Help
Post your comments for Apple, Samsung Wage Battle Both In and Out of Court here
Apple, Samsung Wage Battle Both In And Out Of Court
#2
JeffCanning 
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:18 AM
Apple has been copying intellectual property works of other companies since the beginning. It's about time this company was given a bloody nose since they have become a bunch of corporate bullies in the technology landscape.
#3
tracker141
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:26 AM
What does Apple think a smartphone should look like, we could say the HTC Thunderbolt is a "square object with rounded corners" or the Motorola Bionic and so on. Apple you just have to accept that you can't own the world.
#4
kervskervs
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:30 AM
i just don't understand the legal process. This is about common sense and it seems the that legal process nowadays just goes against just that.
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
#5
GlennWelt
- Member
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 22-November 11
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:33 AM
I agree 100000% with Jeff Canning. Just watch any number of films like 2001 Space Odyssey and you'll see where Apple REALLY may have gotten some of it's design ideas! BULLIES DESERVE WHAT THEY EVENTUALLY GET!
#6
bfreesun
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 05-July 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:43 AM
I had an O2 Smartphone in 2004 which greatly resembled the first iPhone. Indeed Addison Lee used them as sat nav for their cabs before the iPhone even appeared. Don't know about anyone else but I'm fed up with this childish litigation
#7
bfreesun
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 05-July 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:44 AM
kervskervs, on 04 August 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:
i just don't understand the legal process. This is about common sense and it seems the that legal process nowadays just goes against just that.
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
#8
bfreesun
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 05-July 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:46 AM
kervskervs, on 04 August 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:
i just don't understand the legal process. This is about common sense and it seems the that legal process nowadays just goes against just that.
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
The US justice system seems to be more interested in procedure than justice. Proof of innocence is not a reason to stop an execution if the correct procedures have been followed. Go figure
#9
RichardBentley
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:57 AM
I hate Apple. They have used every trick in the book to take advantage of customers, vendors, and competing companies.
#12
JohnTemple
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 01:18 PM
Apple has long enjoyed the mystic of being more special than it really is. It will be beneficial to consumers and for the advancement of technology, when the manufacturers of cell phones are evaluated for the functions they are able to perform, rather then the hype they are able to create.
#13
TroyGrowden
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 01:43 PM
This whole fights is bordering on on a bad reality tv show for its stupidity and wast of public time and money. They are phones / tablets people. They are going to look pretty similar when they have the same functionality - touch screens, speakers, microphones, etc. What other realistic configurations are there? Put the speakers infront of the touch screen? Dual fold out screens (whoops - Nintendo would jump in then)? Why arent Nokia and every other company being hit with the same lawsuits? Poor old Apple isnt happy with its huge market share and bloated prices, and now Samsung is threating this dominance with some decent devices (face it Apple - Android phones are the real competition).
Honestly, is this the sort of rubbish that ties up court systems these days?
Honestly, is this the sort of rubbish that ties up court systems these days?
#14
FredGehelmiholtzenstein
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 02:42 PM
bfreesun, on 04 August 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:
I had an O2 Smartphone in 2004 which greatly resembled the first iPhone. Indeed Addison Lee used them as sat nav for their cabs before the iPhone even appeared. Don't know about anyone else but I'm fed up with this childish litigation
I just searched the web for O2 phone designs. None of them are all-glass screens. They uniformly have physical buttons and controls. And they don't have the Apple-designed icons either. But Samsung's models copied the icons verbatim.
#15
crosswordbob
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,031
- Joined: 25-June 10
Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:04 PM
kervskervs, on 04 August 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:
i just don't understand the legal process. This is about common sense and it seems the that legal process nowadays just goes against just that.
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
I as a end user want to know the truth. Why is the Judge refusing the Jury from having full knowledge to make a proper judgement? Why is she deliberately causing the outcome of the case to become biased base on half information? Yes, it was late but that SHOULD not stop the truth from coming out. It is a waste of the tax payer money and time to retrial. It is a waste of resources and the System is FAULTY!!
Both sides had ample time to log evidence during discovery, which exists to ensure that neither side can spring evidence on the other without giving them opportunity to construct a response. If Samsung felt these exhibits were essential to their case, why didn't they produce it at the appropriate time? Could it be that they knew, given time, that Apple could refute the claims they are making about the exhibits, so are merely trying to catch them off their guard with late evidence? The documents in question are from around 2006; Samsung have no-one but themselves to blame for not presenting them at the right time if they actually wanted to rely on them.
Alternatively, could it be that they don't even care about the exhibits themselves, but are deliberately advertising "evidence" that they know will be inadmissible simply to portray the impression that we/the jury are only hearing half the story? It seems to have convinced a few folks round here...
This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 04 August 2012 - 03:06 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.
#16
RichardBentley
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 04-August 12
Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:47 PM
FredGehelmiholtzenstein, on 04 August 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:
bfreesun, on 04 August 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:
I had an O2 Smartphone in 2004 which greatly resembled the first iPhone. Indeed Addison Lee used them as sat nav for their cabs before the iPhone even appeared. Don't know about anyone else but I'm fed up with this childish litigation
I just searched the web for O2 phone designs. None of them are all-glass screens. They uniformly have physical buttons and controls. And they don't have the Apple-designed icons either. But Samsung's models copied the icons verbatim.
This goes back to the Mac and the little clock icon. This is a demonstration of just how stupid patent rules are. Glass screen are patentable?? Icons are patentable?? A patent at that level is totally absurd, and results in companies like Rolls Royce (whose automobile is now owned by Volkswagon) is always out scouting for someone using their icon, or even the term "-----, the Rolls Royce of ------. Apple is the single most anally proprietary (and arrogant) company I have dealt with. Which is why I have nothing to do with their products (even Quicktime). The patent law allows companies like Apple to troll for frivolous lawsuits and make money doing it. A good example of how stupid patent and copyright laws are is the fact that no book published since 1922 is in the public domain, by law. Software and hardware should have patent expiration dates, and reasonable ones, similar to pharmaceuticals which become generic after a set time. Defending Apple's arguments only continues the ludicrous behavior of the entire intellectual property laws. Both copyright and patent law need to be totally restructured to limit the frivolous and irresponsible behavior of companies that pursue patent lawsuits.
#17
TsarNikky
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 335
- Joined: 18-April 08
Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:56 PM
JeffCanning, on 04 August 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:
Apple has been copying intellectual property works of other companies since the beginning. It's about time this company was given a bloody nose since they have become a bunch of corporate bullies in the technology landscape.
That will be difficult to do, as the Apple files in Judge Koh's jurisdiction. She has a documented pro-Apple bias. So, the first time around is a pro-format exercise. It is on appeal that the "real" decision will be rendered. There, the designs that Apple took from other companies who (for whatever reason) chose to not exploit them become apparent.
#18
crosswordbob
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,031
- Joined: 25-June 10
Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:58 PM
RichardBentley, on 04 August 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:
FredGehelmiholtzenstein, on 04 August 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:
bfreesun, on 04 August 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:
I had an O2 Smartphone in 2004 which greatly resembled the first iPhone. Indeed Addison Lee used them as sat nav for their cabs before the iPhone even appeared. Don't know about anyone else but I'm fed up with this childish litigation
I just searched the web for O2 phone designs. None of them are all-glass screens. They uniformly have physical buttons and controls. And they don't have the Apple-designed icons either. But Samsung's models copied the icons verbatim.
This goes back to the Mac and the little clock icon. This is a demonstration of just how stupid patent rules are. Glass screen are patentable?? Icons are patentable??
No, they are not. Whole designs, however, are. So while there is nothing stopping you designing something that shares certain aspects of Apple's design—including flat glass fronts and icons—equally, a previous design that omits certain aspects of Apple's cannot be used to invalidate it, which is the point Fred was making.
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.
#19
TsarNikky
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 335
- Joined: 18-April 08
Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:58 PM
tracker141, on 04 August 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
What does Apple think a smartphone should look like, we could say the HTC Thunderbolt is a "square object with rounded corners" or the Motorola Bionic and so on. Apple you just have to accept that you can't own the world.
Microsoft...take notice. You, too, have accept that you can't own the world. [Look back in history at all those companies who thought they "ruled the world," and ended up not so and their current mere shadow of their former selves.]
#20
crosswordbob
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,031
- Joined: 25-June 10
Posted 04 August 2012 - 04:00 PM
TsarNikky, on 04 August 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:
JeffCanning, on 04 August 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:
Apple has been copying intellectual property works of other companies since the beginning. It's about time this company was given a bloody nose since they have become a bunch of corporate bullies in the technology landscape.
That will be difficult to do, as the Apple files in Judge Koh's jurisdiction. She has a documented pro-Apple bias. So, the first time around is a pro-format exercise. It is on appeal that the "real" decision will be rendered. There, the designs that Apple took from other companies who (for whatever reason) chose to not exploit them become apparent.
By "documented" I assume you mean "blogged about by people with anti-Apple bias", yes?
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.
