Samsung loses patent suit to Apple

[FrantzM]

Don't think this is true at all about the writers, and as for a PR disaster, don't think the public gives a flying F about it.

Too early to tell. Public discontent is usually slow building but always insidious. The reaction to the iPhone 5 and subsequent Apple products as well as the reply from Samsung and others products could be an indication. To take the example of Microsoft, the public buys a PC with Windows with nary a thought but Microsoft other consumer products do not seem to have fared very well , then again they weren't as well designed as Apple's

 

[rblnr]

To take the example of Microsoft, the public buys a PC with Windows with nary a thought but Microsoft other consumer products do not seem to have fared very well , then again they weren't as well designed as Apple's

All kinds of dangers lie ahead, but that's my take in that if the products shine and they're well-marketed, they'll be fine. The PR fallout will have little if anything fundamentally to do with a decline. Assuming no major problems with it, I expect the iPhone 5 to be a blowout hit.

We'll see if they continue to 'innovate' or whatever what they do is called

 

[amirm]

In general, as Frantz says, there is a definite negative aspect in using your patents offensively. The PR backlash can be pretty severe. In my previous job, we had a guy who took one of our libraries -- binary computer code -- and simply changed the Copyright notice and put in his name. He then proceeded to build a whole company around it! A company later went public making tens of millions of dollars for its founders. During that period, we considered litigating against them. The evidence could not be simpler, showing how they had done what I just said. They had even said so in public! The case was prepared but just before filing, PR chimed in saying they were worried about consumer reaction to us going after a little company that way. So we tore up the case and that was that!

BTW, what they had taken came out of the work of my team. So it was a painful thing to accept but I think it was the right thing. We had far more at stake than shutting them down.

In general, the press and to some extent the consumer has a negative reaction to patent protection of simple things. Remember when Amazon patented "one click" purchasing?

Apple has been smart going after a foreign company -- Samsung -- instead of an American one. In that regard, they may get a free pass here but likely not all the way. People worry about precedence (on behalf of American companies) and will put up some kind of fight.

Apple as a brand doesn't get any better than this. It got there for building beautiful products that consumers love. I am not sure how many people love a brand that is also associating with suing people over what seems like an unpatentable idea (right or wrong).

I am not yet prepared to say this was a bad thing for Apple. But it might turn out to be.

Look at how Microsoft behind the scenes has convinced Android manufacturers to pay royalties to them for the OS. They could have sued but they chose not to.

 

[Steve Williams]

Time will tell and you and Frantz could be right however, like Bob I really don't think the consumer cares. Just keep on delivering product once or twice a year to them and they will be as happy as pigs in doo doo. The only talk I hear at the moment is the countdown until the iPhone 5 is released. I'm out if contract now on my 4S so I'll be in line for mine

 

[rblnr]

Time will tell and you and Frantz could be right however, like Bob I really don't think the consumer cares. Just keep on delivering product once or twice a year to them and they will be as happy as pigs in doo doo. The only talk I hear at the moment is the countdown until the iPhone 5 is released. I'm out if contract now on my 4S so I'll be in line for mine

Yep, we'll see. I wouldn't get a subsidized price till next year from VZ so I'm selling my 4S to Gazelle for $270 which I'll use toward a 5. Kinda silly but my curiosity won out.

 

[JackD201]

I was the Committee Vice Chairman in charge of all legislation regarding Intellectual Property during my stint as a Representative in the Philippine lower house. Part of my responsibility was consolidating all bills meant to harmonize our IP laws with that of the International Community. The difference in the US vs our own judicial system is that the US has a jury system. The jurors can not be expected to know the intricacies of the IP system. In my view what they do see is how much a product resembles another. I have also been a smart phone user for many years beginning with Symbian based phones from Sony Ericsson and Nokia to RIM and Apple. No other phone resembles the iPhone as much as the Samsung phone does. That is what the jury sees, not the code, not the internals. I for one am not thrilled by the current system but for as long it is the prevailing law, that must be followed. Take Mexico copyrighting the name Philippine (or is it Manila) Mangoes or the French registering a scent derived from flowers grown only in the Philippines. I digress, if at first glance a product looks like a rip off, that sets the mindset of the Jurors. Do I agree that Apple should have gone this length? Actually no, I don't and for the very reason Amir stated. The general public doesn't like bullies and in Apple's current position sets them up as one. MS was wise, being perceived as the bully of the day (remember the crackdowns of MS' own suing the Business Software Allowance on pirated copies in third world countries despite artificial shortages?) to pass on certain cases they had every right to pursue. That however was as much a business decision as it was a legal one. Apples contrary to what others here have stated is not a closed ecosystem. While they did drop in-house development and provision of Sync applications, I myself have used RIM's own sync software to successfully sync my address book and other media content on my Bold with my Macs. The fact is, innovation and invention protection is dependent mainly on four major things, first to file for the Pending status and Outright protection once approved and sadly who has the money for application and the capability to bring these into production for the short period of protection. Whatever the case, it comes back to the Jury and the strength of their initial impressions. As much as we discuss this, there is still *** Court of Appeals and if it ever gets there, the Supreme Court.

Apples biggest draw is the level of compatibility with iTunes (an app that is not Mac only) and the added features that make use of the cloud. It's other strength is the number of apps available both inhouse and from third party developers. In my opinion this draw is waning precisely because of migration to the cloud instead of a host computer.

 

[asiufy]

This link here goes to Keith_W, and those who still think Apple "stole" Xerox's ideas....
[h=1]Myth: Copyright Theft, Apple Stole GUI from Xerox PARC Alto[/h]
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/

By the same token, Apple didn't win its case against Microsoft because Sculley negotiated a deal with Gates for Windows 1.0, and that cleared them (Microsoft).

Bringing this to the current case, Apple did offer Samsung a deal, back in 2010. Had they signed a deal, Apple would have decreased its chances of winning by a considerable margin.


alexandre

 

[amirm]

This link here goes to Keith_W, and those who still think Apple "stole" Xerox's ideas....
[h=1]Myth: Copyright Theft, Apple Stole GUI from Xerox PARC Alto[/h]
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/

By the same token, Apple didn't win its case against Microsoft because Sculley negotiated a deal with Gates for Windows 1.0, and that cleared them (Microsoft).

Bringing this to the current case, Apple did offer Samsung a deal, back in 2010. Had they signed a deal, Apple would have decreased its chances of winning by a considerable margin.

alexandre

I wouldn't go for such third-hand account of what happened. There are much better historical reviews than that. The way technology transfers from one company to another is a license. Giving shares in exchange for a visit to Xerox lab does not constitute one. Here is a great write up on what may have happened: http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2012-03-22/apple-and-xerox-parc

I love these quotes:

On Microsoft copying Apple:
"But Gates looked him [Steve Jobs] in the eye, and said in his squeaky voice, “Well, Steve, I think there’s more than one way of looking at it. I think it’s more like we both had this rich neighbour named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it.”

Something Samsung should have used in their defense:
"JT: Was there any feeling among the Apple engineers that any – guilt is probably too strong a word, but feeling like you know Xerox had these great ideas. I guess Xerox really let them go to waste but–

AH: Oh there was nothing like that; Steve Jobs has a good quote. It’s actually a Picasso quote that he often cites; he cited it at one of our retreats which was sort of good artists copy; great artists steal. And what that means is that when you’re passionate about what you’re doing you’ll take ideas from anywhere and with no guilt. You want to make the best possible thing and that was our mentality."

Interview CNET with Andy Hertzfeld

What’s your response when people say the Mac engineers stole everything from Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center?
I just say, well, someone doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Maybe in the very broadest sense we were inspired by Xerox. But literally no code was taken, I mean not a single line of code.

Pretty sure Samsung didn't take any code, or CAD drawings from Apple either . Apple hired people from Xerox. Pretty sure Samsung did not do that.

Didn’t a lot of people join Apple from Xerox?
Just one person on the Mac team, more on the Lisa team–four or five. "

As we are discussing, I am sure many other discussions on this front will be triggered in the months to come, bringing things to surface that are not in the spirit of Apple being god of invention .

 

[NorthStar]

---Interesting world the one we live in isn't it? :b

...Driven mainly by the latest technologies and ***** (five-letters word; starts by "m").
...And ends with a "y".
...And in the middle we got "one".

 

[asiufy]

And here's the smoking gun! Definitive proof that Samsung is an incredible innovator and was wrongfully punished!

Samsung Galaxy S II Crystal Edition unveiled

 

[rblnr]

This looks nothing at all like a Macbook Air:




must be no other way to design a keyboard/frame -- with a jury that possibly doesn't get many of the deep technical details of some of the patents and so forth, it's the demos like this on the cited products that I'd guess carried a lot of weight.

 

[Steve Williams]

Samsung reveals new Galaxy Note II

By PETER SVENSSON, AP


NEW YORK — Fresh off a legal battle with Apple, Samsung is announcing a new version of the Galaxy Note, an offbeat, oversized smartphone that's become a surprise hit.

Samsung, the world's largest maker of phones, is revealing the Galaxy Note II at a trade show in Berlin. The 5.5-inch screen is narrower but longer than on the first version. The processor is faster, and the software has been further adapted for the included stylus — the phone's signature feature.

While Apple has been releasing a new smartphone model each year, Samsung makes several to target different types of customers. That includes low-end phones for price-conscious customers. As a result, Samsung has been selling more smartphones than Apple this year.

The Note runs on Google's Android operating system but isn't among the phones that Apple is asking a judge to ban from the U.S., after a jury in California ruled last week that some of Samsung's Android phones violated Apple patents. The jury awarded Apple $1 billion in damages in a high-profile case that could force Samsung and other Android phone makers to rethink their designs.

The Note is designed to work well with a stylus for jotting notes and drawing on a screen, while styluses for other devices tend to be an afterthought. The Note's large screen also makes the phone more like a tablet and more suitable for playing games and consuming content. Samsung started selling a tablet version of the Note this month.

Samsung Electronics Co. says it has shipped 10 million first-generation Galaxy Note smartphone in one year.

Samsung says the new phone will go on sale in Europe and Asia in October. It did not say when it would launch with a U.S. carrier.

 

[Steve Williams]

Samsung reveals new Galaxy Note II

By PETER SVENSSON, AP


NEW YORK — Fresh off a legal battle with Apple, Samsung is announcing a new version of the Galaxy Note, an offbeat, oversized smartphone that's become a surprise hit.

Samsung, the world's largest maker of phones, is revealing the Galaxy Note II at a trade show in Berlin. The 5.5-inch screen is narrower but longer than on the first version. The processor is faster, and the software has been further adapted for the included stylus — the phone's signature feature.

While Apple has been releasing a new smartphone model each year, Samsung makes several to target different types of customers. That includes low-end phones for price-conscious customers. As a result, Samsung has been selling more smartphones than Apple this year.

The Note runs on Google's Android operating system but isn't among the phones that Apple is asking a judge to ban from the U.S., after a jury in California ruled last week that some of Samsung's Android phones violated Apple patents. The jury awarded Apple $1 billion in damages in a high-profile case that could force Samsung and other Android phone makers to rethink their designs.

The Note is designed to work well with a stylus for jotting notes and drawing on a screen, while styluses for other devices tend to be an afterthought. The Note's large screen also makes the phone more like a tablet and more suitable for playing games and consuming content. Samsung started selling a tablet version of the Note this month.

Samsung Electronics Co. says it has shipped 10 million first-generation Galaxy Note smartphone in one year.

Samsung says the new phone will go on sale in Europe and Asia in October. It did not say when it would launch with a U.S. carrier.

 

[Keith_W]

If we are talking about Smartphones, the true innovator is HTC. Many features on modern smartphones were seen years ago on HTC phones. I should know, I have owned a couple and have been following the scene closely for years.

When Jobs made the announcement for the original iPhone and all the sheeple went berserk, I was scratching my head. How could this be? The original iPhone was lacking many features already available on Windows phones and Palm phones for years - copy and paste, an app store, and options. You could have a touchscreen phone (albeit with stylus) or a phone with a built-in keyboard. You could remove the battery. And most of these phones were expandable via SD card - something even the latest iPhone lacks, and doubtless the iPhone 5 will also lack.

Given HTC's long history in the market, it was particularly galling to watch Apple and their fanboys going around acting as if they invented the smartphone. Even doubly galling to watch them patent features which have been available on smartphones for years. When they went around suing other companies, it really was the last straw for myself and many other close watchers of tech.

Apple are the Johnny come lately of the smartphone market. For a while, they were the genuine leaders. But for the past year, Android has well and truly overtaken them. All versions of Android are customizable to an extent that iOS users can only dream about, and they offer features that will never be available on iOS, at least not without some kind of humiliating capitulation from Apple.

 

[asiufy]

Ballmer was also dismissive of the iPhone... That worked out great for Microsoft, uh? I guess you know something millions and millions of people who own iPhones (or want to own one) don't...
Apple, with the iPhone, iPad and even MacBooks, proved consumers don't care about the external battery. They don't care about that SD card as well. If you do care about them, that's why Samsung is out there. Pick one of their 10000 models, and be happy with it. It's OK to be different, as there's room for everybody.

People weren't "acting as if they (Apple) invented the smartphone". They were acting like Apple RE-invented the smartphone. Steve Jobs said as much during the introductory keynote, first presenting the status quo (fugly keyboard based phones, or bulky pen-based units), then unveiling Apple's concept of a smartphone. As I said initially, this is something we take for granted.

If you want to customise your phone, Android is surely the best alternative. If you want to f*** around with it, Android it is. No doubt about it. But as a solid, all-around OS to get things done, Android gets in the way, pretty much as Windows and Linux does on the desktop (and the MacOS doesn't). The part where you're wrong is that the iOS DOESN'T WANT to be configurable just to be configurable. It'll be configurable where Apple deems appropriate. If that's not good enough for you, and that's OK too, there's always Android, or even better, Windows Phone/Mobile, my personal 2nd alternative.


alexandre

 

[Steve Williams]

I find the 2 camps here (and BTW I am an all Mac user so the iPhone is where I am at) at odds so incessantly that it reminds me of our debates on analog vs digital, tube vs solid state. I can see Keith's frustration but I do agree with Alexandre that Keith you are preaching to the choir re the iphone as those of us who are Mac users will never change.

FWIW, I know countless more people who have switched from android based phones to the iphone than vice versa

As far as configurable, I could care less for now and as Alexandre says it "will" be configurable" when Apple deems it appropriate

I don't believe that Alexandre is knocking the android phones or windows phones but rather he, as an iphone user is trying to rebut some of Keith's arguments. FWIW I am typing this post on my iphone

 

[amirm]

If we are talking about Smartphones, the true innovator is HTC. Many features on modern smartphones were seen years ago on HTC phones. I should know, I have owned a couple and have been following the scene closely for years.

They certainly were Apple like in their innovation in this area. But their story is not told. As it goes, they were showing a prototype portable device with a brilliant display and really nice packaging. This is what it looked like:

A few Microsoft people went by their booth and saw how cool the device was. They put them in touch with HP/Compaq which then produced the device under its brand. It was the platform that showed you can be cool and sexy in a portable device. They went on to produce phones for a number of companies for years, with modest success. So eventually they decided to cut out the middleman and go to market under their own brand.

When Jobs made the announcement for the original iPhone and all the sheeple went berserk, I was scratching my head. How could this be? The original iPhone was lacking many features already available on Windows phones and Palm phones for years - copy and paste, an app store, and options.

To me, the worst missing feature was lack of multi-tasking (ability to run more than one program at once). Apple had taken us back 20 years in computing if not more! I have not kept up with the latest incarnation but the voluntary multi-tasking is a kludge and again, an ancient solution to the problem. There is no excuse for not letting a user run concurrent tasks on a phone.

At the end of the day though, talking about who had something is really not material today. It matters who has it now. HTC as a Taiwanese company could never match what Apple did with its brand and its spokesperson. I am confident there would have been no tablet revolution had any other company brought out the product to the market. In that regard, what Apple did had nothing to do with innovation. It was just who they were which no other company is. If there is one thing that infuriates other companies was this aspect of "unfair" advantage on behalf of Apple. With the passing of Steve Jobs, I think at least half of this advantage is gone. It will be interesting to see if Apple is ever able to create a market for a new class of product like they did with iPad.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

The recent history should tell us that products that are most successful are not necessarily the most innovative. One could point toward Windows OS vs the Mac Operating system. The comparison is not entirely valid with the iPhone but the iPhone lacks a few things although that is compensated by the fervor if its fan base.. Same with Windows. Is it the better smartphone? I would think yes. Is limited as a smartphone? yes too. I believe its success is due to the elegance and ergonomics of its OS. However much people would claim to the contrary, the table was reset by the Apple iPhone and only the Android system reacted well enough to survive ... We can always say that whatever Windows for Smartphone and Symbian or Palm OS could do, it hasn't been enough to warrant them enough oxygen to starve off slow but definite irrelevance, their existence is at most a statistical blip. I am forgetting the BlackBerry that I currently use but its shares of the smartphone market is receding as quickly as that of Windows .. The two Smartphone OS standing are the IOS and Android, maybe Windows is crouched somewhere, I would not entirely write off a company with the wherewithal of the Redmond Giant.

The iPhone was and continue to be an innovative smartphone. It helped it that Apple marketed it extremely well. The ecosystem Apple created strengthened its position. The ecosystem monolithic structure and integration made it easy for non-geeks to do stuff with their iPhone. They were also the first to spur the "apps" .. Now what we, mostly graying people used to call software is now an "app" and they are often very cheap and they work and because of Apple control, they work very well.. I wouldn't say the same for Android but ... I believe right now that Android phones are moving closer toit and if one was to make some kind of Frankenstein/Android/smartphone patching all superior features from the best Android phones, that phone woule likely surpass the iPhone but I don't know of any single phone that would do that ..Plus there are the "Apps" ... Apple has a lot of apps and the control they exert over the apps make them compliant to the Apple ethos .. Android is not there, not yet and maybe never... This is to me very similar to what Windows has over the Mac OS.. The software, the Windows ecosystem. I prefer the Mac interface to windows but in my business there is NO WAY I could turn to mac .. although these days with so much moving to the cloud and .virtualization, the underlying OS may become irrelevant ... I digress

It is one thing to say that the iPhone is lacking , even wanting of some features but let's not deny its sucess and its quality. The darn thing is a great product, beautiful and polished. And it is , truly, innovative.






P.S. I use a Blackberry phone but my girlfriend needs Siri on her phone ... If I find a way to reliably move all my Blackberry contact and communicate with them through iPhone and if is battery can last as long as that of the current Blackberry phones (talk time, important for my business needs) .. I'll switch back ...

 

[carolkoh]

Hehe... have you guys read the fake "Onion-like" story about Samsung paying the $1.2bn in nickles?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technolog...ple-samsung-trucks-nickels-fake?newsfeed=true

 

[NorthStar]

Hehe... have you guys read the fake "Onion-like" story about Samsung paying the $1.2bn in nickles?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technolog...ple-samsung-trucks-nickels-fake?newsfeed=true

-----No but now I just did. :b