorder.
Add 3D lighting effect to some app icons. (Did Apple even invent that idea?)
Of those, #8 (camera app) is the only one that I would consider a direct copy of a uniquely Apple visual. (For a while, the Samsung camera app really looked like an iPhone clone.) Maybe #9 and #10 as well.
There are some good examples of Samsung's attempts to emulate the iPhone look and feel, but this list isn't really one of them. It's more like a laundry list of UI improvements that anyone could come up with, even if the iPhone had never existed.
And, yet, the jury who saw all the evidence said that Samsung owes Apple more than a billion dollars.
So please explain why your unfounded opinion is more valid than theirs?
As a British-born 69-year-old writer, former publisher and editor, my experience of the word "math" is that it is primarily American. When I see it used in print, or hear it on British radio and TV, it is used only by Americans. "Maths" (as in the short form of mathematics) is always used in Britain, and also appears to be used primarily in the rest of the English-speaking world. However, language changes with time... but another word spelling increasingly used by Americans in forum messages which I (as a photographer) dislike is "lense" rather than lens.
Maths is used in Australia, the abuse I dislike most is "loose" rather than "lose", instead of removing vowels such as "u" from words Americans seem to have decided to add another "o".
You said "samsung devices that infringe on apple patents have a samsung logo on it", since all Samsung devices have a samsung logo on them, so I will ask you, what Apple patent does my oven infringe upon?
Look up on google to see what samsungs tablet & phones looked like before the iPad. Not even close! Really a bad looking set of phones & tablet. Then look at pictures of the Samsung phones & tablet after the iPhone. If you can't tell Samsung ripped apple off, you're just stupid.
That was when they were ripping off Nokia, Motorola, Palm and RIM.
Nokia finally decided to act, rather belatedly, the other day.
I'm sick and tired of this back and forth bickering just like everyone else. However, I truly believe that Samsung was doing this since day one knowing they can just drag it out in court, make a mockery of the process, and make the bucks off of Apple's hard work.
I truly want Samsung to get the hammer dropped on them. Bunch of slimy bottomfeeders they are. Not just in electronics, but pretty much everything else too. Just ask the German appliance makers how Samsung rips off their tech too.
Unfortunately it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Outside of tech sites consumers don't care about copying or infringement. As long as they get a decent device and it lasts it doesn't effect them. I don't think Samsung will pay a dime for it but will continue to make a tidy profit. Apple will as well and this will all be for nothing.
How do you know it's false? Can you answer it? How can he answer your question if he doesn't know which Samsung oven you own?
Show us which oven you own, and maybe we can find out if they copied it, and answer your question. The assumption here, based on experience, observation and history is that Samsung habitually copies other company's products for their own profit. To assert that a blanket statement regarding that is false, well…. I'd have to disagree.
So which Samsung oven do you own? (Truth be told, I didn't know Samsung manufactured ovens, but hey, why not? Plenty of those around to copy, right?)
Perhaps we'll find the exception to the observed generality that "Samsung Only Makes What It Has Copied"...
You do realise that Apple doesn't make ovens? Hence the question, how can every samsung product be copied off Apple
Comments
Originally Posted by Techstalker
The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs…
Well, the law says otherwise.
Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.
"Innovate, don't litigate! Except also don't innovate because you don't deserve to own anything you do!"
Oh those so called "inventions" were progress, but not all progress deserves a patent, nothing apple did was new or not obvious, or deserved a patent regrading those software patents, its why many of them don't exist in Europe because they had the sense to limit what a software patent should be. But in the U.S we don't have software patents, we just have patents. meaning Apple can hold wide ranging multi-touch patents they shouldn't. Its not just Apple, Amazon and Google own some pretty ridiculous wide ranging software patents. But that is changing. Hopefully we split software patents into their own category and limit the years they can be held.
Originally Posted by Techstalker
…nothing apple did was new or not obvious, or deserved a patent…
You don't get to decide that.
…Apple can hold wide ranging multi-touch patents they shouldn't.
Thanks, opinion.
…and limit the years they can be held.
"It's too hard to do my own work. I know! I'll force the people actually doing work to give me their stuff sooner! That way I don't have to bother!"
Sammy already lost. It's only a matter of determining whether the decision will become permanent or not.
Actually, a jury decision says otherwise.
Not to mention common sense. Their own attorneys (who had been working with the products for months) were unable to tell the difference between a Tab and an iPad. Then you could consider the Samsung memo where they outlined all the features of the iPhone that they wanted to copy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
oeioeioei jfanning. Were you that kid, sitting on a wall, policeman passing by, telling you that you cannot sit on that wall and replying: "Sure you can, I'm sitting on it right now"?
Ya, and seconds later, screaming the words "Don't taise me bro!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Nope, I am the guy that wants to know the answer to GTR's false claim? Can you answer it?
How do you know it's false? Can you answer it? How can he answer your question if he doesn't know which Samsung oven you own?
Show us which oven you own, and maybe we can find out if they copied it, and answer your question. The assumption here, based on experience, observation and history is that Samsung habitually copies other company's products for their own profit. To assert that a blanket statement regarding that is false, well…. I'd have to disagree.
So which Samsung oven do you own? (Truth be told, I didn't know Samsung manufactured ovens, but hey, why not? Plenty of those around to copy, right?)
Perhaps we'll find the exception to the observed generality that "Samsung Only Makes What It Has Copied"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
The only copying Samsung did was the original Samsung Galaxy in which they copied the look and feel and design of the 3gs, they deserved to get punished over that, because that was copying, no doubt about it.
But these "Utility patents" or better know as software patents are weak, and has been shown to be weak all across europe, asia, and even in the Uninted States.
Apple suing companies over pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search, double tap to zoom, disappearing scroll bar, apple will be lucky if these patents survive the next few years as they currently are.
I take it you think Amazon's "one click" patent (which Apple pays a license fee to use, by the way) should go away too…. since these "utility patents" are at least as strong as that one, conceptually speaking...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
(re: proposed shorter time limit for software patents)
"It's too hard to do my own work. I know! I'll force the people actually doing work to give me their stuff sooner! That way I don't have to bother!"
Too many software patent infringement cases are about people independently coming up with similar methods... and/or the goofy patenting of vague ideas instead of methods.
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Not to mention common sense. Their own attorneys (who had been working with the products for months) were unable to tell the difference between a Tab and an iPad.
As has been pointed out several times, it was not "attorneys", it was ONE older lady attorney.
A younger male attorney, seated further behind her, immediately pointed out which was which.
Quote:
Then you could consider the Samsung memo where they outlined all the features of the iPhone that they wanted to copy.
Unlike most people, I've actually gone through that 126 page list of suggested improvements.
First off, most were comparisons of ease of use, not about copying, and a lot seemed like the author was just trying to fill up his/her report to make it bulkier.
Over half of the recommendations were never implemented at all. Of the other half, about ten were related to Kies (Samsung's iTunes) which I don't use and cannot speak about.
Of the remaining phone related items, most were recommendations that didn't require an iPhone to come up with, as they were just common sense (e.g. "keyboard shouldn't cover the input fields"). In other words, defects like our handheld group's testers come up with on their own without needing a comparison to anything else.
In the end, I found these items that could vaguely be considered a direct "copy" of something Apple did, and even some of them are pretty non-iOS specific.
Show Bluetooth connection type while pairing (headphone, mouse, etc)
Show links for URLs, phone, email (this is a patent dispute)
End Call button should be larger (actually the S2 didn't do this, but other Android phones do).
Double-tapping shift locks uppercase mode (replaceable keyboards might be different).
Long press on key shows alternate language characters (again, not an Apple invention)
Email viewer should allow zoom in and out. (duh)
Facebook message editor should add camera button.
Camera app should have easier camera/camcorder switch.
Maps should sometimes have pin drop effect.
Time entries should allow scrollwheel input.
Voice memo should show something like a microphone instead of reel-to-reel recorder.
Add 3D lighting effect to some app icons. (Did Apple even invent that idea?)
Of those, #8 (camera app) is the only one that I would consider a direct copy of a uniquely Apple visual. (For a while, the Samsung camera app really looked like an iPhone clone.) Maybe #9 and #10 as well.
There are some good examples of Samsung's attempts to emulate the iPhone look and feel, but this list isn't really one of them. It's more like a laundry list of UI improvements that anyone could come up with, even if the iPhone had never existed.
As always, you're misrepresenting the patent system. You can't patent a 'vague idea'. If that happens, the patent can be readily invalidated.
Not according to one of the reports from a blogger who was in the room. The report is that there was a delay before the younger attorney could identify it.
Regardless, there's absolutely no reason why even an older woman attorney should not be able to tell the difference.
And, yet, the jury who saw all the evidence said that Samsung owes Apple more than a billion dollars.
So please explain why your unfounded opinion is more valid than theirs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotoformat
As a British-born 69-year-old writer, former publisher and editor, my experience of the word "math" is that it is primarily American. When I see it used in print, or hear it on British radio and TV, it is used only by Americans. "Maths" (as in the short form of mathematics) is always used in Britain, and also appears to be used primarily in the rest of the English-speaking world. However, language changes with time... but another word spelling increasingly used by Americans in forum messages which I (as a photographer) dislike is "lense" rather than lens.
Maths is used in Australia, the abuse I dislike most is "loose" rather than "lose", instead of removing vowels such as "u" from words Americans seem to have decided to add another "o".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
You said "samsung devices that infringe on apple patents have a samsung logo on it", since all Samsung devices have a samsung logo on them, so I will ask you, what Apple patent does my oven infringe upon?
Is it a "rounded rectangle"?
If it is, there you go then.
/s
Quote:
Originally Posted by skleiniv
Look up on google to see what samsungs tablet & phones looked like before the iPad. Not even close! Really a bad looking set of phones & tablet. Then look at pictures of the Samsung phones & tablet after the iPhone. If you can't tell Samsung ripped apple off, you're just stupid.
That was when they were ripping off Nokia, Motorola, Palm and RIM.
Nokia finally decided to act, rather belatedly, the other day.
Unfortunately it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Outside of tech sites consumers don't care about copying or infringement. As long as they get a decent device and it lasts it doesn't effect them. I don't think Samsung will pay a dime for it but will continue to make a tidy profit. Apple will as well and this will all be for nothing.
You do realise that Apple doesn't make ovens? Hence the question, how can every samsung product be copied off Apple
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
You do realise that Apple doesn't make ovens? Hence the question, how can every samsung product be copied off Apple
Wrong.
Watch out, he has less capacity to understand tongue-in-cheek than a Chia Pet.
Also this...
Hell, they could have even ripped off Apple's big disruptor for this year - the Apple Bus-stop:
Take your pick.
But I think I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Samsung have copied every product ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Watch out, he has less capacity to understand tongue-in-cheek or other humorous comments than a Chia Pet.
I'm hairing you loud and clear...