Discussion in 'mobiles and tablets' started by Kid_Eternity, Apr 18, 2011.
I sueing every brand with an M in their name as my name had an M it in first.
Any innovation does this to an extent... It's whether your using technology that is out of patent, how you integrate it etc. Obviously having a shit-hot patents team that can snap up innovations from smaller companies or tell you how close to the wind you're sailing wrt your competitors helps a lot too.
Not true at all, it depends entirely on when the patents were filed - could just as easily end with Samsung facing charges of industrial espionage. The patent system is a nightmare, as are most areas of copyright/design right/Trademark etc law... Tbh though it's just a facet of capitalist society and there aren't any real alternatives.
Samsung make the chips that power the iPhone and iPad. This is just lawyers being lawyers. ie: twats.
But the Sony Clie had a very similar design back in 2004 - the point being that there's only so much 'design' you can put into a gadget that size. Apple claiming for 'curved corners' is just daft.
The main thrust of Apple's argument seems to be rounded corners on app buttons. Which is pathetic.
It depends exactly where they're claiming the infringements are; the form factor is similar but the overall design differs in quite a few respects... The buttons on the clie are located on the bottom and there are 5 of them, it has that integrated cover type thing, the interface is certainly different etc... It also depends on which areas Sony filed patents for.
You have to admit that there a few aspects of Samsung's design that are very close to apple's, the location of the main button, the border, the layout of icons on their interface etc. Again, it depends where Apple holds patents... Presumably you can access them somehow, might have a dig around later.
Release dates are irrelevant - Apple are suing under their design patents and what matters is whether the filing date (or more accurately the priority date) of the design patent predates the date on which Samsung published (i.e. launched) its design.
Not true. If previous work can be cited then the patent can be invalidated.
You're right to focus on the "is it similar looking" issue. This legal claim is nothing to do with the OS. It's a claim of infringement of a design patent, so forget the way it works - it's the way it looks that's key.
Only in interference proceedings, and only in the US under the first to invent rule. What I said is accurate - the fact that Samsung released before Apple is irrelevant.
I don't know very much about how US design patent infringement works, but in the UK the measure of "how close is too close" for design infringement is dependent upon the degree of 'design freedom' a designer has.
In other words, for an article which can look pretty much however you want it to (e.g. a light fitting) you don't need to be very close to infringe, but for an article for which the designer is more constrained, small differences in design in a competing product are more likely to result in a finding of non-infringement.
I'm not sure that's true.
There are a lot of people like me who wouldn't buy Apple products (even if we could afford them) because of their litigious nature and their tendency towards controlling the way their customers use their products after they've bought them.
I'll admit the iPad is a nice bit of kit but if I'm ever in the market for a tablet I'll chose one that allows me to determine what applications I run on it not just the ones the App Store thinks I should be allowed to use.
Here's the filing for this. From this rather in depth and interesting write up about it...
Wow reading through the filing above (all 373 pages of it!) Apple are really going for it, they're not just alleging icon style theft or design of hardware (not just curved corners but having a black bezel too), they're going after Samsung on packaging as well. This really is a clear attempt at screwing up Android by attacking what appears to be the weakest chink in the chain. Looks like this will be a massive court case lasting years if it goes ahead, and if Apple wins will have real implications for consumer choice in the smartphone and tablet markets.
And here's the inevitable counter claim. Well done, Apple.
That's the way Apple like to work these days. They tried it on HTC last year.
One thing's for sure: the consumer isn't going to benefit from all this bullshit.
Yep, saw that, really don't know what Apple will do if Samsung pulls the plug on the components it sells to them...
Indeed, this kind of corporate bullying is going to become more and more regularly as these new markets develop I reckon...
It's presumably a massive market for them... Also have to remember that a massive conglomerate like Samsung has a lot of internal pressures; the finance guys in chip manufacture may be asking what the design guys were thinking (only scaled up to a company with 150,000+ employees). There will doubtless be bluster and a presentation of a unified policy etc, but I doubt they'd drop Apple in a hurry.
It's not like Samsung is some tiny David standing up to a goliath, it's the world's largest electronics company... In many ways this is more a case of Apple hanging on to various things that make their device unique, and therefore make their business model tenable.
If all they've got to hang on to is rounded icons and rounded corners, then perhaps they might want to consider giving things a boost in the innovation department.
Indeed but they're both huge corporations, does anyone really believe Samsung wouldn't be doing the same if things were reversed?
e2a Editor: They have a lot more than that to hang it on... Read the article KE linked to, there's a fuck of a lot. I know we often get into apple vs other debates here, but they have every right (indeed they have a duty to their shareholders) to protect their IP, and Samsung do seem to have stretched them pretty far.
I think it's fair to say that Apple is easily one of the most litigious electronics companies on the planet. I can think of at least FOUR high level cases they've launched in recent months (Amazon, HTC, Samsung, Nokia), but I'm struggling to recall any recent high profile Samsung ones.
Apple's patent trolling attempts to ban the importing of HTC Android smartphones and a number of Nokia devices already look to be backfiring:
Do they have a right to try and get competitors phones banned from the US via patent trolling?
The only people losing here are consumers.
They have a right to seek redress over patent infringements, without actually reading them or a decent summary it's hard to say. And that article seems to point out that Apple dredged them up as a counter to Nokia and others chasing royalties. I'm not going to argue for Apple's legal team though, I'm sure they genuinely are a bunch of litigious cunts, but that's probably not a property unique to them, nor does it make all their cases invalid.
What would you suggest instead?
I'm no expert in this complex field, but I'd say introducing a system where obvious patent trolling is banned and where companies aren't allowed to buy up other company's patents purely as a means of blocking competitors would be a good start. The patent system is supposed to encourage innovation not kill it dead and be used to crush rivals.
I have to say that when I first saw the Samsung Galaxy I remarked to a friend that it looked like a blatant rip off of the iPhone in attempt to siphon off consumers who didn't want or couldn't afford an iPhone. Reading through that filing above it looks like Apple have a fairly good case on their hands (obvious to say I know because they wouldn't have gone for it unless they thought they could win)...but the bigger issue is corporate control of the market and the impact on consumer choice if you ask me...
Editor: As with anything like this it's never going to be that simple though... I mean you're then restricting the right to sell patents, do you restrict the right to deal them at a remove, do you restrict the amount a company can buy and in what field etc? I also don't know enough to make any real comment, but basically it's easy to have an idea or principle, it's not quite so easy to frame that legally. Especially when you consider the international nature of patent law.
As to your quote... The editor of Urban75 using a free-market libertarian post to back up a point? Has to be a first...
I agree to quite a large extent that patents are more damaging to innovation than actually supportive of it, but within a capitalist economic system I think the alternatives (i.e what free market guy is idealistically hinting at) would probably be a lot worse.
I don't know, I mean there are plenty of phone designs that haven't fallen foul of Apple's patents and the advantage of using android is that you should be able to create distinctive interfaces. I think what's really got apple's hackles up here is that Samsung are essentially stepping on their business model; i.e That they produce a (debatably) high-end product with a unique interface and styling. They can then sit comfortably on the high end consumer market with pros from their stalwarts (media, graphics etc) also tagging along. Samsung have shat all over that, it's like Windows being released with a default Apple skin...
Separate names with a comma.