backtop


Print 147 comment(s) - last by Cheesew1z69.. on Aug 1 at 10:44 AM

You copy, I copy, we all copy

Apple, Inc. (AAPL) is looking to ban all sales of Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd.'s (KSC:005930) smartphones on the grounds that they "copy" the look of its iPhone.  But new documents filed in court by Samsung rock that claim, alleging that Apple itself copied relatively blatantly from Sony Corp. (TYO:6758)

The design of the iPhone is protected by U.S. Design Patent No. D618,677 and D593,087.  Apple is suing Samsung, claiming that it design "copies" the patented iPhone design.

But the Samsung filings indicate that those claims are invalid.

First, they reference their own company's prior art.

To damage the "minimalist" claim it shows off multiple minimalist designs sold well before Apple filed for design protections in July 2007, and before the iPhone was announced.

Samsung 2006

Samsung also points to its F700 music player, which released in Feb. 2007.

Ironically, Apple tried to use this player as evidence, given that it showed off the iPhone in January 2007.  But Apple was forced to embarassingly retract that claim after its lawyers learned that it had been shown at Cebit 2006 (Mar. 2006).

F700 wide
[Image Source: The Hive Mind]

But the more interesting claims relate to Sony.

Back in 2005 Apple was reeling with disappointment at failing to create a hit phone.  Apple's first attempt -- to hire Motorola Mobility Inc. to design an "iTunes Phone" had flopped when the Rokr E1 "iTunes phone" got panned.  Check out this 2005-era CNET picture:
Rokr E1
Motorola Rokr E1 "iTunes Phone" [Image Source CNET]

The editor remarks, "The Motorola Rokr E1 has an uninspiring design."

Apple CEO Steve Jobs demanded better.  Around the same time Apple began poaching Sony's engineers.  Sony at the time was working on some intriguing designs, such as the P900, a design made by Sony's joint venture with Sweden's Ericsson SpA (STO:ERIC B):

Sony P900
Sony Ericsson P900 [Image Source: CNET]

That handset launched in April 2004.

By 2005, when Apple began to poach Sony's employees, Sony was reportedly working on far more advanced designs in the prototype.  Steve Jobs keenly took note.

Steve Jobs at Sony party
Steve Jobs at a Sony event [Image Source: Unknown]

Here's where the story gets a little strange.  In documents obtained by Samsung a CAD drawing of a smartphone that looks remarkably like the iPhone 4 (and a bit like the earlier iPhones) pops up on Apple's servers clearly branded "Sony".

Samsung believes the design was not directly stolen from Sony.  Rather, "in February 2006, before the claimed iPhone design was conceived, Apple executive Tony Fadell circulated a news article to Steve Jobs, Jonathan Ive and others. In the article, a Sony designer discussed Sony designs for portable electronic devices that lacked buttons and other 'excessive ornamentation,' fit in the hand, were ‘square with a screen’ and had 'corners [which] have been rounded out.'"

According to Samsung, Apple then assigned Shin Nishibori -- a Japanese industrial designer who worked for Apple since 2002 -- to mock up what that text description might look like.

This was the result:
Sony Phone
[Image Source: The Verge]

The fact that Mr. Nishibori included the Sony label seems to be pretty damning, and even Apple seemingly realized that, changing the logo to "Jony" in later images, a play on its lead designer -- Jony Ive's name.
Jony Phone
[Image Source: The Verge]


But Samsung argues the message is clear -- Apple copied from Sony.

Apple had a little bit of a history of "borrowing" competitors' ideas.  CEO Steve Jobs lifted the idea for his successful Mac operating system from Xerox Corp. (XRX)  He once bragged, "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."  


Samsung's lawyers write [PDF], "Apple seeks to exclude Samsung from the market, based on its complaints that Samsung has used the very same public domain design concepts that Apple borrowed from other competitors, including Sony, to develop the iPhone."

"Contrary to the image it has cultivated in the popular press, Apple has admitted in internal documents that its strength is not in developing new technologies first, but in successfully commercializing them."

Looks like while Apple's filings were relatively damaging from a standpoint of technical infringement claims, Samsung has a pretty effective defense formulated with respect to design claims.

That defense might leave Sony with a question or two for Apple.

Sources: Samsung, The Verge



Comments     Threshold


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

F700 music player
By shabby on 7/27/2012 9:21:46 PM , Rating: 5
Since this thing predates the iphone by 1 year and is rectangular with round corners and of minimalistic design, how can apples patents of an identical design filed almost 2 years after it have any leg to stand on?




RE: F700 music player
By phatboye on 7/27/2012 10:58:11 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Since this thing predates the iphone by 1 year and is rectangular with round corners and of minimalistic design, how can apples patents of an identical design filed almost 2 years after it have any leg to stand on?


Unfortunately because American laws are stupid, please see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_fir...


RE: F700 music player
By danjw1 on 7/28/2012 10:27:26 AM , Rating: 1
Nope! We just recently switched to first to file. It is called Ex post facto law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

Since Apple filed this patent before we switched to first to file, it isn't valid on the prior art claim.


RE: F700 music player
By vol7ron on 7/28/2012 11:13:02 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Nope! We just recently switched to first to file. It is called Ex post facto law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

That is not what Ex Post Facto means, or is about. Ex post facto is stating you can't do something legal one day (e.g. ride a bike w/o a helmet), then make a law the next day (eg you must wear a helmet when riding a bike), and charge that person for the crime before the law was created.

Patent law is very tricky. In some cases words/descriptions are enough, in other cases you need to file diagrams. In either case, Apple was taking Sony's hearsay and creating it's own visual based on Apple's interpretation of Sony's description. I don't think that's illegal.


RE: F700 music player
By danjw1 on 7/28/2012 11:23:19 AM , Rating: 2
It is not applicable to older patents. This has already been determined in court.


RE: F700 music player
By SPOOFE on 7/28/2012 5:05:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I don't think that's illegal.

But Samsung's not trying to demonstrate illegality on Apple's part, they're trying to weaken Apple's claim that Samsung did something illegal.


RE: F700 music player
By sprockkets on 7/28/2012 12:45:32 PM , Rating: 3
FYI just because we are on a first to file system does not mean prior art is meaningless. It just means if two companies file for the exact same patent, whoever filed first wins.

Ars had an article about that sometime ago.


RE: F700 music player
By Jeffk464 on 7/28/2012 1:18:50 PM , Rating: 3
What, Apple liberating ideas from other companies. No way.


RE: F700 music player
By EricMartello on 7/29/2012 12:00:03 AM , Rating: 4
Steve Jobs - the master copy artist.


RE: F700 music player
By Omega215D on 7/28/2012 2:00:30 AM , Rating: 2
I remember owning the Sony P800 after wanting a phone that could browse the net, play mp3s and work as a PDA. It was 2003/ 2004, I moved from a Moto T720.


RE: F700 music player
By Solandri on 7/29/2012 4:47:08 AM , Rating: 2
The metal band around the iPhone 4 always reminded me of the circa 2002 Sony PEG-SL10 (granted it was silver-colored plastic on the Sony). Now I know why - Apple probably hired away the designer from Sony.
http://www.sonyclie.org/images/newer/sl10.jpg


RE: F700 music player
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 8:47:11 AM , Rating: 2
Ah...good ol Clie...

Had to support those for a few years :o


RE: F700 music player
By Omega215D on 7/29/2012 11:08:10 PM , Rating: 2
Oh jeez, that brought back memories of my Sony Clie NX80 PDA (preceeded by a WinCE PDA from ViewSonic in 2003). IIRC both PDAs had a grid of icons or list scrolling, high tech camera interface (Sony) and music/ video playback capability. Both were rectangles with rounded corners, though they were silver in color and had resistive screens (sony was almost like a capacitive screen).

The only things missing from both were cellular connectivity, otherwise I had to pair them with my cell phone through IR or classic cable connect.

I had a lot of gadgets for an 18 yr old in that time period.


RE: F700 music player
By simoncraddock on 7/29/2012 1:25:11 PM , Rating: 5
I guess Apple and Samsung were both inspired by this from the 1800s...elongated and rounded corners. Sounds and looks very familiar doesn't it?

http://www.schoolhousemuseum.org.au/Web%20Albums/O...

I'd love to see Samsung's lawyers turn up to court with Slate Tablets and keep saying "can you repeat that your honour whilst we take notes on our iSlates we modelled on devices from the 1800s"


RE: F700 music player
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 8:07:57 AM , Rating: 2
wow! nice find!


RE: F700 music player
By mstrmac on 7/30/2012 1:48:49 PM , Rating: 2
"Purple" prototype predates all. It was August 2005, months before the Sony prototype.


RE: F700 music player
By mstrmac on 7/30/2012 1:51:31 PM , Rating: 2
"Purple" prototype predates all. It was August 2005, months before the Sony prototype.


RE: F700 music player
By not on 7/31/2012 11:21:41 PM , Rating: 2
The Samsung F700 was announced in February 2007, 1 month after the iPhone, and released in November 2007, 5 months after the iPhone:

http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php

Unlike the iPhone prototype, which actually worked when it was announced, the F700 was shown around CeBit in March 2007 in a non-functional state:

http://www.slashgear.com/slashgear-at-cebit-samsun...

If these sites don't convince you, please go out and find some links to prove that I'm wrong.

Thanks,

not


This should be quite amusing...
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/27/2012 10:00:09 PM , Rating: 2
To see how the Apple Sheep spin this.




By Cheesew1z69 on 7/27/2012 10:13:03 PM , Rating: 5
this
By sprockkets on 7/28/2012 1:44:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"Contrary to the image it has cultivated in the popular press, Apple has admitted in internal documents that its strength is not in developing new technologies first, but in successfully commercializing them."


This quote is priceless. It pretty much sums up apple, completely.

Thank you Samsung, for allowing us to confirm what we have always known, especially coming from apple themselves: Apple is just a marketing sham. For that, I think my next TV or phone will be yours.




RE: this
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2012 1:51:07 PM , Rating: 2
And they don't even DEVELOP the technologies they are using. OTHER companies do.


RE: this
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: this
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 8:53:02 AM , Rating: 1
What is so profound is that you gargle on Apple nut sack everyday.


RE: this
By Tony Swash on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: this
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 12:03:55 PM , Rating: 1
Ah, the other Apple nut sucker defending the other one. Priceless.


RE: this
By momorere on 7/29/2012 3:14:02 PM , Rating: 2
"They" are both the same person. After Tony receives X amount of down votes, he logs in as Testerguy.


RE: this
By Tony Swash on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: this
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 4:43:32 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, because COMEDY proves your point? You are a bigger idiot then I thought.


RE: this
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
Are you surpised ?. Should not be!.
By fteoath64 on 7/29/2012 2:57:04 AM , Rating: 2
Apple's lawyers better get out of this case before they damage the company more!. It is getting to the stage where they might think they are winning legally but publicly, they are losing much much more than they think. It is a losing proposition to all parties. Although Sammy can salvage a lot of sales from future products when they more away from similar shape design into a different shape design that consumers can embrace.
In terms of raw built, Sammy is really good at it from a hardware standpoint. Sw being from Google is just a tweak to make that work better with the hardware. All devices more in such a way as it is the human approach.




By Zingam on 8/1/2012 4:35:58 AM , Rating: 2
Apple's lawyers will never lose! (The lawyers not the company). Ever heart of bankrupt lawyer? I have yet to hear about one.


Apple/Samsung
By Richard875yh5 on 7/29/2012 5:52:33 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is a company on it's way out. I grwill never buy from the greedy Apple company. I see more and more customer feel the same way.




RE: Apple/Samsung
By ritualm on 7/30/2012 9:20:45 AM , Rating: 1
Impossible. The stupid public vetoed that idea long ago. Most of the non-"Apple cheerleader" people that post here are the minority.


By Dug on 7/30/2012 11:44:01 AM , Rating: 2
Showing August 2005 prototype before Sony's.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/30/apple-purple-ph...




Sony Design
By nofear4COMment on 7/30/2012 12:58:12 PM , Rating: 2
Regardless of who filed, my opinion is that Sony will be the first who own this patent. Despite of that designed were, Apple and Samsung legitimately that both can share and re-innovate to existing design regardless who design. Now, the best implementation in a designs and improvement wins.




the world has gone nuts
By glennco on 7/31/2012 2:14:44 AM , Rating: 2
The next logical step in phone design was no buttons. This is just an idiotic greedy world. touch-screen was around way before Apple iPhone, touch-screen dictates you don't need buttons... therefore touch-screen dictates the smartphone design (or lack of design is more accurate). These idiots will ruin legit patents in the long-run.

i am astounded that these so called smart people are all freakin idiots or do we just blame scumbag lawyers once again. you should not be able to patent a rectangle inside a rectangle no matter how rounded the corners are.

get a clue world or suffer the consequences




It's Samsung's fault...
By Zingam on 8/1/2012 4:30:00 AM , Rating: 2
Samsung should have sued first! :D




The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 7:33:16 PM , Rating: 1
You are a Apples bitch, shocking!


RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By retrospooty on 7/30/2012 10:51:02 AM , Rating: 1
"There has got to become a point when even the guys who hate Apple should take Dailytech to task for posting that video on every other article. Seriously, not only does it makes you look biased and bitter, it also makes every single one of your articles look old and unoriginal. It's like Jason Dick's quote from the Apple lawyer,"

seriously, how can you post this and claim to be ither intelligent, or unbiased?

First off, you are commenting on an article and went straight to calling him "Jason Dick". Immature, irrelevant and insulting, showing you know you have no valid point by lowering yourself to insults. Sencondly, the video is relevant, becasue Apple DOES copy. they copy ideas, they copy tech and they do it "shamelessly" (per Steve Jobs). And its OK. All companies do this. They copy and add, this is what drives progress. It's perfectly fine that Apple copied almost everything that makes the iPhone. The whole thing is a copy, adding the nice multitouch UI and screen. It's OK. The ONLY problem we all have is the suing. The do as I say not as I do thing strikes any sane rational person as as being wrong from the core up. If you cant see that simple logic, then you simply cant see logic.


RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 12:54:57 PM , Rating: 1
He's been calling him Jason Dick for a while... many, many times. It's nothing new. I am surprised he hasn't been taken to task by Jason for it. LOL


RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By retrospooty on 7/30/2012 1:02:09 PM , Rating: 2
I know, I just find it funny how he says when you resort to insults you lost the argument and he doesnt see what a hypocritical putz that makes him ;)


By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 1:45:36 PM , Rating: 2
No kidding...lol


RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 2:47:42 PM , Rating: 2
There is a difference between interspersing logical and solid factual points with demonstrations of disdain, to simply writing out an insult with that constituting your entire post.

A la you.

I hope one day you learn to distinguish things and not see the world through such simplistic eyes.


By retrospooty on 7/31/2012 3:55:06 PM , Rating: 1
oh pleeeease. "Jason Dick" is rediculous and immature. It's something I would have said in Jr. High, not even in high school. What are you 12?


RE: The Steve Jobs Picasso Video
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 2:46:00 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
First off, you are commenting on an article and went straight to calling him "Jason Dick". Immature, irrelevant and insulting


While I do enjoy calling Jason by his true name, it was neither my main point nor intended to be a compelling point. I stand by it, however.

quote:
Sencondly, the video is relevant, becasue Apple DOES copy. they copy ideas, they copy tech and they do it "shamelessly" (per Steve Jobs). And its OK. All companies do this. They copy and add, this is what drives progress. It's perfectly fine that Apple copied almost everything that makes the iPhone. The whole thing is a copy, adding the nice multitouch UI and screen. It's OK. The ONLY problem we all have is the suing. The do as I say not as I do thing strikes any sane rational person as as being wrong from the core up. If you cant see that simple logic, then you simply cant see logic.


I wonder how many morons will need the difference between 'copying' whilst innovating and infringing patents, before you finally get it.

As for claiming I'm biased because I dislike the author for being biased, there's a clever boy.... lol.

As for claiming I'm biased because I criticise a blog writer for repeating the same thing over and over again, there's an even cleverer boy...


By retrospooty on 7/31/2012 3:58:29 PM , Rating: 2
No, your biased becashe you...

1. Only post in articles about Apple. You created your ID here for that purpose and only that purpose.
2. Totally exaggerate Apples benefits
3. Totally exaggerate Androids weakness.
4. Totally ignore Androids benefits
5. Totally ignore Apples weakness.

The funny thing is that its SOOOOO obvious. We all see it and you still act like it doesnt exist. Your head is truly in need of a gut check.


Gadgets
By brendt on 7/27/12, Rating: -1
Don't messed with Asians.
By anandtech02148 on 7/27/12, Rating: -1
RE: Don't messed with Asians.
By Florinator on 7/28/2012 12:50:01 AM , Rating: 2
Whoa, whoa, whoa, hold your horses. Samsung is no innocent little girl either! It is a rather known fact that Samsung has teams working on reverse engineering competitor's products, so "stealing" is the name of the game in Samsung too.


RE: Don't messed with Asians.
By althaz on 7/28/12, Rating: 0
RE: Don't messed with Asians.
By Belard on 7/28/2012 5:58:25 PM , Rating: 2
While Samsung isn't innocent, what is there to copy? All phones pretty much work the same. Apple took parts available that Samsung made anyway and put it into their design with their software.


RE: Don't messed with Asians.
By Strunf on 7/30/2012 7:45:59 AM , Rating: 2
Everyone "steals", and it applies not only to smartphones but to everything else... I find utterly stupid when people complain about it.

A product design is based on what people like or want, and this is found by analyzing what they buy and why they buy it, if a designer was thrown into a cave for 5 years chances are the design he would come up with would be a total failure, how do you think Apple went from no smartphone expertize to the iPhone?...


I just don't give a !#$@
By Da W on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: I just don't give a !#$@
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2012 11:44:34 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Happened before, Apple invented the PC too!
Wow...just wow...


RE: I just don't give a !#$@
By bupkus on 7/29/2012 6:40:08 AM , Rating: 2
So what is wowing you is the idea that someone would call the earliest Apple personal computer a PC?

If in fact Apple had created the first personal computer then there would not yet have been a competing "PC" for Apple to then divorce itself from by calling that a PC and describing its own model "not a PC".

Maybe this link will help you:
http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml/


RE: I just don't give a !#$@
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 8:50:30 AM , Rating: 2
The fact that he said they INVENTED it...which is complete bullshit.. .


Speaking of Steve Jobs....
By Tony Swash on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: Speaking of Steve Jobs....
By Tony Swash on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
Since Mick doesn't read his posts
By TheJian on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
Sorry to burst your bubble
By KPOM1 on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By themaster08 on 7/28/2012 10:03:39 AM , Rating: 3
That's not the point. The point is that Apple were not the first to envision this type of design. It's just another piece of evidence that should be used to invalidate Apple's ridiculous design patents.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By bety on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/29/2012 11:03:20 AM , Rating: 5
The real "propaganda" is from Apple in that they dont copy, and that others copy from them. The truth is that all companies do it and Apple is one of the absolute worst.

Here is a nice list of things Apple copied from Android alone (courtesy of Reclaimer)

1. The revolutionary notification center of Android was a part of it from day one, nobody had done notifications like that before and eventually the competitors had to give in and adopt a similar style.

2. Over the air updates - now a standard throughout all platforms in the world this was something introduced by google from day one.

3. Widgets, Android first, copied by others later.

4. Free turn by turn navigation, once again something that we now see is being copied by competitors.

5. Social network integration - once again now a standard for all platforms!!

6. Multitasking. It took iOS three years to finally do multitasking, and it's still not on par with Android.

7. Drop Down Notifications - Android first, blatantly copied by Apple in iOS 5

8. Wireless Syncing - There are several Android apps out there that let you sync your music, movies, contacts, etc. with your computer over your home's Wi-Fi connection. And they've been around almost since Android's beginning. The iPhone finally got sync with iTunes wirelessly iOS 5.

9. Opening apps from the lock screen - Android skins like HTC's sense have allowed that for years. Another iOS 5 feature stolen from Google

10. Custom Wallpapers - For the first three years of the iPhone's existence, you were stuck with the plain black background on their home screens. (Unless they jailbroke, of course.) It wasn't until the 2010 launch of iOS 4 on the 3GS and iPhone 4 that you could finally choose any photo you wanted for your background. Meanwhile, Android phones have had customizable backgrounds long before iPhone. Android phones also allow animated wallpapers.

11. Voice Recognition - Google Voice was built into Android WAY before Siri came along.

Apple is suing for alot of vague concepts. Its not like they invented the smartphone. All they were is first to market with a multitouch UI... yes it was great, yes it made smartphones alot funner to use. That was a great thing, now let the competition begin.

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. Its as if to say, Toyota, GM, BMW and Honda shouldnt be allowed to make cars because they all copy Ford. Specifically Appl's suits are as if Ford sued GM because they have cupholders and mudflaps on their pick up trucks. Petty and irrelevant.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Schmide on 7/29/2012 11:54:26 AM , Rating: 3
This is the greatest post ever.

I post in other threads, but I still can't upvote this???

This is lame I used to be able to up/down vote.

+1


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By ritualm on 7/30/2012 9:15:13 AM , Rating: 2
The moment you reply to a post, you forfeit the ability to up/down-vote all other posts in the same thread. It's a DailyTech limitation.

Unless you're a DT editor.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By djdjohnson on 7/29/2012 1:26:25 PM , Rating: 2
...and most of those ideas were taken from earlier operating systems. Windows Mobile had quite a few of those, and I'm sure it wasn't the only one.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By room200 on 7/29/2012 4:53:16 PM , Rating: 3
Funny how you're calling many of the features that he says Apple stole "insignificant". This coming from the guy arguing for the company who's suing for the "bounce back" feature at the end of a scroll. LOL


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 5:31:26 PM , Rating: 2
That's Tester for you, everything is not logical, or relevant or significant unless he says it is. He's a fucking joke.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/29/2012 6:55:42 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. Everything apple copies is insignificant but what apple claims others copy is somehow not... Like folder stacking lol? The Android list above is 10x more useful. Tester you are a total tool


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/30/2012 5:17:09 PM , Rating: 1
Okay, it comes down to "patents".

"Patents" are a thing. There are actual "traits" and "details" about what an actual "patent" is.

Some particular details regarding a patent can "invalidate" a patent.

As you admit, Apple reverse-engineered from a Sony description. Apple is ALSO claiming that Samsung "stole" Apple's idea.

But how come it can't simply be that Apple ALSO reverse-engineered the Sony description?

And wouldn't that invalidate the involvement in "patents" in this discussion altogether?

Your thoughts on this matter would be welcome.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/30/2012 5:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But how come it can't simply be that Apple ALSO reverse-engineered the Sony description?

Should read: "But how come it can't simply be that Samsung ALSO reverse-engineered the Sony description?"

If Apple's claim is that Samsung's inspiration was an Apple property, the existence of a Sony property that inspired Apple's design only dilutes Apple's claim.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 2:51:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As you admit, Apple reverse-engineered from a Sony description


Do you know what reverse engineering is?

Reverse engineering is taking an existing physical product and essentially ripping it apart to learn how it was made.

As a result, the quote you attribute to me is absolute nonsense and clearly not something I, nor anyone logical would claim. You do, of course.

The words from Sony were vague, and even if they inspired Apple to create their OWN design (which was not the necessary outcome from Sonys WORDS) - such 'words' existing from Sony do not constitute prior art since they are not art at all. Apple is claiming Samsung stole their iPhone and iPad design, which it clearly did. Sony is not claiming that Apple stole its design, because they, like the rest of the intelligent world, know that this isn't the case.

This also covers your ridiculous assertion that Samsung would 'reverse-engineer' words in the same way.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/31/2012 4:25:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the quote you attribute to me is absolute nonsense and clearly not something I, nor anyone logical would claim.

I didn't see you dispute the comparison to "reverse engineering", thus indicating tacit agreement. You're free to make your words as clear - or otherwise - as you like.

quote:
The words from Sony were vague, and even if they inspired Apple to create their OWN design (which was not the necessary outcome from Sonys WORDS) - such 'words' existing from Sony do not constitute prior art since they are not art at all.

Clearly Apple disagrees. Maybe you should tell THEM this, instead of me?

quote:
Apple is claiming Samsung stole their iPhone and iPad design, which it clearly did.

"Clearly" only if you ignore the mountain of evidence suggesting the opposite.

quote:
Sony is not claiming that Apple stole its design, because they, like the rest of the intelligent world, know that this isn't the case.

I'm not accusing Apple of stealing. I'm accusing Samsung of drawing off the same inspiration that Apple did. Correlation =/= Causation.

Of course, I asked you about PATENTS, not about reverse engineering. Your response to my question about PATENTS would be welcome. Further attempts to dodge the issue will be either ignored or mocked, according to whim. :)


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/31/2012 4:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
"Clearly" only if you ignore the mountain of evidence suggesting the opposite.

He does. He cant form and opinion based on facts, so he forms facts based on his opinion.

"I'm not accusing Apple of stealing. I'm accusing Samsung of drawing off the same inspiration that Apple did. Correlation =/= Causation."

This is exactly right. It is so clear and simple to see. WTF is the difficulty with this guy? He just refuses to accept that Apple copies. There are quotes directly fromthe mouth of Steve Jobs saying they are "Shameless" about copying other tech. There are dozens of points on this thread alone that show things that Android has before Apple and Apple later copied and he refuses to accept it happened. Even Tony isnt this hard headed. Tony will just slink off when he's proven wrong. this guy insults your intelligence and insists until he's blue in the face while ignoring mountains of evidence. LOL.

Ah the internet is fun. =)


By Cheesew1z69 on 8/1/2012 10:44:28 AM , Rating: 2
Even when slapped in the fact with facts, he still ignores them as if they are irrelevant.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 5:32:50 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
massive rant
Yet your post is almost twice as long... go figure..


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/29/2012 7:05:42 PM , Rating: 2
"which addressed precisely zero relevant topics. Your inability to handle the topic at hand"

The topic is Apple copying and suing others for copying... That is ALWAYS the topic with Apple. It's just one that you would rather avoid. As far as each item... wow, just wow. You really would have done better to just not post back at all. These are all great things, notable great by the fact that Apple felt the need to copy them. Check your iPhone 5 specs, they are also coming up with larger screens and 4g. Of course it isnt all patented and some is others tech, but it was in Android first and Apple is copying Android blatantly and obviously and you are way too biased to see it. Actually I take that back... I think you do see it, but are simply acting as if you dont.

I am not at all concerned with your one sided opinion. Anyone that frequents this site knows you to be a total vomitworthy Apple fanboy and cant deal with anything on a level field. In the end th ebest platform wins and when you compare Android 4.1 to IOS6, IOS6 just falls short. Apple needs to start pushing the envelope again like they did in '07.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 7:31:35 PM , Rating: 3
Different post, same bullshit.

quote:
They are all minor, insignificant things, and the majority of phones are not sold because of them, but that is absolutely irrelevant anyway.


quote:
And because none of them are patented, they are not at all relevant to any legal discussion over patent / design infringement.


quote:
Which brings me on to the relevant content - Samsung copying the fundamental design of the iPad and iPhone, backed up by their own lawyer not being able to distinguish the tablets in court, and by emails and memos, even from Google, telling Samsung that their phone looked too much like an iPhone.


quote:
You say 'of course it isn't all patented' as if that's some kind of throwaway comment with no relevance . How can you possibly be so stupid to not realise that that's the ONLY relevant fact.


quote:
As for your usual drivel about bias - I repeat that the only reason you interpret my logic as bias is that you yourself are anti-Apple as you demonstrate continuously. I simply correct you, and will continue to do so.


Absolute fucking nutjob...


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 7:49:53 PM , Rating: 3
Ok Apple Dildo...

You are the furthest thing from logic..


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/29/2012 7:48:33 PM , Rating: 2
Absolute fucking nutjob

Exactly... The funny thing is that he actually seems to think that only his points are valid and that people agree. The constant -1s on his posts should give away the fact that everyone thinks he is a tool. No sense of self awareness at all.

Tester, seriously stop posting... You are embarrassing yourself.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 8:11:04 AM , Rating: 2
They disprove nothing, like all of your posts. And he is right. Sadly, you are to blinded to accept this and move on.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/30/2012 8:14:29 AM , Rating: 2
"When you resort to just saying 'he thinks he's right' and 'hes a tool' - you already lost the debate."

I didnt resort to anything. You arent objective or mentally balanced enough to have a real debate with, You take any and all info and skew it to Apple. You come across like a spoiled child and act as if you are right now matter what, and the rest of your posts are you frantically trying to prove your are right, so you post half truth's and one sides facts. Clearly by your instant downrate to -1 people agree... But WTH, I have time this AM, so I'll bait you on.

"My points all still stand. And they all still disprove yours"

LOL what? Your points prove nothing other than you cant be objective.

1. It was out on Android first, Apple is being outsold by Android and Apple then implemented it in response (note there is nothing wrong or illegal with this, all companies do it but Apple is asinine for suing about it).

2. Again, It was out on Android first and Apple copied it

3. Highly useful and some beautiful as well. Wmail right at the home screen, weather, contacts, etc. Awesome stuff. For you to dismiss widgets as useless shows your complete lack of comprehension of todays smartphone. They arent just useful they are HIGHLY useful.

4. Again, It was out on Android first and Apple copied it

5. I dont really personally use it much, but most do. It is better integrated into the OS. If you actually used Android you'd know this, but you just post form your Apple bubble.

6. Actually both are inferior to WebOS in multitasking, but again it was out on Android first and Apple copied it. You could say Apple copied it elsehwhere, but Apple still was late to the game.

7. I'ts referring to the functionality of the dropdown menu specifically. It has a ton of useful stuff in there now.

8. ITs referring to wirelessly over the web syncing users data, contacts and even favorites/bookmarks (along with a ton of other options) not your flimsy iTunes you dolt.

9. Yes, highly useful for fast access to take a pic or make a call when your in a hurry. Just because you dont have it doesnt mean its not good.

10. Live wallpapers are awesome. They add an incredibly beautiful touch to the phone instead of the bland IOS icon with background that they have nursed since IOS1

11. Whatever, I had it on my Palm years before the iPhone came out. In the end, it comes down to the best implementation.... BTW, Android wins that again. Go look at any of the links of the Siri vs. S-voice below.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=siri+v...

You are wrong on this. Not just a little wrong, you are totally wrong. At this point you are just arguing to argue, as your "points" are flat and defeated.

NEXT!


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/30/2012 5:26:12 PM , Rating: 2
It just goes to show how easy it is to deny the blatant truth, now matter how much it punches you in the face.

One game I like to play on people I meet is to eventually inform them of my "irrational belief" that the state of Delaware doesn't exist. It's amazing; it always follows the same line of conversation:

Them: "But I've been there/someone I know has been there!"
Me: "I'm sure you/someone you know sincerely believes you've been there."
Them: "I can take you there, I can show you!"
Me: "It's easy to take someone someplace and call it someplace it's not."
Them: "There's maps!"
Me: "Just a piece of paper. I mean, there's the big ol' Delaware RIVER, obviously! Is that what you mean?"
Them: "You can go up in space and look at it yourself!"
Me: "Oh sure, you can point at any ol' piece of ground and call it 'Delaware.' Suuuure..."

It'll go on forever. It's totally effortless. Try it yourself sometime, you can deny even the most obvious facts, without the slightest bit of energy expended, with no practice even, for hours and hours and hours. For the rest of your life, if you want. Denial is STUPID-easy. That's why so many people do it.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 2:59:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I didnt resort to anything.


You did exactly what I said. You're back tracking now, now the tears have had some time to well up.

quote:
You arent objective or mentally balanced enough to have a real debate with, You take any and all info and skew it to Apple. You come across like a spoiled child and act as if you are right now matter what, and the rest of your posts are you frantically trying to prove your are right, so you post half truth's and one sides facts. Clearly by your instant downrate to -1 people agree..


One big irrelevant tearful cry-fest.

quote:
1. It was out on Android first


To determine is something infringes patents or is 'copied' from something else, it coming out first on one or the other is not enough. You're so simplistic. As per the majority of your list, they existed on OTHER system before Android. Thus, if you define that as your criteria for copying, you're in fact making a damning indictment of Android for copying.

2 - Same as 1

3 - Usefulness is not relevant to whether or not something is legally protected (see my previous post on that - you should try to read so that your 'points' don't come pre-owned out of the box, next time)

4 - Same as 1

5 - Same as 3.

6 - Same as 1.

7 - Same as 3.

8 - As I said, you could always do this with apps, and Same as 1.

9 - Same as 1 and 3.

10 - Same as 1 and 3 (and lol @ you getting all excited over wallpaper, btw)

11 - LOL @ you saying that it doesn't matter if Apple did Siri before S-voice, after a 10 point rant on things that were done first on Android and how that's significant. How to destroy 10 points in a single sentence of stupidity.

;-)

I'll repeat the bottom line because however many times morons like you get told this, you still refuse to get it: Nothing you listed was a 'first' on Android, thus nothing at all that you list could ever be patented in the first place (due to prior art).

But more fundamentally (and it really is basic) nothing you listed is patented. There is no wrong in that simple fact, which proves both me correct and you incorrect. It's simple, obvious, factual reality. They are not patented, and not even created first on Android. Thus Android copied them just as much as anyone else, and just like anyone else they were entitled to because they aren't patented.

As a side not, the entire list is pointless things which add precisely nothing to productivity anyway, but as explained to you before, that is not relevant.

All of the points made in my above statement have already been made in previous posts, indicating your flat out denial of reality or inability to read or comprehend logic. Learn before you try to deny facts next time


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/31/2012 4:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
What part are you not getting here? We aren't concerned with Apple little vague patents. We all know the patent system is broken and that Apple is manipulating it well. The facts are the facts, and that list came out on Android first, and Apple copied it. No-one said it was patented. We simply are saying that Apple copies Android too, on MANY MANY fronts. You don't need to get upset about it , its just facts. It doesn't affect your life.

Whatever. Your pretty much a waste of skin. At this point, Android has far surpassed the iPhone on hardware and software... There isnt anything you can say or do to change that. You like Apple, go for it, buy Apple, but I will call you on your BS when you post it here.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/31/2012 4:24:08 PM , Rating: 2
He doesn't get it, period.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/31/2012 4:27:37 PM , Rating: 2
Some people get it, some people don't get it, and some people don't get that there's something to get.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By inperfectdarkness on 7/30/2012 2:23:13 AM , Rating: 2
So let me get this straight:

-Android doesn't have a leg to stand on...because it didn't patent ideas/implementation which shouldn't--by rights be patentable.

-Apple has a legitimate gripe because it patented the same kind of ideas/implementation which should never have been granted a patent in the first place.

.....um....

If this is your argument, I am going to patent farts and pre-emptively sue you whenever you eat mexican food.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/30/2012 5:29:38 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
See, I didn't voice any opinion on whether or not any of the patents in question should be or are valid.

Then you're just wasting everyone's time, because a core aspect of this whole case is whether or not there's validity to Apple's claim.

Good job, you've successfully turned Daily Tech into combination middle school typing class plus personal masturbation booth. Ya got something dangling in your hair.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 7:20:18 PM , Rating: 2
And on the corner of his lip.... BAZINGA!


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 3:04:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then you're just wasting everyone's time, because a core aspect of this whole case is whether or not there's validity to Apple's claim.


Do I have to voice an opinion on whether or not a patent is valid to state a fact that if something isn't patented you can't sue over it?

Are you really that primitive?

You're the one arguing with something you've now finally managed to grasp and realise that it's simply the factual reality. The real stupidity lies with you and the rest of the comments who didn't grasp what I said.

As for whether or not there is validity to the claimed patents or not, is of no relevance to the points I made whatsoever, and the points I made were all that was required to disprove the former statements. If you state that my comments which disproved yours and other comments wrong was a waste of time, by definition the original comments must have been too.

As for your second sentence, I wonder if you see the irony in accusing someone of wasting time for writing factual logic and then writing such nonsensical drivel.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/31/2012 4:32:12 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Do I have to voice an opinion on whether or not a patent is valid to state a fact that if something isn't patented you can't sue over it?

Whoever said "you can't sue over it?"

Now you're just really making shit up. Might as well start accusing everyone of killing kittens while you're at it. Oooh, I know! Maybe suggest that retrospooty is actually Jack the Ripper! Ooooh, that's like MEGA-evil!

quote:
You're the one arguing with something you've now finally managed to grasp and realise that it's simply the factual reality

The notion that Apple's patents couldn't possibly be invalid in any way is "factual reality"?

Tell me again how Steve Jobs created the universe in just seven days.

quote:
As for whether or not there is validity to the claimed patents or not, is of no relevance to the points I made whatsoever

You'd have to make a point before something can be relevant to it! And no, the one atop your head doesn't count.

quote:
If you state that my comments which disproved yours and other comments wrong was a waste of time, by definition the original comments must have been too.

So it's impossible for you to deviate from relevant to irrelevant over the course of a conversation? Such powers you have! Perhaps if you used these magic powers of yours for good instead of evil...

quote:
I wonder if you see the irony in accusing someone of wasting time for writing factual logic and then writing such nonsensical drivel.

Why don't you just call your posts "magic spells" and really wank hard?


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 9:12:21 AM , Rating: 2
Don't bother, anything you say is irrelevant unless Tester says it's OK or valid.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By adiposity on 7/30/2012 3:01:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So let me get this straight:

-Android doesn't have a leg to stand on...because it didn't patent ideas/implementation which shouldn't--by rights be patentable.

-Apple has a legitimate gripe because it patented the same kind of ideas/implementation which should never have been granted a patent in the first place.


When it comes to patent lawsuits, it would seem fairly important whether you had applied for, and received a patent for an idea/implementation.

When it comes to morality, maybe having the patent doesn't matter, but this issue is hardly based on morality--Apple is making their legal case.

The system sucks, but you have to work within the system. Apple may not have ever invented anything, but they do occasionally have unique implementations, and they fvcking patent everything whether it's unique or not. Not fair, maybe, but it gives them a lot more "leg[s] to stand on," legally.

That said, hopefully all design patents are thrown out the window. Beveled edges, thinness, aspect ratio, etc. should not be patentable.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/30/2012 5:30:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When it comes to patent lawsuits, it would seem fairly important whether you had applied for, and received a patent for an idea/implementation.

When it comes to patent lawsuits, whether or not the patent is valid also carries a degree of importance.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2012 4:26:46 PM , Rating: 2
Awww yeah, get em Retro! :D

I'm also working on an Android hardware first lists, where I will definitively prove that ALL of the handset innovation since 2009 has come from the Android makers, not Apple.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By retrospooty on 7/30/2012 6:15:26 PM , Rating: 2
Nice, definitely share it when you get it together. I enjoyed shutting this tool down today.

At least Tony is good natured about it. This guy in a condescending ass about everything... Which adds to the hilarity, because he's being condescending, but is totally wrong from the ground up, and has been shut down by myself and many others on this thread. Its like being lectured by Forrest Gump LOL. "Mama always told me Apple is right no matter what... Even when, sometimes things ... things just dont make no sense a'tall"


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By sprockkets on 7/28/2012 12:50:37 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/28/2012 5:08:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But that image isn't a Sony design. It's a mockup of what Apple engineers thought could fit into the Sony design.

Samsung's goal isn't to prove that Apple ripped off Sony, they're trying to show that they didn't necessarily rip off Apple.

If Apple took information made available by [someone else] (in this case, Sony) and wound up with a certain design, Samsung can claim that they ALSO took information made available by [someone else] (again, Sony) and did the exact same thing. Thus: No ripping off Apple's design, instead, inspiration just came from the same source for both companies.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By Belard on 7/28/2012 5:52:35 PM , Rating: 2
And "rectangular with round corners" pretty much covers many phone designs that predates the iPhone. Most hand devices have rounded corners.

And of course, nobody mistakes any other phobe with an iPhone. Other than the cheap knock off Airphone4. Which has fake iosmstule buttons, many used over and over again. Check it out on you tube. It looks like a thick iphone4. The weak battery is replaceable, holds two sim cards, has substandard resolution.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/30/2012 5:37:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The mistake you make is in not realising that the vague description by Sony did not in any way constitute a design which necessarily looked like an iPhone, or the mock up that Apple created.

The only reason you think I'm behind you is because I'm so far ahead that I'm about to pass you by. That's a fancy way of saying: No, stupid, I do realize that, just like I also realize that it's but one piece of evidence indicating that Apple's patent is invalid.

quote:
What you fail to mention is that evidence in this case has shown that Google had even warned Samsung that they were copying Apple, clearly they were more informed than you.

Google is not a court of law, and has no control over the patent office, and has no say in whether or not Apple's patents are invalid.

quote:
Do some research, the design patents encompass a much wider range of attributes than just shape, such as icons, packaging, size, weight, colours.

All of which bear examples of prior art. There's a mountain of evidence, child. This latest article is about just one of them.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 3:10:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only reason you think I'm behind you is because I'm so far ahead that I'm about to pass you by.


It would be better if you didn't waste your time with such silly irrelevant sentences after being proven wrong next time.

quote:
it's but one piece of evidence indicating that Apple's patent is invalid.


Does the fact that something is 'but one' piece of evidence mean that therefore it is immediately significant? No? Does that make your point irrelevant? Yes.

You can't defend a stupid claim by saying that there are other VALID claims you can make. If you need to state that that already proves that you know your original claim has no grounds whatsoever.

And lets be clear, it doesn't. The words from Sony in no way constituted a design or a product of any kind. The mockups were created by Apple.

quote:
Google is not a court of law, and has no control over the patent office, and has no say in whether or not Apple's patents are invalid.


Much like you, my friend, only Google are much, much more informed and their stating that Samsung copied Apple is much, much more significant to the legal process than your denial thereof. To be clear, you state that Google is not a court of law as if arguing with some imaginary foe who had stated that they are? Talk about blind stupidity...

quote:
All of which bear examples of prior art. There's a mountain of evidence, child. This latest article is about just one of them.


If I say... 'none of them bear examples of prior art', does that constitute a valid argument to you? Because that's how ridiculously vacuous and pointless such statements are.

There is no prior art for either the iPad or the iPhone - they were both such original devices they totally shook up both of their respective industries. You can't do that by releasing an equivalent product.


RE: Sorry to burst your bubble
By SPOOFE on 7/31/2012 4:42:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Does the fact that something is 'but one' piece of evidence mean that therefore it is immediately significant? No?

Oh yes, why even bother with these silly "courts" and "trials"? We should just ask Lord High Judge Testerguy to make snap pro-Apple decisions in all matters!

quote:
Does that make your point irrelevant? Yes.

More wishful thinking. "Make them go away mommy, the bad men are scaring me!"

quote:
You can't defend a stupid claim by saying that there are other VALID claims you can make.

Your lack of knowledge about the totality of this case is very telling, and perfectly explains your inability to make any sort of sense. There are no claims I CAN make that haven't ALREADY been made.

Of course, you KNOW about the evidence. You're just in denial. Don't be scared. Come to the light... the light of Not Being A Brainless Blithering Fuck.

quote:
And lets be clear

We've been waiting for you to do just that!

quote:
The words from Sony in no way constituted a design or a product of any kind.

They constitute "inspiration", or at least, Apple sure thought so.

quote:
only Google are much, much more informed and their stating that Samsung copied Apple

Did Google state that Samsung copied Apple, or did Google warn Samsung that Apple might try to bully them?

Oh noes, Apple doesn't bully! Apple is teh peace and teh loves of teh whole worlds!!

quote:
you state that Google is not a court of law as if arguing with some imaginary foe who had stated that they are?

Oh, if only you were imaginary, you stupid, stupid little boy. It would make me feel so much better knowing such imbecility couldn't actually exist.

I'm asking you what merit Google has on this case, and your response is that I don't have any, either. Except I'm not claiming any sort of authority. I'm just looking at the facts and comparing them to your delusions. And while your delusions certainly ARE very fanciful, they're just too incoherent to serve as the basis for... anything, really.

You still got that thing dangling in your hair.

quote:
If I say... 'none of them bear examples of prior art', does that constitute a valid argument to you?

You WOULD have to try something other than your tired denial, yes. Tell me how "rounded corners" haven't existed before. That's right, we'll start small so as to not overwhelm your brain cell.


The full quote
By Tony Swash on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: The full quote
By themaster08 on 7/28/2012 7:11:59 AM , Rating: 5
Apple did not design the iPhone. Sony did. Get over it.


RE: The full quote
By Tony Swash on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: The full quote
By themaster08 on 7/28/2012 9:25:14 AM , Rating: 5
Jobs may be considered as a genius in your deluded world, but I believe this sums up the whole thing perfectly:

http://www.smeggys.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=20523&f=1...


RE: The full quote
By distinctively on 7/28/2012 9:31:24 AM , Rating: 2
Nice find. Dennis Ritchie is definitely someone to be admired.


RE: The full quote
By bupkus on 7/29/2012 7:02:30 AM , Rating: 2
OMG. I hadn't heard.
I am genuinely stunned.

I remember reading his book about C back at ASU in the 80's when I was taking CS classes towards my BS.

[Checking Wiki]
How sad that he died alone... in New Jersey.

RIP, Dennis Richie. Although I never met you I know you from your works.


RE: The full quote
By distinctively on 7/28/2012 9:27:27 AM , Rating: 3
Ah yes, Tony. These sames dunces grouped together against Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. It seems that Jonathan Swift's statement is as vague as Apple's patents.

Your support for a such a sleazy company like Apple reminds me of all those who still believe that there is a carburetor that can achieve 100mpg. You simply believe what you want, regardless of rationality or reason. If you simply said that you like your iPhone and that Apple had some good ideas, that would be reasonable. Your implications that everyone stole everything from Apple is so unrealistic that you do nothing but embarrass yourself.


RE: The full quote
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2012 11:11:12 AM , Rating: 2
It's amusing he uses quotes all the time from people, when they have no bearing on the discussion at hand as if it somehow is going to make him seem more intelligent.

You also have to remember, Apple saved his life! It brought him back from the clutches of death from MS! They are his savior, his GOD, his HIGHER POWER. He has NOTHING else in life but total MISERY and FAILURE in my opinion but Apple.

It's quite pathetic.


RE: The full quote
By elleehswon on 7/28/2012 11:25:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's amusing he uses quotes all the time from people, when they have no bearing on the discussion at hand as if it somehow is going to make him seem more intelligent.


this.


RE: The full quote
By Tony Swash on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: The full quote
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2012 11:31:18 AM , Rating: 3
Coming from the biggest dunce here, you, not really.


RE: The full quote
By SPOOFE on 7/28/2012 5:16:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would have thought given some of the comments here that a quote about dunces was utterly apt.

Relevance to the subject at hand is more impressive than hiding behind some smarter dude's words.


RE: The full quote
By testerguy on 7/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: The full quote
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 4:45:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
every bit as blinded and biased
Right, because you aren't....

/me rolls eyes...


RE: The full quote
By x10Unit1 on 7/30/2012 12:21:30 PM , Rating: 2
Obligated to protect your patents? No, you aren't. In fact, patent trolls don't protect their patents until they can sue and make lots of money on them. Or companies will use patents to stop competition. Apple is not the only one doing this.

Off topic, if you haven't figured out that DT is "a little" anti-apple, you are an idiot. You and Tony trying to heard counter the entire DT community with your hateful/insulting comments doesn't help Apple, but rather hurts it.


RE: The full quote
By testerguy on 7/31/2012 3:15:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Obligated to protect your patents? No, you aren't.


Actually, yes you are, not only to your shareholders but also to validate the patents, it is legally necessary that you seek damages or bans if your patents are infringed upon. So your argument is simply 100% factually wrong.

quote:
Off topic, if you haven't figured out that DT is "a little" anti-apple, you are an idiot. You and Tony trying to heard counter the entire DT community with your hateful/insulting comments doesn't help Apple, but rather hurts it.


I wonder if someone can genuinely be so dumb to suggest that I, of all people, haven't observed the bias this site has towards Apple.

As for your evidently uneducated take on whether my comments do anything to 'help Apple' (not my goal) - not only are you an irrelevance - you also misunderstand my goals.

I correct inaccuracies, whether they are anti-Apple or anti-Android, I correct them. An educated reader will recognise that whilst reading (many silently). I don't aim to educate the biased idiots, and clearly I don't care of their opinion to bother changing their mind, but I allow impartial observers to gain a more accurate perspective.

Take your post for example. Someone who doesn't have a clue about law trying to state 'facts' which are simply 100% wrong. Without my intervention drivel such as yours would actually be believed by some.


RE: The full quote
By SPOOFE on 7/31/2012 4:46:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, yes you are, not only to your shareholders but also to validate the patents, it is legally necessary that you seek damages or bans if your patents are infringed upon.

Obligation to shareholders is profit. That's it. And NOT protecting patents can be profitable as he described. He didn't suggest IGNORING one's patents in perpetuity.

quote:
I correct inaccuracies,

Fighting fire with fire, eh? Go Team Apple!


RE: The full quote
By solarrocker on 7/28/2012 12:59:58 PM , Rating: 1
I was having a somewhat bad day, but your usual writings off garbage made me happy again. Thank you for being such a douche!


RE: The full quote
By drycrust3 on 7/28/2012 6:25:45 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Even so I wonder at the awful darkness of a mind that can type ["]Apple did not design the iPhone. Sony did"

I think exaggeration is getting the better of you. Maybe that is a sign of a dark mind.
So what's wrong with Apple having to admit it copied something from Sony? Isn't being to proud to admit that also a sign of a dark mind?


RE: The full quote
By testerguy on 7/29/2012 3:08:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think exaggeration is getting the better of you. Maybe that is a sign of a dark mind. So what's wrong with Apple having to admit it copied something from Sony? Isn't being to proud to admit that also a sign of a dark mind?


How ironic that you accuse someone of exaggeration yet in the same sentence state that Apple copied Sony.

The pictures you see with a Sony label on, were created and designed by Apple.

Not Sony.

While inspiration was taken from WORDS released by Sony, the design itself was 100% Apples. Thus, they didn't have anything to copy in the first place. Yet you state they did.


RE: The full quote
By SPOOFE on 7/31/2012 4:50:30 PM , Rating: 2
He didn't "state" that Apple copied Sony. See, look:

"So what's wrong with Apple having to admit it copied something from Sony?"

See that funny symbol at the end of the sentence? That's not just a cute design the Riddler thought up. We intelligent humans call that funny symbol a "question mark". The "question mark" denotes some sort of query.

And - now I know this may be a little too advanced for you, but give it a try - "statements" don't end with "question marks".

Hope this helps. Maybe your poor third-world homeschooled-by-a-cabbage education is the cause for your inability to communicate.


RE: The full quote
By bety on 7/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: The full quote
By TakinYourPoints on 7/28/12, Rating: 0
RE: The full quote
By web2dot0 on 7/30/2012 12:10:05 PM , Rating: 1
Smartphones existed before Apple came out with iPhone. Of course, Apple's design is "inspired" by its predecessor. That's what every new product does. Looking at existing designs and how to make it better.

You can say copy all you want .... but any person with a brain will tell you that when iPhone 1 came out, nobody said anything about them copying anybody because the phone provided features and packaging it in a way that was the most intriguing and unique product out there.

No one file lawsuits, so isn't that already pretty obvious? If you think you can make billions of dollars off Apple, wouldn't you file for patents?


RE: The full quote
By retrospooty on 7/30/2012 12:15:12 PM , Rating: 3
The point here isn't that Apple copies others, the point is that it DOES copy others just like all companies and is suing others who do exactly what Apple does (and all businesses do).

Apple blantanly copies others and adds to it and its perfectly fine... Others copy Apple and add to it and Apple sues. Look above in this comment section and you will see plenty of lists of things that Apple copied from Android with no litigation.


Give me an f'ing break.
By JackBurton on 7/28/12, Rating: -1
RE: Give me an f'ing break.
By distinctively on 7/28/2012 9:34:45 AM , Rating: 2
Considering the fact that Samsung digital picture frames appeared before the iPad, you're looking pretty ridiculous right now.


RE: Give me an f'ing break.
By BillyBatson on 7/28/2012 4:09:23 PM , Rating: 2
You sir need a new pair of reason glasses, it might help you understand what's really going on.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














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