Apple successfully sues Samsung for over $1bn

[Shaun]

A US jury has ruled that Samsung should pay Apple $1.05bn (£665m) in damages in an intellectual property lawsuit.

It said several of Samsung's devices had infringed Apple's software and design patents.

The jury rejected Samsung's claims that several of its patents had been breached and awarded it no damages.

Apple may seek an import ban of some of its rival's products, blocking them from the US market. Based on previous cases, Samsung is likely to appeal.

The two firms account for more than half of global smartphone and tablet computer sales.

The nine-person jury at the federal court in San Jose, California had to consider 700 questions about each sides' claim that its rival had infringed its intellectual property.

It deliberated for less than three days before coming to its unanimous decisions.

It rejected the South Korean firm's claim that Apple's intellectual properties were invalid. It added that Samsung was "wilful in its infringement" in many of the cases.

Not all of Apple's claims were upheld.

The iPhone maker had claimed a total of $2.5bn (£1.6bn) in damages. Samsung had sought $519m.

Apple said it applauded the court "for finding Samsung's behaviour wilful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn't right."

Samsung has described the verdict as a "loss for the American consumer".

The jury ruled that some of Samsung's handsets, including its Galaxy S 4G model, had infringed Apple's design patents for the look of of its iPhone including the system it uses to display text and icons.

However, it dismissed the allegation that the South Korean firm's tablets had infringed the rectangular design used for Apple's iPad.

It also found that all the disputed Samsung devices had copied the bounce-back response in the iOS system's user interface, without paying a licence. This makes lists jump back as if yanked by a rubber band when pulled beyond their limit.

Another infringement involved use of Apple's tap-to-zoom feature.

Samsung failed to convince the jury Apple owed it money for using technologies it claims to own including listening to music on a device in the background while carrying out another task; and integrating a phone, digital camera and email facility into a single device.

Michael Gartenburg, research director at Gartner, said the verdict could have major ramifications for the wider smart device sector.

"Apple patents being upheld will force the rest of the industry to both innovation and differentiation," he told the BBC.

"That will be a good thing for consumers in the long run. Anyone who was even thinking about borrowing a technology or design from Apple will think twice about it now.

"Apple's point was that it was possible to create an experience that doesn't look like its designs and only Nokia and RIM Blackberry are really doing that right now."

There has been a spate of lawsuits involving mobile-device makers, but this case had been viewed as one of the most significant to date.

This is because of the size of the damages involved, the likelihood it will influence the way future patent licenses are handled, and the insights it has given into both Apple and Samsung's working practices.

Samsung's offending handsets have since been replaced with updates.

But Apple may use this ruling to seek import bans on some of the current generation of devices powered by Google's Android software - made by Samsung and others - that it believes replicate elements of its user-interface.

No respect for Apple whatsoever. Will stop at nothing to force every competitor into bankruptcy.

[Mrluvaluva]

And the jury were apparently picked from an area about 10 miles away from Apples headquarters. This is not a victory for the consumer. This just reinforces Apple's monopoly.

[Jords]

I like Apple goods but this doesnt seem very fair.

[Shaun]

patenting a "multi touch screen"... not long before they try to claim they invented sound.

[Tom4784]

Apple is a ****ty company, Macs are overstylised pieces of **** that aren't worth the plastic they're encased in and their line of ipods and the like have just become a joke.

[lostalex]

It seems completely fair to me. Samsung absolutely has been coping Apple, the Samsung phones and their tablets are almost identical copies.

Why shouldn't Samsung be punished for copying Apple? We don't allow people copying designer clothing and handbags and shoes, so why should we allow people copying electronic products?? Samsungs products look almost EXACTLY the same. If i was Apple i'd be pissed off too.

The jury made the right call on this one.

[arista]

And the jury were apparently picked from an area about 10 miles away from Apples headquarters. This is not a victory for the consumer. This just reinforces Apple's monopoly.


That stinks


Samsung should have Won but they are South Korea based.

[Jake.]

Pathetic result, but then again Apple have never liked having competition.

[lostalex]

Pathetic result, but then again Apple have never liked having competition.

Samsung is not competition, they are just cheap knock-offs.

If Samsung wants to compete with Apple why don't they make their own innovative products? Why do they only come out with cheap knockoffs a couple of months after Apple?

[Jake.]

Samsung is not competition, they are just cheap knock-offs.

If Samsung wants to compete with Apple why don't they make their own innovative products? Why do they only come out with cheap knockoffs a couple of months after Apple?

Knock-off? Samsung is one the 'daddy's' of electrical products, and they clearly are competition judging by how fast their smartphones sell. Apple don't like competition, just look at Android. Steve Jobs wanted to get rid of that, all because the software was helping other phome companies sell their smartphones.

[Apple202]

lmao i saw this title and thought you were all talking about me :joker:

[lostalex]

Knock-off? Samsung is one the 'daddy's' of electrical products, and they clearly are competition judging by how fast their smartphones sell. Apple don't like competition, just look at Android. Steve Jobs wanted to get rid of that, all because the software was helping other phome companies sell their smartphones.

Samsung phones didn't look ANYTHING at all look like the iphone until the iphone came out, and then all of a sudden all of samsungs phones look and operate just like iphones. are you serious?? you don't see how they copied Apple??


And don't even get me started on the tablet...

[Marc]

Good :hmph:

Serves them right for trying to be Apple and make knock-off Apple goods.

No body touches Apple

[Apple202]

Samsung phones didn't look ANYTHING at all look like the iphone until the iphone came out, and then all of a sudden all of samsungs phones look and operate just like iphones. are you serious?? you don't see how they copied Apple??


And don't even get me started on the tablet...

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/601166_4089174150718_1091228845_n.jpg

...

[Marc]

That story forgot to mention how each jury member will shortly be receiving a new iPhone 4 and iPad 2 :D

[lostalex]

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/601166_4089174150718_1091228845_n.jpg

...

and Apple isn't suing Microsoft, are they?

(and that 2002 tablet looks horrible, it looks nothing like an iPad, it looks like one of my grandma's picture frames. Microsoft tablets failed because they just used windows OS on them, Apple invented a whole new OS for tablets and smart phones, iOS which is what people love.)

[arista]

No Microsoft is Apples secret partner in some bits

[Apple202]

and Apple isn't suing Microsoft, are they?

(and that 2002 tablet looks horrible, it looks nothing like an iPad, it looks like one of my grandma's picture frames. Microsoft tablets failed because they just used windows OS on them, Apple invented a whole new OS for tablets and smart phones, which is what people love.)


BiB Lmao stop moving the goalposts just because you can't cope with the fact Apple copied Windows first.
So stop getting all high and mighty about how Samsung copied Apple when Apple originally copied some of their ideas from other companies anyway.

[lostalex]

Don't get all high and mighty about how Samsung copied Apple when Apple originally copied ideas from Microsoft anyway.


oh please, by that logic Microsoft copied the idea from Star Trek.

[Apple202]

oh please, by that logic Microsoft copied the idea from Star Trek.

wtf are you on?

Microsoft release tablet.
Apple release tablet.
Samsung releases tablet.
Apple sues Samsung.

D'you really not get where I'm coming from??????????

[lostalex]

wtf are you on?

Microsoft release tablet.
Apple release tablet.
Samsung releases tablet.
Apple sues Samsung.

D'you really not get where I'm coming from??????????

It's obvious they copied Apple. Why would Apple copy a failed product from microsoft? and why would they wait almost a decade to do it? Samsung obviously copied Apple's iPad because it was SUCCESSFUL. Microsoft's tablet was never successful. microsoft tried to make a tablet that would be a replacement for laptops, and make it as much like a laptop as possible. The iPad is not trying to replace laptops at all, it's just a giant iPhone. Apple is only guilty of copying ITSELF.

Didn't that old Microsoft tablet use a stylus? A stylus won't even work on an iPad. They had totally different operating systems, and totally different user experiences. The same cannot be said about the iPad and Samsung's copycat version.

[Apple202]

It's obvious they copied Apple. Why would Apple copy a failed product from microsoft? and why would they wait almost a decade to do it. Samsung obviously copied Apple's iPad because it was SUCCESSFUL. Microsoft's tablet was never successful.

IT WAS STILL A TABLET.

Putting a shiny new cover on it doesn't mean that the original premise is not the same? Even changing the processor doesn't mean that the idea is not the same? The idea was a tablet computer, and Microsoft thought of it first and Apple copied it.

[Shaun]

To be fair to Alex the copyright bid for the tablet format was proved unsuccessful and didn't hold up in court, the case went against Samsung in the touch screen phone area. Although the fact they tried to sue for that (when, as you've said, Microsoft came up with first) is pretty laughable indeed.

The fact of the matter is that once you've created a world of new technology there's going to be imitations, variants and knock-offs. You shouldn't be able to copyright an "idea" any more than you should be able to copyright a "thought". The invention of the Dyson didn't stop other vacuum products, the invention of Coca Cola didn't stop Pepsi, and so on. Unless the exact same technology is used, right down to materials and programming, I struggle to see the legitimacy here, and the whole case just stinks of "we've afforded better lawyers than you".

[Shaun]

Stephen Fry ‏@stephenfry
You may think me an Apple fanboi but these lawsuits give me not pleasure but distaste.

Stephen Fry has spoken. Close the thread tbh

[Shaun]

Btw if anyone is interested in the full evidence report, Apple released a 132 page document today: http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/08/here-is-the-entire-132-page-samsung-internal-report-apple-released-into-evidence-today/

[Shaun]

And a list of products and their responsible damages owed:

http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/total-damages-price-per-phone-two-cult-of-mac.jpg

[lostalex]

IT WAS STILL A TABLET.

Putting a shiny new cover on it doesn't mean that the original premise is not the same? Even changing the processor doesn't mean that the idea is not the same? The idea was a tablet computer, and Microsoft thought of it first and Apple copied it.


well if you wanna talk about Tablet's, Apple had the Newton, long before microsoft's 2002 tablet. As you can see from the pics, the beginnings of both the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad began long before 2002.

These products were from the 90's.... so you can see what Apple was doing with the Newton long before it turned into the iPhone and iPad...


http://oldcomputers.net/pics/newton-right.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Apple_Newton-IMG_0454-cropped.jpg/250px-Apple_Newton-IMG_0454-cropped.jpg

http://www.cpushack.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/apple_newton120.jpg

[BBfanUSA]

Kinda wished that Apple would have to use to money to make a factory in the united states like Piers Morgan suggested.

I swear apple is getting very close to becoming a monopoly.

[Saph]

Its weird how 10 years ago no one cared about Apple and now everyones craves it :s

[lostalex]

Its weird how 10 years ago no one cared about Apple and now everyones craves it :s


I cared about Apple 10 years ago, i grew up on Apple, our computer lab in school was all Apple Macs, all donated. Apple had a huge program that donated computers to schools all around America. I think most American kids in the 90's had Apples at school. I grew up with logo the turtle, and Kid Pix, and Claris Works, and Oregon Trail, we had Apples in the classroom when i was growing up.

[Jake.]

well if you wanna talk about Tablet's, Apple had the Newton, long before microsoft's 2002 tablet. As you can see from the pics, the beginnings of both the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad began long before 2002.

These products were from the 90's.... so you can see what Apple was doing with the Newton long before it turned into the iPhone and iPad...


http://oldcomputers.net/pics/newton-right.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Apple_Newton-IMG_0454-cropped.jpg/250px-Apple_Newton-IMG_0454-cropped.jpg

http://www.cpushack.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/apple_newton120.jpg

That's a PDA, surely?

[Munchkins]

Its weird how 10 years ago no one cared about Apple and now everyones craves it :s

*Clings my baby Iphone 4S*
but its true :L

[Jake.]

I do like Apple, I'm using an iPad as we speak. But greed just pisses me off. Still love how Android dominates the mobile market (even though I have a windows phone and love it)

[lostalex]

That's a PDA, surely?

obviously, but it's clear where they were going with it, you can clearly see the beginning of both the iPhone and the iPad in the Newton. it's clear that they were developing this technology for a long time... long before Samsung was doing anything even remotely similar.

[Jake.]

Then you could just as easily say that Apple copied Psion?

[lostalex]

Then you could just as easily say that Apple copied Psion?

No, Because Psion hasn't done anything even remotely close to the iPad or iPhone.

[BB_Fan2012]

Apple Always Wins, thats why they are the best ..... http://files.myopera.com/debplatt/smiley/ninja.gif

[Red Moon]

It could only really happen in the USA.

To me it is like Coca-Cola designing a coke bottle and then patenting how you drink out of it, then sueing Pepsi for allowing user's to use there bottles in the same way. It is madness.

[Red Moon]

Apple Always Wins, thats why they are the best ..... http://files.myopera.com/debplatt/smiley/ninja.gif

Some of there recent product have been utter rubbish. I use to love Apple products but the products have become cheap disposable consumer items over recent years. It is no wonder they are having to go to court to protect their market share because their hardware is shoddy. My experience of some of their recent products has all been negative.

[lostalex]

It could only really happen in the USA.

To me it is like Coca-Cola designing a coke bottle and then patenting how you drink out of it, then sueing Pepsi for allowing user's to use there bottles in the same way. It is madness.

Oh please, this is an American thing????

Europe is a million times worse, they patent everything, you can't call a certain type of cheese by it's name unless it's made in that actual place, or you can't call champagne champagne unless it's made in a certain part of France. Europe is a million times worse when it comes to protecting ridiculous things and patents and names. Europe is way more protectionist than the US.

Don't even get me started. :nono:

[BB_Fan2012]

Some of there recent product have been utter rubbish. I use to love Apple products but the products have become cheap disposable consumer items over recent years. It is no wonder they are having to go to court to protect their market share because their hardware is shoddy. My experience of some of their recent products has all been negative.

If thats how you feel, then fair enough, but i aint had any major issues with their producs, i have had a 3gs, 4s, ipad 1 & ipad 3, and the only issues i have are the battery life on the Iphones could be a lil better, but other than that they are great products in my eyes, don't hate me for saying that :laugh:

[Red Moon]

Then you could just as easily say that Apple copied Psion?

They are copy each other and have been doing it for years. Now the US legal system has got in on the act and persuaded companies to sue each other we, the consumer, are basically screwed. This could damage the tablet and smartphone market for years to come, by giving Apple a monopoly in the market place which won't be good for anyone.

Watch this space because Apple will now turn their guns on Google and everyone else. They want to kill Android before it kills them.

[Red Moon]

If thats how you feel, then fair enough, but i aint had any major issues with their producs, i have had a 3gs, 4s, ipad 1 & ipad 3, and the only issues i have are the battery life on the Iphones could be a lil better, but other than that they are great products in my eyes, don't hate me for saying that :laugh:

Cracking cases, faulty power supplies, and expanding and exploding batteries just a few of the faults I have experienced. It is not all good.

One thing you can say in the past is if you brought an Apple product it would last you years but that isn't the case anymore. They aren't even designed that way anymore. Their recent computers aren't user expandable and they aren't really designed to be repaired. They are throw away fashion items.

It's no wonder they are the richest company in the US when they have managed to turn phones, tablets and computers into fashion items people replace every year.

Two years ago I would have told anyone to buy Apple, I have 8 year old working Apple desktops and Laptops. Now I would never buy another computer from them. It has been that bad.

[BB_Fan2012]

Cracking cases, faulty power supplies, and expanding and exploding batteries just a few of the faults I have experienced. It is not all good.

One thing you can say in the past is if you brought an Apple product it would last you years but that isn't the case anymore. They aren't even designed that way anymore. Their recent computers aren't user expandable and they aren't really designed to be repaired. They are throw away fashion items.

It's no wonder they are the richest company in the US when they have managed to turn phones, tablets and computers into fashion items people replace every year.

Two years ago I would have told anyone to buy Apple, I have 8 year old working Apple desktops and Laptops. Now I would never buy another computer from them. It has been that bad.

Edited for you ;) Like i say i have not had any major issues other than the battery issue, sorry to hear the problems you have had, so what phone you got now?

[Jake.]

They are copy each other and have been doing it for years. Now the US legal system has got in on the act and persuaded companies to sue each other we, the consumer, are basically screwed. This could damage the tablet and smartphone market for years to come, by giving Apple a monopoly in the market place which won't be good for anyone.

Watch this space because Apple will now turn their guns on Google and everyone else. They want to kill Android before it kills them.

I have to agree. It's a shame really.

[Red Moon]

Don't even get me started. :nono:

I was talking about the litigation culture, rather than the regional protection of products, that is another matter altogether.

After all it make sense to protect regional products, if I buy a Melton Mowbray Pork Pie I expect it to be made there or it's not a Melton Mowbray Pork Pie. It's a bit like Apple saying there computers are made in America when they actually made outside the USA. It would just be wrong, so you need rules so people aren't misled.

Anyway this is the truth behind Apple not so squeaky clean side:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57367950/the-dark-side-of-shiny-apple-products/

but I guess it is the same for many companies that want massive margins and profits.

[Red Moon]

Edited for you ;) Like i say i have not had any major issues other than the battery issue, sorry to hear the problems you have had, so what phone you got now?

It's okay, I'm use to missing out words and having to back and edit stuff myself. I'm dyslexic and even when I read stuff back to myself I add in the missing words :shocked:

Currently I use an Android but I didn't buy it because it had tap to zoom or any of the features Apple were going on about. I wanted something with Facebook and Twitter and unlike a iPhone I have a keyboard too.

[Ryan.]

I dare anyone to read this document and tell me that there is any possible way Samsung did not slavishly copy the iPhone's graphical and functional UI.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/102317767/44

To me that is all the evidence any jury should ever need. Absolutely defenceless.

Samsung has built its business on taking over existing markets, emulating the products already on sale and then rising quickly to the top. They have done it most famously in TVs. Anyone can see that Samsung has been understandably envious of Apple's massive success in smartphones and tablets, and have gone to great lengths to copy every part of Apple's business, down to store design, UI icons and even dock connector.

Exhibit A:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tuaw.com/media/2011/09/samsung-copying-cjr.jpg

And don't give me that crap about Apple 'patenting rectangles' or anything else. It is abundantly clear that there is more than one smartphone design solution. Look at the HTC One X, The Sony Xperia Arc, The Nokia Lumia range, or even Samsung's Galaxy S3. There is just no denying that in the original Galaxy S, and several phones after it, Samsung copied Apple.

I rest my case.
http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/samsung-phones-before-and-after-iphones.jpeg

[Red Moon]

Samsung has built its business on taking over existing markets, emulating the products already on sale and then rising quickly to the top.

And Apple has never done that?

As Bill Gates reportedly said to jobs once: “Well, Steve, I think there’s more than one way of looking at it. I think it’s more like we both had this rich neighbour named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it.”

[Red Moon]

Steve Jobs said:

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

That is what this all about and at the end of the day if Apple do win this war then we will be the losers. The people that use and buy smart phones.

[Ryan.]

And Apple has never done that?

As Bill Gates reportedly said to jobs once: “Well, Steve, I think there’s more than one way of looking at it. I think it’s more like we both had this rich neighbour named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it.”

Of course, but Apple has done what Samsung used to do; that is look at what has already been achieved, add innovation and value and continue to innovate. Apple didn't simply copy the Xerox PARC project as is, it refined and sculpted it, adding original ideas and concepts.

That is what Samsung does not do. It is what HTC and Nokia have done: 'steal' the idea of a multitouch, thin, all screen smartphone, but add their own innovations and attempt to move the market forward. I doubt you even looked at the document, but you would clearly see Samsung made no attempt to add their own ideas in this case. They literally went 'this is how our product sucks, this is how the iPhone does it, this is how we go about copying the iPhone'. And that is why they have been left with a 1bn dollar bill, not for drawing inspiration from others work. But for plagiarism and theft.

Samsung is no better than those Chinese KIRF brands.

[Flamingjoe]

That story forgot to mention how each jury member will shortly be receiving a new iPhone 4 and iPad 2 :D

:laugh2:

[Red Moon]

Of course, but Apple has done what Samsung used to do; that is look at what has already been achieved, add innovation and value and continue to innovate. Apple didn't simply copy the Xerox PARC project as is, it refined and sculpted it, adding original ideas and concepts.

That is what Samsung does not do. It is what HTC and Nokia have done: 'steal' the idea of a multitouch, thin, all screen smartphone, but add their own innovations and attempt to move the market forward. I doubt you even looked at the document, but you would clearly see Samsung made no attempt to add their own ideas in this case. They literally went 'this is how our product sucks, this is how the iPhone does it, this is how we go about copying the iPhone'. And that is why they have been left with a 1bn dollar bill, not for drawing inspiration from others work. But for plagiarism and theft.

Samsung is no better than those Chinese KIRF brands.

The fact is Apple are no better than Samsung and it's not just Xerox they took idea's from it is Microsoft too, who in return Microsoft took ideas from Apple. It has all been going on for years.

The functionally comes from the operating system and that is Android. At the end of the day it is Android that Apple is after. It just happens to be going at Samsung first. But the thing is, like I said:

To me it is like Coca-Cola designing a coke bottle and then patenting how you drink out of it, then suing Pepsi for allowing user's to use there bottles in the same way. It is madness.

The thing is once you start this thing were do you stop..... Mercedes Benz filing patent cases against every car maker in the world because they had the idea of the car first.

It all is a load of nonsense being able to patent of how I interact with a device is just stupid. As is patenting the look of an interface, it is like saying because I build a house with a door at the front and four windows by neighbour can't do the same.

It would serve Apple right if Samsung pulled all of it's hardware supplies from Apple and refused to let them to use their technology patents, it would sink most of their products in an instant.

[lostalex]

Steve Jobs said:

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

That is what this all about and at the end of the day if Apple do win this war then we will be the losers. The people that use and buy smart phones.


....or you could just buy an iPhone... you wouldn't regret it.

[Red Moon]

....or you could just buy an iPhone... you wouldn't regret it.

Apple doesn't offer functionality of my phone in there limited range of products, however do you think everyone should buy Apple iPhones and iPads and that is it?

[lostalex]

Apple doesn't offer functionality of my phone in there limited range of products, however do you think everyone should buy Apple iPhones and iPads and that is it?

Yes, i do think that everyone should have access to the best technology on the market. Unfortunately, only Apple can provide it. I do wish the rest would catch up in their own unique and innovate ways...hopefully this decision will spark more innovation, now that they arn't allowed to just play catch up to Apple.

It's interesting that there's been no mention of RIM Blackberry in this thread yet. they are the perfect example of what happens when you just try to play catch up and stop innovating.

[Ryan.]

RIM has no reason to ever be discussed again. It will be completely dead by 2014.

[Red Moon]

Yes, i do think that everyone should have access to the best technology on the market. Unfortunately, only Apple can provide it.

And the only way that Apple think they can stay ahead is if they kill off the competition in the courts rather than the market place. The company is running scared of Android.

[Red Moon]

RIM has no reason to ever be discussed again. It will be completely dead by 2014.

Maybe not if Apple have their way, they might be a surprising winner from all this if Android gets killed off as will the Microsoft Windows based smart phones.

[Red Moon]

Another way to look at it:

At the end of the day progress comes from copying one idea and adding something to it after you understand the idea.

It is what we all do from the moment we are born and we go through the education system. We are taught ideas and then we apply them to life. Over time we add to those ideas and make them our own and pass them on.

As the ideas travel from one generation to the next they become more refined and more developed and the originator of the idea becomes irrelevant.

This is a natural process that has taken us to where we are today.

However there is one thing that speed up the development process and that is competition. Look at the aircraft at the start of any of the world wars and then look at them again at the end of the conflict and see the difference. The rate of development was massive. Take away the war (the competition) and the rate of development becomes sedate.

Even if Apple have a point abut the patents, stifling competition means that Apple no longer need innovate at the same rate and even Apple customers will lose out.

[Ryan.]

Another way to look at it:

At the end of the day progress comes from copying one idea and adding something to it after you understand the idea.

It is what we all do from the moment we are born and we go through the education system. We are taught ideas and then we apply them to life. Over time we add to those ideas and make them our own and pass them on.

As the ideas travel from one generation to the next they become more refined and more developed and the originator of the idea becomes irrelevant.

This is a natural process that has taken us to where we are today.

However there is one thing that speed up the development process and that is competition. Look at the aircraft at the start of any of the world wars and then look at them again at the end of the conflict and see the difference. The rate of development was massive. Take away the war (the competition) and the rate of development becomes sedate.

Even if Apple have a point abut the patents, stifling competition means that Apple no longer need innovate at the same rate and even Apple customers will lose out.

Exactly, and that's Apples issue here. Samsung didnt add anything of value, but slavishly copied every innovation Apple had come up with (as shown in that document) I'll say this again: HTC One, Nokia, Sony and RIM have proved there is more than one way to make a smartphone.

[Red Moon]

Exactly, and that's Apples issue here. Samsung didnt add anything of value.

If they haven't added anything of value, then why do I know people that want to ditch their new iPhones for Galaxy S3's?

Unless they are just ditching them because the S3 has a big screen, they are faster and the hardware is more up to date. Most people say it has more features.

At the end of the day the sun doesn't shine out of Apples bottom, a lesson I have learnt myself. They are not the company they were, although are still good at giving people what they want. Maybe they should stick to that rather than spending money on law suits.

At the end of the day without competition even Apple users will lose out, as will everyone.

[armand.kay]

-uses a blackberry tablet and phone- :whistle:

[Iceman]

Stupid american courts.... Much prefer my Samsung..... dont see the appeal of the anything apple bring out....and actually couldnt give a **** about them......eventually apples rot....

[Mrluvaluva]

Following its $1.049 billion court victory Friday, Apple is asking for a U.S. sales ban on eight Samsung devices, according to reports.

Those devices are:
Galaxy S 4G
Galaxy S2 (AT&T)
Galaxy S2 (Skyrocket)
Galaxy S2 (T-Mobile)
Galaxy S2 Epic 4G
Galaxy S Showcase
Droid Charge
Galaxy Prevail

Apple came up with the list after reviewing the verdict, decided by a nine-member jury. The Galaxy SII ban is carrier specific.

Why these?

The ban of eight may seem small when considering Apple was going after 28 devices during the course of the trial, however the ones it picked out are the only products still sold in the United States.

Each device was found to violate a design patent, utility patent, trade dress or have multiple infringements over the course of several years.

TechRadar has reached out to Samsung regarding if and how they intend to fight the proposed bans.

Samsung asked U.S. District judge Lucy Koh to lift a pre-trial ban she placed on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 after a jury found it didn't infringe on trade dress claims for the iPad 3.

[Shaun]

Saddening.

[Ryan.]

They won't get the sales ban.

[Sam:)]

**** sake, next thing apple will sue Isacc Newton claiming he had no right to discover gravity with apple.

I've had an iPhone 4 and I taught it was over-exhagerated... much prefer my iPod Touch, its cheaper and you dont feel as cautious with it.

[Ryan.]

http://gizmodo.com/5938468/samsung-is-now-copying-os-x-dock-would-they-ever-learn?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews

Samsung does it again. Honestly, it's things like this that show they are nothing but copying robbing bastards and they deserve to be sued.

[Mrluvaluva]

Apple is allegedly pushing for $3 billion in damages in its patent infringement case against Samsung, triple the amount initially order by a court.

The Korea Times reports that the iPad maker's lawyers will appeal to US District Judge Lucy Koh to increase the penalty at a hearing scheduled for this Friday (September 21).

Apple successfully sued Samsung for $1.05 billion last month after a jury found that the firm had copied critical features of the iPhone and iPad for its mobile devices.

In order to increase the damages, a jury must now find Samsung guilty of "wilful infringement" on five of the six patents in question. Judge Koh will have the power to meet Apple's request should this condition be met.

"By using that condition, Apple has decided to request the judge to order Samsung to pay more than $3 billion in the hearing on the San Jose verdict on September 21 in California," a legal source told the Korea Times.

Earlier this week, Samsung's request to overturn a sales injunction on its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US market was rejected. The company has already taken action to file post-verdict motions against the judge's original decision.

Previous reports suggested that the Korean giant is planning to file an injunction against Apple's iPhone 5 over allegations that it violates its 4G patents.


DS (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tech/news/a407015/apple-seeking-to-triple-samsung-damages-says-report.html)

[Mrluvaluva]

Incidentally...

Apple is making an estimated £426 on every 16GB model of the iPhone 5 sold, as the device costs just £103 to build, according to a TechInsights report.

This, of course, does not factor in other costs, such as development, distribution, marketing and taxes, while TechInsights notes that the figure is just an estimate as the iPhone 5 has not been fully analysed.

TechInsights has compiled the report on what it believes are the costs of producing the new smartphone, which shifted 2m pre-orders worldwide in just 24 hours from September 14, doubling the record of its predecessor, the iPhone 4S.

Announced last week, the new phone features a larger 4-inch screen boasting a resolution of 1136 x 640 and 326 pixels per square inch. It also comes with Apple's new GPU A6 processor, improved camera technology and support for 4G LTE connectivity.

Apple has remained relatively tight-lipped on exact details about what is inside the iPhone 5, but TechInsights has made a number of estimates based on information that is available.

It estimates that it costs Apple $167.50 (£103) to make the iPhone 5 model with 16GB of storage. Due to improvements in processor and display standards, the phone is more costly in production than the iPhone 4S ($132.50) and the iPhone 4 ($112).

However, Apple is charging £529 for the SIM-free version of the iPhone 5 16GB, meaning it is making £426 on each handset sold.

DS (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tech/news/a406462/apple-making-gbp426-on-every-16gb-iphone-5-report-claims.html)

[Ryan.]

except that virtually noone buys handsets unlocked, meaning apple actually loses 10 up front for the 16GB. But ofc they make a fortune in contract costs :D

[flamingGalah!]

Apple are just :bored:

They don't like a bit of competition, end of.

It does amuse me how OTT Apple 'fans' are though, they think of Apple as some sort of God to worship, I swear there is some sort of brainwash technology hidden within their products :joker:

I did have an iPhone, but prefer a phone to have buttons to press lol. It's Blackberry all the way for me :D

[Mrluvaluva]

Samsung can continue to sell the Galaxy Nexus in the United States after winning the latest stage in its patent dispute with Apple.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, based in Washington DC, overturned a California judge's order blocking Samsung from selling its smartphone amid the lawsuit by Apple.

Apple accuses Samsung of stealing its smartphone and tablet computer technology.

A jury in September agreed with the company, and ordered Samsung to pay $1bn. Samsung has now appealed against the judgement.

The Washington appeals court said Apple had failed to show that any of the patent violations it accused Samsung of in regards to the Galaxy would immediately and irreparably hurt its own smartphone sales.

It said judge Lucy Koh had abused her discretion in granting Apple a preliminary injunction earlier this year.

Ms Koh, a California District Court judge, ruled Samsung had copied critical features of the iPhone and iPad.

The jury also found Apple did not infringe any of Samsung's asserted patents.

Samsung and Apple are locked in a global patent battle in 10 countries, including the US.

In August, a court in Tokyo dismissed Apple's claim that South Korean firm Samsung had infringed its patent.

The stakes are high as the two technology giants fight for the top spot in the booming smartphone market.

The Galaxy Nexus is a third-generation touchscreen Android smartphone developed by a partnership between Google and Samsung.

Apple, meanwhile, recently unveiled the iPhone 5, with the iPad mini expected to be announced before Christmas.

Samsung's own tablet, the Nexus 7, won a T3 Gadget Award on Monday.


Sky (http://news.sky.com/story/996606/samsungs-nexus-can-go-back-on-sale-in-states)

[arista]

"Ban on Samsung Galaxy Nexus overturned
by US court in fresh blow for Apple in its war with Google
Court of Appeals ruling could have
major implications in future attempts
to ban competitors' products
Apple failed to prove that consumers
purchased the Samsung product because
of the infringing technology, the appeals court ruled"


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2216563/Ban-Samsung-Galaxy-Nexus-overturned-US-court-fresh-blow-Apple-smartphone-war-Google.html#ixzz29HOjCrXK



Yes Fair is Fair
people need a choice.

[Mrluvaluva]

Apple loses Samsung Galaxy Tab fight High Court appeal

Apple has lost its appeal against a High Court ruling that the Samsung Galaxy Tab does not infringe the iPad maker's copyright.

Despite accepting that some parts of the Galaxy Tab are similar to the iPad, the Court of Appeal today upheld the judgement that the device does not infringe its rival's design.

In July, Judge Colin Birss said that the Galaxy Tab and the earlier-released iPad were "very, very similar" when viewed from the front, but there were important differences on the back and in the thinness of the tablets.

Most notably, he said that Samsung's design was "not as cool" as Apple's, because it lacked the "extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design".

After losing its appeal against the ruling, Apple will now have to place prominent adverts explaining that Samsung did not copy the iPad.

A notice must remain on Apple's UK website for six months, and be placed in several UK newspapers and magazines to "correct the damaging impression" that Samsung was a copycat.

Samsung welcomed the ruling. A spokeswoman for the South Korean firm said: "We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners and that the origins of Apple's registered design features can be found in numerous examples of prior art.

"Should Apple continue to make excessive legal claims in other countries based on such generic designs, innovation in the industry could be harmed and consumer choice unduly limited."

Apple has not yet released a statement.

Samsung and Apple, the two largest makers of smartphones and tablets in the world, have been battling it out in courtrooms on multiple continents, with both claiming the other infringes their technology.

A jury in California awarded Apple more than $1bn in damages earlier in the year after ruling that its South Korean rival had copied designs for the iPad and iPhone.

Apple has since been pursuing bans on Samsung devices, although Samsung has been able to fend off many of these actions.

In an interesting twist, Apple is expected to announce a smaller version of its iPad tablet computer at an event in the US next week.

The so-called iPad Mini is expected to come with a 7.8-inch screen, compared to the main iPad's 9.7-inch display. But Samsung has offered a 7-inch model of the Galaxy Tab since November 2010.


DS (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tech/news/a431596/apple-loses-samsung-galaxy-tab-fight-high-court-appeal.html)

Good.

[Niall]

I think Apple might've been a bit too heavy handed in all these legal proceedings but you'd have to be an idiot not to see that Samsung's devices in the past few years have had a lot more than a passing resemblance to iOS, so I can understand why they've done it.

[Doogle]

I really ****ing hate Apple now. iOS 6 is the biggest piece of **** ever quite frankly, iTunes is outdated and laggy as ****, the lock button on my iPod broke after only a year and I'm definitely sure that wasn't me pressing down too hard on it, and Samsung are just superior really. I would get an android phone had I not spent so much on apps for my iPod already.

[Niall]

I really ****ing hate Apple now. iOS 6 is the biggest piece of **** ever quite frankly, iTunes is outdated and laggy as ****, the lock button on my iPod broke after only a year and I'm definitely sure that wasn't me pressing down too hard on it, and Samsung are just superior really. I would get an android phone had I not spent so much on apps for my iPod already.

If you're gonna get an android device then you shouldn't really go with Samsung. Only the Nexus line of Android phones are actually worth the money as the rest have a shelf life of like 2 months. :idc:

[Doogle]

If you're gonna get an android device then you shouldn't really go with Samsung. Only the Nexus line of Android phones are actually worth the money as the rest have a shelf life of like 2 months. :idc:
Yeah I didn't plan on getting a Samsung phone, well I did at first until I saw better ones. I still love Samsung though.

[Mrluvaluva]

I have a Galaxy S2 and couldn't be happier with it. :idc: