Apple says it may file new patent suit targeting Samsung Galaxy S4

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    robogoborobogobo Posts: 378member
    I swear these judges are being paid by Samsung. A tax on the court's resources? Really? That's a legitimate reason to deny? So a whole new trial won't be any more taxing? Give me a break. This is obviously a pro-Samsung move to keep the G4 on the shelves. By the time it comes to trial it'll be obsolete.
  • Reply 22 of 38
    cash907cash907 Posts: 893member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jax44 View Post



    The length of time to get a patent case to trial should be weeks to a few months, not years.

    What a joke.


     


    Because the only company that has business to conduct in the courtroom is Apple, right?


     


    Sorry Jax, but this is probably the only line Apple gets to stand at the back of just like everybody else.

  • Reply 24 of 38
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member


    Time for Apple to pull up stumps and relocate the spaceship campus to east texas.


     


    Justice and land development seem to move faster there.


     


    Designed by Apple in Austin.

  • Reply 25 of 38
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member



    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rednival View Post


    There is a reason Apple goes after the hardware.  Software patents are far riskier.  It would be incredibly complicated to explain how Android (in and of itself) is a violation of patents.  It would probably involve showing lines of code to a jury and explaining algorithms and programming concepts in great detail.  Software patents cover concepts and logic, not physical or visual ideas.  




     


    You're right about software patents, however (and it's easy to get lawsuits confused) this particular case is only about them.


     


    For example, Apple's on background data synchronization, and Samsung's on video compression.


     


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by jax44 View Post



    The length of time to get a patent case to trial should be weeks to a few months, not years.



     


    It's because determining infringement of a software patent can easily depend on even a missing comma.


     


    Figuring out meaning can be extremely time consuming.  This is exactly why Judge Koh has limited the amount of pre-trial legal debate about claim construction (i.e. the wording), by asking both sides to only worry about the claims that are their best shots at winning.


     


    Otherwise, the trial could be delayed for another year.  She wants it instead to happen as soon as possible.


     


    Quote:




    Originally Posted by robogobo View Post



    I swear these judges are being paid by Samsung.


     


    You're picking on the wrong judge.  Magistrate Grewal is the one who possibly helped Apple win their big trial last year, by preventing Samsung from presenting prior art evidence, even though he had the power to allow it.

  • Reply 26 of 38
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member


    I love the use of the word "may" in the title.  image


     


    Because all of the mobile tech giants are constantly suing each other I think it's about time that someone like SNL spoofs the tech presentations in a  skit where the tech giants just announce their lawsuits.  Whether they spoof Apple, Google/Motorola, Samsung, or Microsoft it all plays out the same.


     


    "I'm very excited to present this to you today.  We're filing 20, count them, 20 (!) new lawsuits against our competitor."

  • Reply 27 of 38
    macfandavemacfandave Posts: 603member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post


     


    Because the only company that has business to conduct in the courtroom is Apple, right?


     


    Sorry Jax, but this is probably the only line Apple gets to stand at the back of just like everybody else.



     


    Considering the massive economic impact that smartphone sales have and the rapid rate of innovation in a new industry, it would be understandable if cases like this one got priority and were allowed to cut in line.  I'd even think they'd develop a separate court to deal with high-value, early-stage technologies.

  • Reply 28 of 38
    tkell31tkell31 Posts: 216member


    Apple should put the time, money and energy they invest into lawsuits into developing new products.  

  • Reply 29 of 38
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post


     


    Considering the massive economic impact that smartphone sales have and the rapid rate of innovation in a new industry, it would be understandable if cases like this one got priority and were allowed to cut in line.  I'd even think they'd develop a separate court to deal with high-value, early-stage technologies.



     




    Be careful what you wish for.


     


    http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/06/04/itc-bans-us-import-of-older-apple-iphones-ipads-after-samsung-win

  • Reply 30 of 38
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post


    The camera looking at your eyes and stopping video is both creepy and stupid.  We can only imagine what Samsung is doing with the data it harvests from the camera that always watches you.



     


    Well, first off, it is not always watching.  It's like Siri or Facetime. You have to turn it on, and this particular feature is only available while using a certain video player.


     


    More importantly, eye watching code only looks for realtime geometric shapes and shades.


     


    Not sure what kind of info you think anyone could harvest from that.  Colors of face blobs, perhaps?


     


    Apple undoubtedly gets a lot more useful info from the voices they harvest from Siri requests.

  • Reply 31 of 38
    plagenplagen Posts: 151member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tkell31 View Post


    Apple should put the time, money and energy they invest into lawsuits into developing new products.  



    Right. So other (read Samsung) can steal without putting the time, money and energy into developing new products?

  • Reply 32 of 38
    sennensennen Posts: 1,470member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tkell31 View Post


    Samsung should put the time, money and energy they invest into copying Apple into developing new and innovative products of their own.  



     


    Fixed.

  • Reply 33 of 38
    Asia=Western Idea Xerox Machine
  • Reply 34 of 38
    bmason1270bmason1270 Posts: 258member
    tkell31 wrote: »
    Apple should put the time, money and energy they invest into lawsuits into developing new products.  

    Apple spends more on RD than most companies are even worth. STFU
  • Reply 35 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,508member
    Here's a viewpoint worth at least thinking about:
    http://www.patentprogress.org/2013/06/27/smartphone-patent-wars-a-lesson-for-privateers/

    Privateering isn't a good thing, but it's darn sure becoming more common. Nokia figured it out.
  • Reply 36 of 38
    chipsychipsy Posts: 287member


    Well if you don't like touching phones then use Wifi Direct which has been available on Samsung Galaxy S phones since version 1. Airdrop is just Apple's marketing name for Wifi direct. There are many more ways of sharing between phones with an Android device than just NFC.

  • Reply 37 of 38
    chipsychipsy Posts: 287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post


    The ridiculous phone-bumping.  AirDrop via Bluetooth is much more practical and dignified.


     


    The camera looking at your eyes and stopping video is both creepy and stupid.  We can only imagine what Samsung is doing with the data it harvests from the camera that always watches you.



    Well if you don't like touching phones then use Wifi Direct which has been available on Samsung Galaxy S phones since version 1. I'm sorry to say but Airdrop is just Apple's marketing name for Wifi direct. There are many more ways of sharing between Android devices than just NFC.

  • Reply 38 of 38
    jax44jax44 Posts: 79member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post


     


    Because the only company that has business to conduct in the courtroom is Apple, right?


     


    Sorry Jax, but this is probably the only line Apple gets to stand at the back of just like everybody else.



    My statement applies to everyone, not just Apple.

Sign In or Register to comment.