backtop


Print 78 comment(s) - last by ritualm.. on Oct 29 at 8:56 AM


  (Source: Android Authority)
However, Apple made sure to highlight a few facts in its favor

As ordered, Apple posted a notice on its UK website saying that Samsung didn't copy the iPad.

A recent UK court ruling ordered Apple to post an apology to Samsung on its website, saying that the South Korean electronics maker didn't steal the designs of the iPad after all. Apple has complied, but with a snarky tone that made sure to highlight a few facts in Apple's favor.

For instance, Apple made sure to note that a German court ruling did find Samsung in violation of copying its patents, and of course, Apple mentioned its August win in the United States where Samsung was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages.

Apple even injected the fact that the UK judge thought Apple's designs were cooler than Samsung's.

Here's Apple's full note below, but you can also find it on its UK site here:

Samsung / Apple UK judgment
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.

In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:

"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."

"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.
 
The Apple-Samsung patent war began in April 2011 when Apple claimed Samsung was an "iPhone, iPad copycat." More specifically, Apple said Samsung's Galaxy S 4G, Epic 4G and Nexus smartphones infringed on Apple's patents. 
 
Apple worked pretty hard to ban Samsung's smartphones and tablets around the world, and successfully accomplished this in countries like Germany and Australia. Samsung launched a few lawsuits of its own regarding 3G patents, and was also able to lift the ban on its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia in December 2011. However, Samsung wasn't so lucky in Germany, where the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is still banned.


Back in August, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California reached an unfavorable verdict for Samsung, saying that the South Korean electronics maker was guilty of violating technology patents. In other words, most of Samsung's smartphones and tablets in question were found guilt of copying Apple's iPhone and iPad designs. It was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.

Earlier this week, Samsung Display decided to cut ties with Apple, saying it will no longer ship LCDs to Apple next year. Its LCD shipments to Apple have been cut more and more over time due to Apple wanting huge discounts.

However, just yesterday, an ITC judge in the U.S. ruled that Samsung violated four Apple patents, including
the flat front face with wider borders at the top and bottom, the lozenge-shaped speaker about the display screen; the translucent images for applications displayed on the screen, and the device's ability to detect when a headset is plugged in.

Source: iMore



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not an apology
By themaster08 on 10/26/2012 11:45:03 AM , Rating: 5
This is not an apology. It's merely informing us of the ruling in the UK, as well as in other courts.




RE: Not an apology
By DrChemist on 10/26/2012 12:33:12 PM , Rating: 5
I agree. Samsung should sue for contempt of court as it merely just posted pieces of the judges statements and did not comply one bit. In fact by making numerous statements as to it being wrong in other parts of the world is enough grounds to do so. I hope they get sued and the UK courts force them to write the words out in BOLD "I AM SORRY SAMSUNG FOR SUING YOU AND TRYING TO BAN YOUR PRODUCTS. YOU DID NOT COPY OUR PRODUCTS AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING COMPETITION". Everyone knows 90+% of their patents are null and void do to overreaching and prior art. Hopefully the USPTO will start invalidating them as they are finally starting to do. This will go the way of the OS Patent wars in the early to mid 90s and everyone will be booted and told to shut up and make a competitive product and stop whining.


RE: Not an apology
By testerguy on 10/26/2012 12:50:29 PM , Rating: 2
Apple was not ordered to apologise.

Apple was ordered to publicly acknowledge the verdict and that Samsung had been found not to be infringing.

This, they did.


RE: Not an apology
By GulWestfale on 10/26/2012 1:27:30 PM , Rating: 3
by acknowledging that the judge found samsung's product to "less cool" than apple's, and by only posting those statements to its site, apple is inferring that they sued samsung because apple sees their products as equally cool.
i think this should be highlighted by samsung.


RE: Not an apology
By BZDTemp on 10/26/2012 2:06:06 PM , Rating: 4
On the same time Apple also showed once again how dickish they are.

Firstly they hid the link to the info page among a bunch of other small hardly use links on the site. It's hardly unexpected but it is also showing a lack of style. Secondly there is the text on the info page itself - I simply can not imagine it being anymore lame.

Apple may think they are being clever but in my view they just underlined how evil and self righteous a company Apple is.


RE: Not an apology
By zerocks on 10/26/2012 7:36:07 PM , Rating: 2
It barely even reads as that, if you've read the whole thing it really leaves you thinking nothing of what they were supposed to correct..
Apple was told to "correct the damaging impression" and they have most certainly not done that.


RE: Not an apology
By mi1400 on 10/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: Not an apology
By someguy123 on 10/28/2012 7:02:42 PM , Rating: 2
They were ordered to set the record straight on infringement.

Instead what they posted essentially implies that the infringement claim was denied due to "coolness". Instead of acknowledging that the device didn't infringe the entire thing implies that the case was lost due to coolness, or that the judge was an idiot with no basis other than subjective taste.

I wonder what that judge thinks about this.


RE: Not an apology
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 2:02:37 PM , Rating: 1
Apple forgot to include the following--

Disclaimer: Not responsible for the opinions of the UK courts who have not the slightest understanding of the laws as properly interpreted by the courts of northern California.

Home town ftw!


RE: Not an apology
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 2:05:29 PM , Rating: 2
Sarcasm?


RE: Not an apology
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 5:23:38 PM , Rating: 4
Yep


RE: Not an apology
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 7:03:48 PM , Rating: 2
Just checking :)


RE: Not an apology
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 5:44:19 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry for the confusion. I am of the belief the more subtle the sarcasm the more humor.

Consider-- A public disclaimer in the execution of a court declared admonition makes little sense unless as sarcasm towards Apple for turning that court decision into an admonition right back at that court.
I consider this act by Apple as Contempt of Court not requiring a third party to engage in a lawsuit.

We shall see if the appointed judge acts to preserve the dignity of that court or if he just knuckles under.


RE: Not an apology
By Shadowself on 10/27/2012 1:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
People need to remember that the UK court ruling stated that Samsung got the right to approve or disapprove the public statement. Samsung did not get edit rights, i.e., they didn't get the right to edit whatever Apple proposed. However, Samsung did get a right to reject whatever Apple proposed to publish.

My guess (and it is only a guess because I have no inside information about this) is that Apple proposed wording that was worse for Samsung than this; then after a few rounds of back and forth, Samsung approved this version. I find it difficult to believe that this is the first version that was presented to Samsung for approval and they OK'd it.


Why does it seem
By HoosierEngineer5 on 10/26/2012 12:39:50 PM , Rating: 2
like Apple is run by a pack of arrogant rabid lawyers?




RE: Why does it seem
By cmdrdredd on 10/26/2012 1:01:16 PM , Rating: 4
At this point, it is the only way to stay relevant in the market. Make ridiculous patents and/or claim someonw copies their design to force them out. Lets see them try that with Microsoft's surface somehow. I am waiting for it.


RE: Why does it seem
By Tony Swash on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: Why does it seem
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 8:27:27 PM , Rating: 2
Once again the only metric you have is profit.
When your National Constitution is sold down the river for profit, when rapist Catholic priests are protected, when predator corporations and the rich pay off politicians for control of the House and the Senate, when corporations buy all the news media and use these to dominate and control information, how it is presented and what is allowed, you may find that metric should be the last of importance rather than the first.

BTW, I promise I will never hire a contract killer to harm anyone rating me down just in case you feel the need to strike first. For those whose sense of sarcasm is challenged, this was sarcasm.


RE: Why does it seem
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 8:43:02 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, btw...
Samsung posted $7.4 billion USD in Q3 2012 operating profit. Net profit rose 90 percent to $5.9 billion USD.
I guess crime does pay.
Uhhh, yaahhh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DS4CeP_QLA


RE: Why does it seem
By HoosierEngineer5 on 10/26/2012 2:56:28 PM , Rating: 3
Why is it so hard to stay relevant the old fashioned way; better product, lower cost?


RE: Why does it seem
By Argon18 on 10/26/2012 5:44:39 PM , Rating: 1
Microsoft is King of patent abuse, market monopoly, buying out or forcing out the competition, and other anti-competitive practices. I won't give a dime to Apple, nor will I give a dime to Microsoft. Both are industry bullies and abusers, and peddlers of proprietary anti-consumer crap.


RE: Why does it seem
By ritualm on 10/26/2012 6:52:16 PM , Rating: 2
So much disinformation. Remember, Microsoft is merely following the same well-trodden path blazed by Standard Oil and American Telephone & Telegraph.

Also, the US government as we know of today does not exist - it is actually a subsidiary of Microsoft.


RE: Why does it seem
By BifurcatedBoat on 10/26/2012 8:33:08 PM , Rating: 3
It is now, after Apple helped make it that way. I fear dark times are coming for tech in Western countries.

Companies in countries like China, unfettered by our ridiculous IP laws, will be doing all the innovation, and as a result, take the leadership role within the next decade or two.


typical apple
By sprockkets on 10/26/12, Rating: 0
RE: typical apple
By testerguy on 10/26/2012 12:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
The current ban in Germany has nothing to do with any design patent.

Apple was awarded a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Tab in Germany based on the design right, but this was amended on appeal. The appeal court rejected that the community design right had been infringed, but maintained the ban on a different legal basis which is specific to Germany. It relates to 'unfair competition' - so the comment Apple made on their website is accurate.

This is why the decision in the UK which is binding across Europe didn't result in a lifting of the ban in Germany.


RE: typical apple
By testerguy on 10/26/2012 12:59:51 PM , Rating: 2
Also, while you correctly state that the 'iPad' design patent wasn't found to have been infringed in the US, the Galaxy Tab was found to be infringing one of the utility patents.

In the sentence talking about other courts' decisions, Apple doesn't specify which elements the courts found were copied:

quote:
So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.


RE: typical apple
By ritualm on 10/26/2012 6:59:23 PM , Rating: 2
Whose court? Judge Koh's heavily-biased trial that ended in favor of hometown favorite? That's not a proper legal trial - it's full of holes, and the decision is rendered moot as the juries are less tech-literate than the bum panhandling in New York's Central Park.

Keep up with your fervent support of anything Apple. You're not the only DT poster who loves to argue for the sake of arguing. The only difference between you and me, then, is you really are a brainwashed iLunatic.


RE: typical apple
By testerguy on 10/27/2012 6:24:57 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Whose court? Judge Koh's heavily-biased trial that ended in favor of hometown favorite? That's not a proper legal trial - it's full of holes, and the decision is rendered moot as the juries are less tech-literate than the bum panhandling in New York's Central Park.


Highlighted the part of your paragraph which is factually and legally incorrect.

Besides, in the sentence I quoted, Apple didn't say anything about a 'trial' - just courts. To remind you:

quote:
So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.


And I already told you, the German court is another example. Hence 'courts' plural.

quote:
Keep up with your fervent support of anything Apple. You're not the only DT poster who loves to argue for the sake of arguing. The only difference between you and me, then, is you really are a brainwashed iLunatic.


Journey back to my two precise, accurate comments - and feel free to point out which of the facts I stated you incorrectly believe to be untrue.

Then you'll realise which one of us is brainwashed. If you interpret facts in such an angry way, I worry for your children.


RE: typical apple
By ritualm on 10/28/2012 6:11:31 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Highlighted the part of your paragraph which is factually and legally incorrect.

Did you even look at how the juries were selected?

If you know anything about technology, let alone use the offending products in question, you are not allowed to serve on the jury.

It's a gross miscarriage of justice and only serves to increase the legitimacy of the incumbent's book of lies. Factually and legally incorrect? In your dreams.
quote:
German court

Germany's court system is infamous for its "shoot first, ask questions later" policy, and thus is fertile ground for anyone looking to get a competitor's product banned on inadmissible grounds. Congrats, you just torpedoed your own argument.
quote:
Journey back to my two precise, accurate comments

Rofl, precise and accurate? From the unholy abomination otherwise known as testerguy? Die in a fire.
quote:
Then you'll realise which one of us is brainwashed.

You're still brainwashed. I am not. Oh snap.
quote:
If you interpret facts in such an angry way, I worry for your children.

You willingly let a corporation speak on your behalf. I worry more about the freedom of speech for your children.

Typical Apple dimwit.


RE: typical apple
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/28/2012 9:17:58 AM , Rating: 2
And yet, he claims he doesn't defend Apple, yet that's all he does. Pretty sad and pathetic if you ask me.


The douche-juice is strong in this one..
By DukeN on 10/26/2012 11:47:20 AM , Rating: 3
Once an iAsshole, always an iAsshole...




By Meinolf on 10/26/2012 1:11:15 PM , Rating: 2
Where do I buy that I so need one of them


Dear Apple,
By Motoman on 10/26/2012 11:43:53 AM , Rating: 4
Please go to hell. Go to hell and die.

Love,
Clear-headed people of the world




Lawlable
By legendzero1 on 10/26/2012 11:44:17 AM , Rating: 2
Stay classy Apple.




LOLZ !!!!!!
By momorere on 10/26/2012 2:01:35 PM , Rating: 2
Yet ANOTHER court rules that Samsung DIDN'T copy crApple. When will the biased judges here in the US start doing their jobs instead of taking the bribes (I mean making "sound" rulings) ?

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Samsung-Apple-Pat...




By jenli on 10/26/2012 5:57:06 PM , Rating: 2
About time the political negative ads comes to technology.
Before this, things were a bit muted, inferred, not explicit.
Did the Samsung ad directly mock the Apple crowd waiting
in line ? I will bet the next one will :-).

Eventually, this might even spill into everyday things,
like cars, airlines, and apple pies. Let the games begin...




WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH
By messele on 10/27/2012 5:41:38 PM , Rating: 2
WAAAAAAAAH WAAAAAAAAAAHHHH WAAAAAAAAAHHHH

This was always going to happen. Judge said ripoffs could be distinguished because they were tatty ripoffs. I laughed.




LOL
By Tony Swash on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 12:19:55 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
couldn't help but laugh
That because you are a loser Apple Troll.


RE: LOL
By sprockkets on 10/26/2012 12:20:09 PM , Rating: 1
Do you also take your dick out and wave it in front of android users and jerk it with your iphone 5 users in person as well?


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 12:56:40 PM , Rating: 2
Oh look, it's the other loser jumping in.


RE: LOL
By Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer on 10/26/2012 12:59:02 PM , Rating: 5
I'm a "fanboy" of companies competing on their merits, rather than suing each other out of business with patents that should never have been granted.


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer on 10/26/2012 1:42:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Me too, so surely you take issue with how much Samsung ripped off the iPhone and iPad with their earlier devices?

Nope. I don't buy that argument at all. That was never what this was about. This was about Steve's insane crusade against Google and Android.
quote:
Me too, so surely you take issue with Samsung seeking to ban the iPhone 4S over 3G patents, and seeking to ban the iPhone 5 over LTE patents, especially given that those are FRAND?

I think if a crazy person comes up to you on the street and takes a swing, you are morally justified in hitting back.


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By ritualm on 10/26/2012 6:43:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And the person taking the swing is the person who rips off an entire product range, as numerous courts have found. Apple is the one hitting back.

Why innovate when it's cheaper to just copy? Steve Jobs himself said as much over this topic.

Why do you consider it perfectly acceptable for Apple to plagiarize the work of others and claim credit as their own, but intolerable whenever others do the same?

You are dense, and you are lying when you said you own neither Samsung nor Apple product.


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/27/2012 6:29:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why innovate when it's cheaper to just copy? Steve Jobs himself said as much over this topic.


There are two types of 'copying': Legal, and illegal.

Steve Jobs was talking about the former, which in any industry is the process of taking inspiration from other products but adding your value such that you don't infringe any of their designs or patents.

What Samsung did, is the latter, which is why now owe Apple $1bn in damages.

If Apple has infringed patents, feel free to show which ones? If not, it isn't plagiarism - by definition.

And don't try to tell me whether I'm lying or not about what I own, you illogical fool.


RE: LOL
By ritualm on 10/28/2012 6:23:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Steve Jobs was talking about the former, which in any industry is the process of taking inspiration from other products but adding your value such that you don't infringe any of their designs or patents.

Funny... Steve Jobs didn't walk his talk.

Samsung walked his talk and the result is $1-billion in phony fines. That's a nicer way of saying Apple extorted $1-billion from South Korea. Which, by the way, is illegal - yet Apple sees nothing wrong with trying to extract three times that amount.

Congrats on sending the wrong message to the world: imitators are rewarded, innovators are punished. Why innovate when you can simply copy with far less legal risk and cost?

You're a lying, illogical, brainwashed, delusional and homophobic sewage refuse. You call me a fool, yet this fool is smarter than you.

You're like Nicki Minaj - juvenile, uncool and unwise. Idiot and fat, best of both worlds huh?


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 1:54:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Me too, so surely you take issue with how much Samsung ripped off the iPhone and iPad with their earlier devices?
No, because anyone with common sense and half a brain cell, once again not you, can see the differences and know they are different products. One clue would be the HUGE Samsung pasted on the front of the phones.

quote:
Me too, so surely you take issue with Samsung seeking to ban the iPhone 4S over 3G patents, and seeking to ban the iPhone 5 over LTE patents, especially given that those are FRAND?
Nope...


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 2:38:48 PM , Rating: 1
You keep calling ME a fanboy, you really need to stop, you look like a fucking idiot. Oh wait, you are a fucking idiot.

"I don't defend ANY company" - Your words, yet you are all over the Apple articles like stink on shit.

You are a LOSER, get it? LOSER. You and Tony. Both. Get a fucking LIFE.


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/2012 3:49:43 PM , Rating: 1
What I actually said:

quote:
I don't care about any company


I never said I am not defending any company - I told you, in the face of non-stop illogical idiocy which is against Apple, I present the other (and logical) point of view.


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 4:02:30 PM , Rating: 1
Again with the logic shit, you don't have any. Period. You say shit, then completely contradict it. You are a loser.


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 4:13:18 PM , Rating: 1
And again, you say "I don't defend ANY company" yet, you shit all over the Apple articles. You are so full of shit...


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/27/2012 6:31:49 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, how can you fail to read the exact same thing, twice, when I'm even so kind to re-quote it for you?

To quote what I actually said:

quote:
I don't care about any company


Now compare to what you claim I said:

quote:
I don't defend ANY company


Read, learn, please get an education.

I even told you that I never claimed I wasn't defending any company.

Dailytech monkey strikes again...


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/27/2012 6:56:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Dailytech monkey strikes again...
You sure did.


RE: LOL
By ritualm on 10/28/2012 6:31:13 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Wow, how can you fail to read the exact same thing, twice, when I'm even so kind to re-quote it for you?

Because you are BSing. The manner in which you respond is a dead giveaway. Feel free to dress up cow manure with magical pixie dust, at the end it's still cow manure.
quote:
I don't care about any company

=
quote:
I don't defend ANY company

to which I add
quote:
I don't defend ANY company except Apple

Intelligent Design is Creationism. You fervently support Apple even when you falsely claim to the contrary. "Presenting the other, more logical side?" Yeah right.

Apple-sponsored PR troll strikes again...


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/28/2012 9:31:20 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You fervently support Apple even when you falsely claim to the contrary. "Presenting the other, more logical side?" Yeah right.
Bingo! Not only is he a liar, he is an persistent liar.


RE: LOL
By ritualm on 10/26/2012 6:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I never said I am not defending any company - I told you, in the face of non-stop illogical idiocy which is against Apple, I present the other (and logical) point of view.

hahahahaahahahahahahahhahahahaahah *deep breath* hahahaahhhhahhahahahahhaa

No, it isn't.

Meanwhile, Apple's stock price dropped past $600 in the face of missed expectations, barely one week after Tony Swash bragged "If you don't buy Apple now, you will regret it."


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/27/2012 6:33:27 PM , Rating: 2
No what isn't? That makes no sense.

And why would I care about Apple stocks, which are currently above 600?


RE: LOL
By retrospooty on 10/26/2012 2:48:37 PM , Rating: 2
"surely you take issue with how much Samsung ripped off the iPhone and iPad with their earlier devices?"


Really man, you need to get some perspective on this...
If you want to say "Apple is being copied", then take it back to the root. Apple "copied" the whole mobile phone idea, as well as putting and OS and apps on a phone from Palm/Handspring. All companies do this. The entire industry builds off ideas of others. It always has, as all industries always have since the dawn of civilization. Its as if to say, Toyota, GM, BMW and Honda shouldn't be allowed to make cars because they all copy Ford.

This is how business is done. The irritating thing is that suddenly after copying others tech for years (and still doing it) they act as if they are above it all with some mock outrage... "how dare they copy us" LOL.


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/27/2012 6:35:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple "copied" the whole mobile phone idea, as well as putting and OS and apps on a phone from Palm/Handspring.


Show me the patents they infringed while introducing their mobile phone OS which was completely different from anything from Palm.

You can't. Therefore, legally, they didn't copy.

You need to learn the distinction between taking inspiration and copying patented technology or designs.


RE: LOL
By ritualm on 10/29/2012 8:56:09 AM , Rating: 2
Ha! I bet you cannot show from the iCamp anything that does not come with a huge amount of prior art.

Everything of what you said is full of "Designed by Apple in California" lies and smokescreens. You are a paid Apple shill, you refuse to admit your comments are unfounded and without merit, and you accuse others of trolling.

Come at me bro. Small-time wannabe gangster trying to talk big like an Internets Al Capone, so much LOL.


RE: LOL
By nikon133 on 10/28/2012 4:54:03 PM , Rating: 1
I was personally never-ever tempted to mix Apple product with anything else. In case of Samsung, while some of their product did share some design cues with iProducts, they also shared with previous Samsungs (like F700) and others (like that Sony prototype). Plus, there is always big bold Samsung logo on front of their devices.

If someone got fooled, that is because that someone is fool. I know a lot of people (outside of US) who, out of pure ignorance, still think that Colt is synonym for "revolver" in general (rather than a brand making revolvers, among other things), and Jeep is synonym for 4X4 car.

I wouldn't be surprised that some people think that iPhone is synonym for touch-screen smart-phone, but I cannot blame Samsung for such ignorance.


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 1:03:23 PM , Rating: 2
It's quite amusing how he calls others fanboys, but is so rabid about defending Apple every chance he gets.


RE: LOL
By testerguy on 10/26/2012 1:08:57 PM , Rating: 1
Believe it or not, I don't care about any company. I don't own shares in any of them, and I own neither a Samsung or an Apple phone.

I only have to defend Apple because so many of you on this website defend Samsung so irrationally and illogically, mainly because you have some crazy 'rabid' hatred of Apple.


RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 1:11:13 PM , Rating: 1
God, you are so full of shit it really isn't funny anymore. Anyone with half a brain cell on this site, not you, can SEE your rabid fanaticism with Apple.


RE: LOL
By Tony Swash on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By degobah77 on 10/26/2012 1:27:24 PM , Rating: 3
Because you're a dick.


RE: LOL
By retrospooty on 10/26/2012 2:09:03 PM , Rating: 1
I don't think he is a dick... He has abolutely no life and therefore gloms on to a company (of all the absurd things) for comfort. Sad and strange.


RE: LOL
By Tony Swash on 10/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: LOL
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/26/2012 2:19:02 PM , Rating: 1
Loser Troll...


RE: LOL
By retrospooty on 10/26/2012 2:26:26 PM , Rating: 3
" iPhobes who will get all frothed up and red faced about it"

This is where you lose reality... You yourself are far too emotionally involved with Apple, therefore you think that anyone that posts contrary to your FUD are all bent out of shape about it.

Get some perspective Tony, its just a company. You like the products, buy the products and be happy with your toys. That is that.


RE: LOL
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 9:02:00 PM , Rating: 1
Oh, how I wish Apple made sex toys. I could so get into that. Ladies, imagine one with the battery life of an iPhone!

What about Apple lubricants and condoms and a blow-up doll of an iPad 3. I'll bet the assemblers at Foxconn would stop killing themselves and instead riot by squirting each other with creams that smell of apples.

Conclusion: I think my fiction is more fun.
Tony, you are not invited to the Christmas party. You're just too mean hearted.


RE: LOL
By bupkus on 10/26/2012 9:02:23 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, how I wish Apple made sex toys. I could so get into that. Ladies, imagine one with the battery life of an iPhone!

What about Apple lubricants and condoms and a blow-up doll of an iPad 3. I'll bet the assemblers at Foxconn would stop killing themselves and instead riot by squirting each other with creams that smell of apples.

Conclusion: I think my fiction is more fun.
Tony, you are not invited to the Christmas party. You're just too mean hearted.


RE: LOL
By nikon133 on 10/28/2012 4:04:09 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sure this will improve their mood:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2012/10/...

Isn't rubber-banding one of the reasons Samsung got nailed by Judge Dredd and jolly jury? That judgement seems to be slipping away by the day.


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki