IarrthoirFirinne, on 28 April 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:
CaniblCat, on 28 April 2012 - 12:59 PM, said:
As hilarious as this is, if Samsung really did orchestrate it, then they went too far.
If not, though, kudos to those who did!
doesn't matter if samsung did orchestrate it or not they have right to be heard and protest against another company stealing there patents and/or ideas and if apple is stealing idea's from other company's then it need to be dealt with accordingly. If your not part of apple either be co-worker owner or inventor how do you know they didn't steal Samsung's idea or vi-versa other way around..... it was defiantly well rehearsed I personally hope apple get's the crap sued out them because they over-priced compromised piece of crap that has more glitches then my spelling.. lol
You really have to ask who is stealing from whom. The answer becomes somewhat obvious when you consider that Samsung is Apple's primary parts supplier and that Apple's phones and tablets have used Samsung's displays and certain other components almost exclusively now for five years. Strangely, it took more than two years before Samsung started succeeding with their designs and nearly every one of them looks very similar to Apple's own products. It's almost obvious that Samsung managed to analyze existing iPhone models and copy the circuitry well enough to make a phone that's almost iPhone enough to be the iPhone itself. Having that inside track on Apple's parts thus makes it easy for them to release a new Galaxy phone within months of Apple's own releases but never quite easy enough to leapfrog Apple's concepts. What Samsung hasn't been able to do, however, is copy Apple's ecosystem that ties the iPhone, the iPad and the Mac computers together so seamlessly, so despite the fact that Android is at least as capable as iOS, their Android-based phones simply cannot keep up with Apple's progress.
So, you are right up to a point; people need to invent their own devices if they want to compete with someone. It seems Apple produced this particular type of product line first and they at least attempted to get all the licenses they needed to remain legal with their products. They either used their own designs for specific features or bought the companies that created the features they needed. Their touch screen technologies ran at least a year in advance over the next nearest capable product. Their touch patterns--multitouch as it were--were created by two professors at the University of Delaware, where they created a company to market it and Apple purchased that company. Where Apple had to rely on patented components, Apple did everything it could to ensure those patents were covered--and defended themselves when one company tried to say that even though Apple was using a component by a licensed manufacturer, Apple was accountable for the secondary use of that patent--in other words despite the radio for the wireless network was covered in itself, the end product also had to pay a licensing fee. The courts ended up saying, "No. If the manufacturer of the component is paying the license, the downstream user is covered by that payment.
So who, really, is playing the patent game legitimately? Who, really, is ripping off whom?
Oh, and who's devices are really overpriced? If people are willing to pay Apple's prices, then they must believe they're getting their money's worth. You certainly don't see a lot of people returning them and asking for refunds.