Apple Doesn't Need Samsung Anymore

3 Pages
1
2
3
→

You cannot start a new topic
You cannot reply to this topic

Apple Doesn't Need Samsung Anymore

#1 PCWorld

Advanced Member

Group: PCWorld BOT
Posts: 104,601
Joined: 01-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 01:46 PM

Post your comments for Apple Doesn't Need Samsung Anymore here

#2 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:05 PM

IMHO, the Community Design that the injunction is based on fits the Tab to a tee. The CD is remarkably vague, just a rectangular-ish portable computer with a bezel and a 30-pin docking port in the middle of one edge (btw- I realize the port is technically different between the two products, but this is purely about physical form factor). But unless it can be shown that something already existed in the hand-held computing category, Apple will own the form factor for 25 years. Looking at the latest Galaxy phone, I think Samsung will have and even harder uphill battle.

#3 linuxrants7xpg

Expert

Group: Members
Posts: 1,866
Joined: 11-May 11
Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:28 PM

Apple may be trying to get rid of Samsung, but it's looking like it could be more of a "I wish I knew how to quit you" situation than Apple likes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.linuxrants.com
http://twitter.com/linuxrants
http://facebook.com/linuxrants
Google+

"42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot."
— Steven Wright

"Dawn: When men of reason go to bed."
— Ambrose Bierce

Spoiler

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

#4 ahumanbean

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 222
Joined: 09-May 08

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:29 PM

This lawsuit is plain stupid and Apple will loose. They are just angry that Samsung is doing such a good job competing against them by putting out better phones and tablets. Apple will likely be using Samsung components for eons to come.

#5 linuxrants7xpg

Expert

Group: Members
Posts: 1,866
Joined: 11-May 11
Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:30 PM

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 02:05 PM, said:

I can't say for sure, but I'm expecting Apple to get beaten down based on prior art. I could be wrong though.

Spoiler

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

#6 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:40 PM

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 02:30 PM, said:

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 02:05 PM, said:

I can't say for sure, but I'm expecting Apple to get beaten down based on prior art. I could be wrong though.

From my understanding, prior art in this case only qualifies if the product was available to the public. For example, a graphic designer can't get injunctions against companies' products simply because they have sketches of similar looking products in their portfolio from years ago.

Interestingly, though, an aquarium manufacturer had their CD ruled invalid when somebody produced an old magazine that advertised a similar looking aquarium in the past.

#7 mrwhite

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 400
Joined: 11-November 08

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:49 PM

ahumanbean, on 11 August 2011 - 02:29 PM, said:

LOL better products, Apple is suing them because their products look "exaclty" like an iPhone or iPad. If they are better, then maybe should design something that doesn't look like an Apple product. It's called common sense. Heck, even their UI is taken from the iPhone, again, why they are being sued. Research man, research. Don't make comments blindly because your a Fandroid.

#8 linuxrants7xpg

Expert

Group: Members
Posts: 1,866
Joined: 11-May 11
Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 11 August 2011 - 03:17 PM

mrwhite, on 11 August 2011 - 02:49 PM, said:

If Apple is suing Samsung because their products look "exaclty" alike, then someone at Apple needs a very good optometrist.

Posted Image

Spoiler

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

#9 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 03:30 PM

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 03:17 PM, said:

If Apple is suing Samsung because their products look "exaclty" alike, then someone at Apple needs a very good optometrist.

I won't get into the 'which is better' discussion. I just want to clarify what the Community Design specifies, which is:

http://www.studiogeo...hil/ipad-cd.png

That's it! It doesn't even specify the color of the bezel.

BTW- That's CD 000181607-0001

#10 linuxrants7xpg

Expert

Group: Members
Posts: 1,866
Joined: 11-May 11
Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 11 August 2011 - 03:34 PM

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 03:30 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 03:17 PM, said:

If Apple is suing Samsung because their products look "exaclty" alike, then someone at Apple needs a very good optometrist.

This isn't really a "which is better" conversation I don't think. Personally, the first time a lawyer walks into court and pulls the monitor off of a laptop and hands it to the judge, I think this farce will be over. As I said before, I could be wrong.

Spoiler

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

#11 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 03:56 PM

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 03:34 PM, said:

This isn't really a "which is better" conversation I don't think.

Right, I'm just saying that I'm not trying to flame bait or troll here. Just discussing. :')

Quote

Personally, the first time a lawyer walks into court and pulls the monitor off of a laptop and hands it to the judge, I think this farce will be over. As I said before, I could be wrong.

It would have to fall under the "Handheld computer" category is the thing. A laptop display isn't self powered, nor does it have the guts to function as a computer.

#12 crosswordbob

Veteran

Group: Members
Posts: 5,031
Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:09 PM

It's an interesting notion, and not one I would claim to be any more or less likely than any other scenario, but if the theory in this article is correct, it could indicate an alternative explanation for Apple's recent litigious aggression: not because they are becoming scared of the competition, but because they're no longer scared of the fall-out it could/will cause in terms of future supply contracts.

Before I'm flamed for suggesting it, I'm only offering food for thought.

If I dispute one single point in a post, that should not be taken as an indication that I agree/disagree with any other point made by that poster or anyone else in the thread. Or anywhere else. Ever.

#13 Nuke61

Expert

Group: Members
Posts: 2,495
Joined: 09-June 09
Location:San Diego

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:28 PM

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 03:30 PM, said:

I won't get into the 'which is better' discussion. I just want to clarify what the Community Design specifies, which is:
http://www.studiogeo...hil/ipad-cd.png

That's it! It doesn't even specify the color of the bezel.

BTW- That's CD 000181607-0001

If that's all Apple needs to show, no wonder Samsung was stopped. It seems that all Apple did was specify a general shape and proportion of their product. As such, they don't need to look exactly alike, just similar enough.

2.93GHz i7 w/12 gigs, 27" IPS @2560x1440 and 23 IPS @1920x1080 fed by an ATI HD 5750
stock Droid Incredible 2
supercharged Z06 Corvette, now with 608 RWHP<evil laugh>
other toys :-)

#14 linuxrants7xpg

Expert

Group: Members
Posts: 1,866
Joined: 11-May 11
Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:32 PM

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 03:56 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 03:34 PM, said:

Personally, the first time a lawyer walks into court and pulls the monitor off of a laptop and hands it to the judge, I think this farce will be over. As I said before, I could be wrong.

It would have to fall under the "Handheld computer" category is the thing. A laptop display isn't self powered, nor does it have the guts to function as a computer.

I'm not a lawyer, so there are certainly things in play here that I don't understand. I can say that to me, there is very little difference in "design" between a laptop monitor and what we see in CD 000181607-0001. Also, it appears to me that CD 000181607-0001 is extremely vague. Would something so vague ever stand up in court?

Also, it begs the question, how can Apple claim this design when it's so obvious that it's appeared before?

This post has been edited by linuxrants7xpg: 11 August 2011 - 04:34 PM

Spoiler

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

#15 crosswordbob

Veteran

Group: Members
Posts: 5,031
Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:45 PM

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 04:32 PM, said:

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 03:56 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 03:34 PM, said:

Personally, the first time a lawyer walks into court and pulls the monitor off of a laptop and hands it to the judge, I think this farce will be over. As I said before, I could be wrong.

It would have to fall under the "Handheld computer" category is the thing. A laptop display isn't self powered, nor does it have the guts to function as a computer.

The design specifically states "Handheld computer", so I guess a monitor doesn't apply. No comment on other questions.

If I dispute one single point in a post, that should not be taken as an indication that I agree/disagree with any other point made by that poster or anyone else in the thread. Or anywhere else. Ever.

#16 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:50 PM

Nuke61, on 11 August 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 03:30 PM, said:

I won't get into the 'which is better' discussion. I just want to clarify what the Community Design specifies, which is:
http://www.studiogeo...hil/ipad-cd.png

That's it! It doesn't even specify the color of the bezel.

BTW- That's CD 000181607-0001

That's all they need, *however* being so vague means that it is easier to prove prior art.

#17 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 05:05 PM

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 04:32 PM, said:

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 03:56 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 11 August 2011 - 03:34 PM, said:

Personally, the first time a lawyer walks into court and pulls the monitor off of a laptop and hands it to the judge, I think this farce will be over. As I said before, I could be wrong.

It would have to fall under the "Handheld computer" category is the thing. A laptop display isn't self powered, nor does it have the guts to function as a computer.

Sorry, I didn't catch your video earlier, I thought you were referencing something from a Knight Rider episode. ;') Boy, isn't that remarkable how they predicted the future tablet reader craze?

A few problems with this: Knight Ridder had to have actually produced such a product that was available to the public to be prior art in this case. I couldn't find any evidence of that in my searches, but maybe somebody else has? Knight Ridder has applied for zero CDs in my searches, but they do hold some patents. Also, the form factor isn't quite spot on, and they continually categorize it as a digital reader, not a tablet computer.

#18 xvMATTLEEvx

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 247
Joined: 14-March 11

Posted 11 August 2011 - 05:06 PM

And the cheap fandroids need to understand no single Android tablet is a threat to the iPad. Hell all the Android Tablets combined still trail the iPad. And Fandroids, Android is an OS not a phone in essence there isn't a single Android phone that outsells the iPhone 4 and there isn't a single Android tablet that outsells the iPad. I'm almost willing to bet the iPhone 4 outsells the top 5 Android phones by itself. No the only way Fandroids can make Android look better is take all the Android phones combined and compare it to a single product. Hell iOS has more users than Android and that is why Android users don't compare Android with iOS but instead with an individual iOS product.

#19 edelbrp

Advanced Member

Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 19-August 07

Posted 11 August 2011 - 05:27 PM

crosswordbob, on 11 August 2011 - 04:09 PM, said:

Often the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing. I was doing an e-com site for a local cellular company (back when there were smaller companies, it has now since been bought successively to being part of Verizon these days), anyways, I was hired and served a cease-and-desist shortly after for using their brand.

Another example is when Sony Entertainment sued the consumer electronics division of... (wait for it)... Sony over the digital transfer and copying of music.

I doubt Samsung will deny Apple access to their semiconductors division, if for nothing else than the world's largest buyer of flash memory is Apple, and they buy those chips form Samsung, I thing Samsung is also their fab for Apple's "A#" processor chips? Anyways, if an iPad or a Galaxy sells, they make money.

#20 crosswordbob

Veteran

Group: Members
Posts: 5,031
Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 11 August 2011 - 05:57 PM

edelbrp, on 11 August 2011 - 05:27 PM, said:

crosswordbob, on 11 August 2011 - 04:09 PM, said:

In all honesty, this perspective gels most with how I envisage the whole mess (see, for example, this slightly out-of-date but fascinating graphic). It just looks to me like a legal team is something tech companies need, but have little control over, playing their own private games with each other while the rest of the companies carry on with their day-to-day operations.

That may be vastly over-simplifying matters, but as a complete outsider to these things, it's the impression I get.

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 11 August 2011 - 05:58 PM

If I dispute one single point in a post, that should not be taken as an indication that I agree/disagree with any other point made by that poster or anyone else in the thread. Or anywhere else. Ever.