What's new

Apple Gets $1 Billion From Samsung

When blackberry came out every phone started looking like one. There was no lawsuit then.

Anyway I really cannot think of another way to make a touchscreen product that does not end up looking like a square or rectangle. And Android is a google product. Samsung is not responsible for any IOS similarities.

Apple is going wild with lawsuits, there was a story about them suing an australian grocery chain.

Apple Sues Australian Grocery Store Over Logo

woolworthsapple_DV_20091005111957.jpg


Does that look like apples logo????
They trademarked the apple fruit??

Just wait and Apple will sue Mc Donalds for MAC
 
.
Apple is a sucks company and its greedy like where it came from a country which is only for assembler lines. Apple has stupid design with it stupid itunes so everytime you need to wipe old music or data to be able for 1 new song added.

Down with Apple !!! Samsung rocks solid !!!
 
. . .
Apple is a sucks company and its greedy like where it came from a country which is only for assembler lines. Apple has stupid design with it stupid itunes so everytime you need to wipe old music or data to be able for 1 new song added.

Down with Apple !!! Samsung rocks solid !!!

I dont think so. If I'm not mistaken, the Appe has changed the way we use phones.
However, technology is always moving forward too quickly....

Koreans were so cruel during the Vietnam War.

We know this. Prior to 1968, North Vietnamese army did not pay much attention to South Korea force, they only focused to deal with U.S army. It was a mistake of the Vietnamese....
 
.
It was obvious that Samsung was going to lose just by looking at how the trial proceeded.

Pretty Much all of the crucial evidences that Samsung has were suppressed for dumb reasons like being a bit late (but new evidences being admitted is pretty usual in a trial) and by having a stupid 25 hour limit on the trial right after combining Samsung's own lawsuit into Apple's one.

It's completely unfair to Samsung because it takes far more time to explain wireless technology patents in comparison to dumb patents on icons and rounded rectangles.

What makes it worse is that people today don't tend to appreciate TRUE scientific work as opposed to pretty design...especially in the US. Try to explain a 3G patent to an average American and he/she would fall asleep in 5 minutes but damn they sure do love pretty rectangles and icons.

What should happen is that Samsung would appeal and the case should be ruled as a mistrial...the judge was biased against Samsung from the get go, and you can't possibly expect a fair ruling from the average jury.

1 Billion for shapes and icons....no money for communications technology, bullsh*t.

P.S. No Chinese should celebrate this victory because it would affect them when one of their own mobile company expands in Europe/NA. Some of Huawei's phones are pretty damn good for the price but would have no chance of getting popular without Apple pulling tricks.
 
.
Absolutely shameless for Apple. The only reason they are suing Samsung is because Samsung is beating them in the smartphone market which prior to the arrival of Samsung Galaxy series Apple seemed to dominated. All I have to say it seems really desperate for Apple trying to pull a stunt like that rather. No wonder nowadays more and more people are buying Samsung Galaxy rather than blindly following the cult of apple. If this law suits stands than I see no reason why Stanley Kubrick should sue Apple for stole the idea of Newspad in his 1968 "2001 Space Odyssey" for Ipad.

I dont think so. If I'm not mistaken, the Appe has changed the way we use phones. However, technology is always moving forward too quickly....

I guess you never used any touch screen smart phone like HTC before the appearance of Iphone.
 
.
August 25, 2012

Verdict reached for Apple in Samsung case

US jury orders Samsung to pay Apple $1.05 billion for copying innovative technology used in iPhone and iPad

After a year of scorched-earth litigation, a jury decided on Friday that Samsung ripped off the innovative technology used by Apple to create its revolutionary iPhone and iPad.

The jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1.05 billion. An appeal is expected.

Apple Inc. filed its patent infringement lawsuit in April 2011 and engaged legions of the country's highest-paid patent lawyers to demand $2.5 billion from its top smartphone competitor. Samsung Electronics Co. fired back with its own lawsuit seeking $399 million.

But verdict, however, belonged to Apple, as the jury rejected all Samsung's claim against Apple.

Jurors also decided against some of Apple's claims involving the two dozen Samsung devices at issue, declining to award the full $2.5 billion Apple demanded.

However, the jury found that several Samsung products illegally used such Apple creations as the "bounce-back" feature when a user scrolls to an end image, and the ability to zoom text with a finger tap.

As part of its lawsuit, Apple also demanded that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the US market. A judge was expected to make that ruling at a later time.

During closing arguments at the trial, Apple attorney Harold McElhinny claimed Samsung was having a "crisis of design" after the 2007 launch of the iPhone, and executives with the South Korean company were determined to illegally cash in on the success of the revolutionary device.

Samsung's lawyers countered that it was simply and legally giving consumers what they want: Smart phones with big screens. They said Samsung didn't violate any of Apple's patents and further alleged innovations claimed by Apple were actually created by other companies.

Samsung has emerged as one of Apple's biggest rivals and has overtaken Apple as the leading smartphone maker.

Samsung's Galaxy line of phones run on Android, a mobile operating system that Google Inc. has given out for free to Samsung and other phone makers.

Samsung conceded that Apple makes great products but said it doesn't have a monopoly on the design of rectangle phones with rounded corners that it claimed it created.

Google entered the smartphone market while its then-CEO Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board, infuriating Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who considered Android to be a blatant rip off of the iPhone's innovations.

After shoving Schmidt off Apple's board, Jobs vowed that Apple would resort to "thermonuclear war" to destroy Android and its allies.

The Apple-Samsung trial in San Jose came after each side filed a blizzard of legal motions and refused advisories by US District Judge Lucy Koh to settle the dispute out of court. Deliberations by the jury of seven men and two women began Wednesday.

Samsung has sold 22.7 million smartphones and tablets that Apple claimed uses its technology. McElhinny said those devices accounted for $8.16 billion in sales since June 2010.

Apple and Samsung combined account for more than half of global smartphone sales.

From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts viewed Samsung as the underdog in the case. Apple's headquarters is a mere 10 miles from the courthouse, and jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where Apple's late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer.

While the legal and technological issues were complex, patent expert Alexander I. Poltorak previously said the case would likely boil down to whether jurors believed Samsung's products look and feel almost identical to Apple's iPhone and iPad.

To overcome that challenge at trial, Samsung's lawyers argued that many of Apple's claims of innovation were either obvious concepts or ideas stolen from Sony Corp. and others. Experts called that line of argument a high-risk strategy because of Apple's reputation as an innovator.

Apple's lawyers argued there is almost no difference between Samsung products and those of Apple, and presented internal Samsung documents they said showed it copied Apple designs. Samsung lawyers insisted that several other companies and inventors had previously developed much of the Apple technology at issue.

The US trial is just the latest skirmish between the two tech giants over product designs. Apple and Samsung have filed similar lawsuits in eight other countries, including South Korea, Germany, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, Britain, France and Australia.

Samsung won a home court ruling on Friday in the global patent battle against Apple.

Judges in Seoul said Samsung didn't copy the look and feel of the iPhone and ruled that Apple infringed on Samsung's wireless technology.

However, the judges also said Samsung violated Apple's technology behind the feature that causes a screen to bounce back when a user scrolls to an end image. Both sides were ordered to pay limited damages.

The Seoul ruling was a rare victory for Samsung in its fight with Apple, whose arguments previously have been shot down by courts in Europe, where judges have ruled that they are part of industry standards that must be licensed under fair terms to competitors.

The US case is one of some 50 lawsuits among myriad telecommunications companies jockeying for position in the burgeoning $219 billion market for smartphones and computer tablets.

Verdict reached for Apple in Samsung case | GulfNews.com

--------------

So now the company which first launched LCD TVs (thin body) can sue all other TV manufacturers who used thin body for their LCD, LED, Smart Tvs. as they look similar to the first product.

Also laptops, the first company which produced laptop can sue all laptop manufacturers as it's unique innovative design (keyboard and mouse sensor, and a small flat screen attached) have been stolen by other laptop manufacturers.

Syringes: the first company that produced syringes can sue all companies that manufacture syringes as they copied the innovative design of their syringe and used it "illegally without permission"

Refrigerators: the first company that produced it can sue all fridge manufacturer for using their innovative design

Well there are many things we use everyday are copied by a company from the first company that produced it, Lawsuits, it's is a whole new world out there to earn money by some manufacturers.
 
.
I dont think so. If I'm not mistaken, the Appe has changed the way we use phones.
However, technology is always moving forward too quickly....

Apple did change the way we use phones, and they deserved to be compensated for that. But that already happened for years, Apple now has over 60 billion in cash and is the biggest company in the world.

The original intent of the patent system was to shield SMALL inventors who have brilliant ideas but don't have the resources to turn their idea into reality at a scale large enough that they can make a decent profit without someone else stealing their idea first.

It's not meant to shield corporations so that they can make 100 billions rather than 60 billions.
 
. .

Kubrick's collaborator on "2001," the science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke, called the device in the story a "Newspad," and in the book version of "2001" described how a user "would conjure up the world's major electronic papers; he knew the codes of the more important ones by heart, and had no need to consult the list on the back of his pad." He went on: punch in the code for a story and "the postage-stamp-size rectangle would expand until it neatly filled the screen and he could read it in comfort."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
. . .
August 25, 2012

Verdict reached for Apple in Samsung case

US jury orders Samsung to pay Apple $1.05 billion for copying innovative technology used in iPhone and iPad

After a year of scorched-earth litigation, a jury decided on Friday that Samsung ripped off the innovative technology used by Apple to create its revolutionary iPhone and iPad.

The jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1.05 billion. An appeal is expected.

Apple Inc. filed its patent infringement lawsuit in April 2011 and engaged legions of the country's highest-paid patent lawyers to demand $2.5 billion from its top smartphone competitor. Samsung Electronics Co. fired back with its own lawsuit seeking $399 million.

But verdict, however, belonged to Apple, as the jury rejected all Samsung's claim against Apple.

Jurors also decided against some of Apple's claims involving the two dozen Samsung devices at issue, declining to award the full $2.5 billion Apple demanded.

However, the jury found that several Samsung products illegally used such Apple creations as the "bounce-back" feature when a user scrolls to an end image, and the ability to zoom text with a finger tap.

As part of its lawsuit, Apple also demanded that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the US market. A judge was expected to make that ruling at a later time.

During closing arguments at the trial, Apple attorney Harold McElhinny claimed Samsung was having a "crisis of design" after the 2007 launch of the iPhone, and executives with the South Korean company were determined to illegally cash in on the success of the revolutionary device.

Samsung's lawyers countered that it was simply and legally giving consumers what they want: Smart phones with big screens. They said Samsung didn't violate any of Apple's patents and further alleged innovations claimed by Apple were actually created by other companies.

Samsung has emerged as one of Apple's biggest rivals and has overtaken Apple as the leading smartphone maker.

Samsung's Galaxy line of phones run on Android, a mobile operating system that Google Inc. has given out for free to Samsung and other phone makers.

Samsung conceded that Apple makes great products but said it doesn't have a monopoly on the design of rectangle phones with rounded corners that it claimed it created.

Google entered the smartphone market while its then-CEO Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board, infuriating Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who considered Android to be a blatant rip off of the iPhone's innovations.

After shoving Schmidt off Apple's board, Jobs vowed that Apple would resort to "thermonuclear war" to destroy Android and its allies.

The Apple-Samsung trial in San Jose came after each side filed a blizzard of legal motions and refused advisories by US District Judge Lucy Koh to settle the dispute out of court. Deliberations by the jury of seven men and two women began Wednesday.

Samsung has sold 22.7 million smartphones and tablets that Apple claimed uses its technology. McElhinny said those devices accounted for $8.16 billion in sales since June 2010.

Apple and Samsung combined account for more than half of global smartphone sales.

From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts viewed Samsung as the underdog in the case. Apple's headquarters is a mere 10 miles from the courthouse, and jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where Apple's late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer.

While the legal and technological issues were complex, patent expert Alexander I. Poltorak previously said the case would likely boil down to whether jurors believed Samsung's products look and feel almost identical to Apple's iPhone and iPad.

To overcome that challenge at trial, Samsung's lawyers argued that many of Apple's claims of innovation were either obvious concepts or ideas stolen from Sony Corp. and others. Experts called that line of argument a high-risk strategy because of Apple's reputation as an innovator.

Apple's lawyers argued there is almost no difference between Samsung products and those of Apple, and presented internal Samsung documents they said showed it copied Apple designs. Samsung lawyers insisted that several other companies and inventors had previously developed much of the Apple technology at issue.

The US trial is just the latest skirmish between the two tech giants over product designs. Apple and Samsung have filed similar lawsuits in eight other countries, including South Korea, Germany, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, Britain, France and Australia.

Samsung won a home court ruling on Friday in the global patent battle against Apple.

Judges in Seoul said Samsung didn't copy the look and feel of the iPhone and ruled that Apple infringed on Samsung's wireless technology.

However, the judges also said Samsung violated Apple's technology behind the feature that causes a screen to bounce back when a user scrolls to an end image. Both sides were ordered to pay limited damages.

The Seoul ruling was a rare victory for Samsung in its fight with Apple, whose arguments previously have been shot down by courts in Europe, where judges have ruled that they are part of industry standards that must be licensed under fair terms to competitors.

The US case is one of some 50 lawsuits among myriad telecommunications companies jockeying for position in the burgeoning $219 billion market for smartphones and computer tablets.

Verdict reached for Apple in Samsung case | GulfNews.com

--------------

So now the company which first launched LCD TVs (thin body) can sue all other TV manufacturers who used thin body for their LCD, LED, Smart Tvs. as they look similar to the first product.

Also laptops, the first company which produced laptop can sue all laptop manufacturers as it's unique innovative design (keyboard and mouse sensor, and a small flat screen attached) have been stolen by other laptop manufacturers.

Syringes: the first company that produced syringes can sue all companies that manufacture syringes as they copied the innovative design of their syringe and used it "illegally without permission"

Refrigerators: the first company that produced it can sue all fridge manufacturer for using their innovative design

Well there are many things we use everyday are copied by a company from the first company that produced it, Lawsuits, it's is a whole new world out there to earn money by some manufacturers.

Apple just saw opportunity to earn a quick buck plus the law supports it! I am against total patenting ESPECIALLY when it comes to medicines and even when it comes to this (electronics)...Partial patents like patenting the idea is fine...But patenting each chip, each chemical as though its yours is ridiculous! Many people can come up with similar designs! It just helps people monopolize..

I mean seriously its a consumer market if you sell something for $100 and someone else can sell it to you for $50 who would go for the $100 product? Not EVERYONE is ****** rich and robbing banks!

My point is that touch screen smart phone like HTC's existed way before the creation of Iphone, but why does people need Apple to teach them to appreciate it? I can only say that Apple has a better PR department than the rest.

Apple just saw opportunity to earn a quick buck plus the law supports it!
 
.
Never liked Samsung anyways, too plasticy! Apple products do have quality, must give credit where it's due.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom