Apple offers Samsung patent settlement deal tied to anti-cloning provision

123457»

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 138
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Since we're on the subject of copying China is developing their own OS, better than either iOS or Android... kinda. Now testing on China Mobile.
    http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/01/china-builds-own-phone-os-aims-to-be-more-secure-than-android-or-iphone/

    Everyone is getting into the game...
    http://www.naturalnews.com/043568_secure_smartphone_Swiss_companies_government_surveillance.html
    Of course they will never get back their ultra secretive banking system, so why not.
  • Reply 122 of 138
    Originally Posted by Shortest Douche

    [post]

     

    I guess you forgot that you’re breaking the law right now and that you’ve just given us your IP address.

     

    Seems like the action of someone with mental difficulties.

  • Reply 123 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

     

     

    Samsung won the 'cloning' lawsuits. Both in Germany and the UK. That was the court case where Apple violated the order and lied about it badly enough to have to carry a message on their homepage for a month.

     

     

    Plus, haven't they settled out at a total of under $1B so far for patent infringement?


    Oh look, It's a new troll.

  • Reply 124 of 138
    noahjnoahj Posts: 4,503member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Since we're on the subject of copying China is developing their own OS, better than either iOS or Android... kinda. Now testing on China Mobile.
    http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/01/china-builds-own-phone-os-aims-to-be-more-secure-than-android-or-iphone/
    "Kinda" is one way to put it. More secure certainly does not equal better. It just means more secure. And just because a claim of more secure is made does not mean it is true either. Everyone wants to have the best most secure and easiest to use phone OS. iOS has set the bar fairly high for most of that, and it will be seen if this or any following efforts clear that bar or not. Security can always be improved, but the only way to truly ensure security is to compromise user experience, it is a balancing act. If anyone disagrees on this point they truly do not understand what security is and what needs to be done to ensure it.
  • Reply 125 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MarkyMarc43 View Post

     

    Oh look, It's a new troll.


     

    The only trolly part of that post was your response. If you go on to read the thread you'll find I prove that I'm right unequivocally citing judgements explicitly.

     

     

    Hardly the actions of a troll.

  • Reply 126 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

     

     

    The only trolly part of that post was your response. If you go on to read the thread you'll find I prove that I'm right unequivocally citing judgements explicitly.

     

     

    Hardly the actions of a troll.


     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    Order handed down. Apple complied fully. Judge said, “No, do it again.” Apple protested, rightly, having already done it. Judge threatened fines for complying fully with the ruling. Apple forced to change.

     

    Every report on the lawsuit says this.

     

    Am I confused that once a ruling is decided upon it cannot magically be changed at a whim, much less after it has already been carried out? I doubt it.

     

    Not a single claim made was incorrect.

     

    Prove it. This didn’t happen, by the way. They explicitly said they lost the British case.

     

    No… the notice was part of the ruling.

     

    Which is why it’s so confusing that you would get it THIS wrong.


    Credit where credit is due.

     

    I did read all the way to the end, which I am likely to do if there is hearty and intelligence conversation / discourse. I have flagged my OS to not "react" without further data points in the future.

     

    MJC

  • Reply 127 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MarkyMarc43 View Post

     

     

    Credit where credit is due.

     

    I did read all the way to the end, which I am likely to do if there is hearty and intelligence conversation / discourse. I have flagged my OS to not "react" without further data points in the future.

     

    MJC


     

    No hard feelings. It's clear from even a couple days on this site (I did lurk a little beforehand) that there are way more trolls than I thought, just their posts usually get deleted before I see them.

     

    Anyhow, I don't intend to rile anyone up or even get in an argument. Going to avoid TS in future and just argue my point politely and carefully :)

  • Reply 128 of 138
    Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

    Going to avoid TS in future and just argue my point politely and carefully :)


     

    Or correctly. Might try that, too.

  • Reply 129 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    Or correctly. Might try that, too.


     

    You ran away from our last discussion, maybe don't try trolling in another thread.

  • Reply 130 of 138
    Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

    You ran away from our last discussion


     

    How pathetic.

  • Reply 131 of 138
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    I guess you forgot that you’re breaking the law right now and that you’ve just given us your IP address.

     

    Seems like the action of someone with mental difficulties.


    I will quote that one guy with mental disorder everybody is sick of: "Shut up and go way"!

  • Reply 132 of 138
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,310member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shortest Douche View Post

     

    Why would Samsung agree to this settlement? They made tens of billions with the galaxy S line and were fined only little less than1 Billion (final amount still to be determined). It would just be bad business.


    The Court required an attempt at settlement. If settlement is not possible, then the court can then step in and create a solution. That solution may not be amenable to Samsung, such as further injunctions.

     

    Oh you say, but injunctions against obsolete products do nothing to Samsung's bottom line.

     

    The problem for Samsung is that Apple is quite prepared to bring new IP infringement against Samsung, and the court may then find that Samsung's inability to settle previously cause for immediate injunctions against current and future product sales in the U.S. to provide relief for Apple's infringement claims against a unwilling party. 

     

    That has teeth, and that is the end goal that Apple has been moving; injunctions that provide incentives to Samsung to stop infringement.

  • Reply 133 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tmay View Post

     

    The Court required an attempt at settlement. If settlement is not possible, then the court can then step in and create a solution. That solution may not be amenable to Samsung, such as further injunctions.

     

    Oh you say, but injunctions against obsolete products do nothing to Samsung's bottom line.

     

    The problem for Samsung is that Apple is quite prepared to bring new IP infringement against Samsung, and the court may then find that Samsung's inability to settle previously cause for immediate injunctions against current and future product sales in the U.S. to provide relief for Apple's infringement claims against a unwilling party.

     

    That has teeth, and that is the end goal that Apple has been moving; injunctions that provide incentives to Samsung to stop infringement.


    Don't get me wrong; I actually despite samsung ethics. But they proved one can just copy/steal in this industry and get away with it. 1 Billion is nothing compare to the money they made. These battles will last for years. Enough time for them to develop their own IP.

  • Reply 134 of 138
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,310member

    My point is that they aren't/won't get away with it in the long run; their will be a cost. Your point is that it is still very profitable for them to do this. I agree; for now.

     

    But IP isn't in stasis, and if Apple and others aren't able to protect legitimate IP now and in the future, then most likely there will be legislative intervention that will make it more difficult for IP infringers to profit, i.e., injunctions at lower thresholds and more timely.

     

    One should note that Samsung is even more vulnerable to commoditization and a race to the bottom than Apple is, and many of those low end Android OEM's will be just as happy to infringe Samsung's IP.

     

    Will this ultimately be Samsung's fate; to be copied by large Chinese OEM's?

    Probably.

  • Reply 135 of 138

    Henry Ford should sue every car maker for cloning his idea. Before him, cars looked like horse carriages. Just like every apple fanatics claim the same about phones before the iPhone. He could even sue apple for cloning his assembly line approach.. (If he behaved as bad and spoiled as Apple does!)

    LG & Prada should even sue Apple, for cloning their LG Prada. (Yes iPhone is a clone of the LG Prada). Samsung could just as well say they copied the LG Prada. As say they copy Apple. I would even say that Samsung phones look MORE like LG Prada clones than an iPhone clone.

    Apple basically cloned the touch screen cell phones, and made it as simple as possible. Yet not smart, no MMS, no Apps, no nothing, just music, sms and calls.

    Even my SE K750i were capable of apps, email, sms, mms.

    Even my Windows Mobile version FIVE touch screen phone, were capable of all that, remember this is pre-iPhone times. And I'm talking about a cell phone OS in version FIVE. BEFORE the iPhone. Sure it had 4 physical buttons underneath the screen. But with time they would naturally disappear on later models (as touch = flexibility). ALL PHONE MAKERS WANT THAT! It's natural evolution of tech! Flexibility! You don't think Apple would like to get rid of that ugly ass button in the bottom of your iPhone? THEY SURE WOULD! It's natural evolution of tech! How can you even patent that? How are you able to patent simplicity? Because baseline is, that's what they're doing. Only reason they are suing Samsung, is because Samsung is the biggest player! = the most money. Plus the fact Samsung makes (or made) the processors for Apple, which could make you believe this is just because they want those processors for FREE! Or cheaper, just like a discount!

     

    If they tried to sue HTC or LG instead. It would be the other way around! Then Apple would owe them money! HTC and LG made phones like iPhone.. BEFORE Apple! Know your history of tech! Apple never made squat! Remember this "Good artists copy, great artists STEAL"? Great quote!!!

     

    All Apple's products is based upon the simplest possible design. It's so obvious when looking at Apple products!

    I owned a Windows touch screen phone. BEFORE Apple even came to the cell phone market. Apple just simplified the smart phone design. It's just as simple a design as you get. (Okay it could be a wee bit simpler, but not much). Are you really able to patent simplicity? It's seems like it with the logic of Apple...

    Stanley Kubrick should even sue apple for making the iPad, yes in the movie "2001: A space odyssey" a tablet computer is featured. See these gadgets have been in our imagination for decades. How can you sue on this? And how can you even patent designs that have already been made up in movies?

     

    I'm NO fanboi. At the moment, I don't like ANY of the three major mobile OS makers..

    I'm just sick and tired of hearing ALL THAT BS. About Samsung cloning Apple.

    Go look your self in the mirror iPhone! You might see a LG Prada / HTC Touch rip off!!

     

    If Apple made the laws in this world, there would be just ONE (biased) manufacturer of ANYTHING! Only one manufacturer of chairs, tables, cars, drinks, computers, cpus, ram, hard disks, medicine, tooth brushes, mirrors, candles, light bulbs, TVs, DVD players, DVDs, refrigerators, washing machines, carpets, bricks, calendars, aircraft, boats, paper, clothes, you name it!

    And ALL companies would have monopoly in their area. In no fear of ANY competition!

    I would LOVE to have monopoly on producing common sugar! And I would leverage the price, so everyone who wants products with sugar would have to sponsor ME!

    But that wouldn't be a fun world to live in, would it? FFS it's just competition. And competition makes better products! Apple just seems like the spoiled crying teenage player in this game of competition. Why? Because Apple steal all their product ideas? I bet so! It's hard to be innovative, when you go about stealing all your ideas! I have nothing against that. It's called competition. Who makes the better product wins. And that forces Apple to innovate! A skill they are not very good at. So of course they FEAR that the competing products becomes better. How you prevent this? Yes, you put a big ass financial / law suit stone in their shoes!

    And yes innovation is a high selling point of Apple. Truth is, they are just quick at stealing new tech, that way it SEEMS like they were the inventors. But NOOO.. Even the "App store" is a "Ubuntu Software Center" rip off... Apple hasn't been innovative since they had "the Woz" / made the first Apple computers! THAT was innovation! Bet they should sue every PC maker in the world instead. Would make a lot more sense to do so.

    MY TWO CENTS!

  • Reply 136 of 138
    Originally Posted by oste

    Henry Ford should sue every car maker for cloning his idea. Before him, cars looked like horse carriages. Just like every apple fanatics claim the same about phones before the iPhone.

     

    Rule #7, 21, 22, 23, & 24.

     
    LG & Prada should even sue Apple, for cloning their LG Prada. (Yes iPhone is a clone of the LG Prada). 

     

    Rule #8.

     
    Apple basically cloned the touch screen cell phones, and made it as simple as possible.

     

    Rules #22 & 23.

     

    It's natural evolution of tech!



     

    Rule #22.

     
    Only reason they are suing Samsung, is because Samsung is the biggest player! = the most money.

     

    Rules #26 & 27.

     

    Plus the fact Samsung makes (or made) the processors for Apple, which could make you believe this is just because they want those processors for FREE! Or cheaper, just like a discount!


     

    No rule, you’re just completely insane.

     

    Know your history of tech! Apple never made squat!


     


     

    Rules #7, 8, 9, 21, 22, & 23.

     
     Remember this "Good artists copy, great artists STEAL"? Great quote!!!

     

    Rule #3.

     

    All Apple's products is based upon the simplest possible design. It's so obvious when looking at Apple products!


     

    Rule #24.

     

    I owned a Windows touch screen phone. BEFORE Apple even came to the cell phone market. Apple just simplified the smart phone design. It's just as simple a design as you get. (Okay it could be a wee bit simpler, but not much). Are you really able to patent simplicity? It's seems like it with the logic of Apple...


     

    Rules #21, 22, 23, & 24.

     

    Stanley Kubrick should even sue apple for making the iPad, yes in the movie "2001: A space odyssey" a tablet computer is featured.


     

    Rules #7 & 8.

     
    See these gadgets have been in our imagination for decades. How can you sue on this? And how can you even patent designs that have already been made up in movies?

     

    Rules #7 & 8.

     

    Im NO fanboi. Im just sick


     

    Rule #2.

     
    …BS.

     

    Then prove it, psychopath.

     

    If Apple made the laws in this world, there would be just ONE (biased) manufacturer of ANYTHING! 



     

    Rules #26 & 27.

     
    And ALL companies would have monopoly in their area. In no fear of ANY competition!

     

    Rules #26 & 27.

     

    FFS it's just competition. And competition makes better products! Apple just seems like the spoiled crying teenage player in this game of competition.


     

    Rules #26 & 27.

     
    Because Apple steal all their product ideas? I bet so!

     

    Rules #3, 7, & 8.

     

    It's hard to be innovative, when you go about stealing all your ideas!


     

    Rules #2, 3, 7, & 8.

     

    It's called competition. Who makes the better product wins. And that forces Apple to innovate!


     

    Rules #2, 26, & 27.

     

    So of course they FEAR that the competing products becomes better. How you prevent this? Yes, you put a big ass financial / law suit stone in their shoes!


     

    Rules #2, 26, & 27.

     

    Truth is, they are just quick at stealing new tech, that way it SEEMS like they were the inventors.


     

    Rules #3, 7, 8, & 21.

     
    Even the "App store" is a "Ubuntu Software Center" rip off... Apple hasn't been innovative since they had "the Woz" / made the first Apple computers! 

     

    Rules #3 & 21.

     
    THAT was innovation! Bet they should sue every PC maker in the world instead. Would make a lot more sense to do so.

     

    Rules #3, 7, 8, 21, & 22.

     

    Congratulations. You have won the “Make Every Single Sentence Of Your Post Conform To The Rules Of The Troll List” essay contest.

     

    Your prize is shutting up forever and going away.

     

    You've already reported this item. Thanks for helping to make our community better.

  • Reply 137 of 138
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    That's some first post. Now we have to figure out who paid you.
  • Reply 138 of 138
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    jungmark wrote: »
    That's some first post. Now we have to figure out who paid you.

    Seems like he's being paid per word, and extra if he included "I'm no fanboi"
Sign In or Register to comment.