Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Cellphones Patents Wireless Networking Apple Technology

Apple Wins Again — ITC Rules They Didn't Violate Samsung Patents 149

An anonymous reader writes "A preliminary ruling from the International Trade Commission found that Apple did not violate four of Samsung's patents in the design of the iPhone. 'The patents in the complaint are related to 3G wireless technology, the format of data packets for high-speed transmission, and integrating functions like web surfing with mobile phone functions.' The complaint was filed by Samsung in 2011, and a final confirmation is due next January. Apple has similar claims against Samsung awaiting ITC judgment; the preliminary ruling is expected in mid-October."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Wins Again — ITC Rules They Didn't Violate Samsung Patents

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 15, 2012 @09:33AM (#41345641)

    Wow, just wow. This level of being deluded is on level with someone who is indoctrinated by a religion.

    I guess I won't even bother trying to put holes in your arguments because they kind of speak for themselves.

  • by Hazel Bergeron ( 2015538 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @09:54AM (#41345723) Journal

    It is cowardly to set up an account just to troll. A good troll does not fear alternating between insight and subtle nonsense using the same account.

  • by Dr. Evil ( 3501 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @10:01AM (#41345745)

    Domestic company wins.

    If this were an American company suing an American company, the ruling would be done around 2020. Then the damages would be minimized when a new government is sworn in.

  • Nope... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 15, 2012 @10:03AM (#41345755)

    Apple Wins Again

    Nobody wins. We all lose.

  • Re:Dissonance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nerdfest ( 867930 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @10:14AM (#41345791)

    It's easy: hate software patents for being weapons of anti-competition rather than protectors of innovation, and hate Apple for using the weapons.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 15, 2012 @11:53AM (#41346271)

    In the US court, it was decided that the US company Apple did not violate any of Korean company Samsung's patents. In the Korean court, it was decided that the Korean company Samsung did not violate any of US company Apple's patents.

    I wonder if someone had the idea to patent the three dots in menu items to inform users that another selection window will open instead of an action being performed. I mean, if "rubber banding" and "rounded corners" are all patentable, why not other obvious things?

  • by scubamage ( 727538 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @11:58AM (#41346301)
    Because they're stifling innovation and right now that's about the only way they can be stopped. I find it funny the people expect anything other than the company with the highest worth in world history to win these cases.
  • by sokoban ( 142301 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @12:12PM (#41346401) Homepage

    With 0.3-0.6% of GDP directly attributed to Apple and its basically unlimited funds for lobbying (bribing) politicians,

    Except Apple spends 1/10th as much as Google does on lobbying and doesn't have a Political action committee to funnel money to politicians like how Google does.

    your lovely (US) government cannot afford letting them lose their current market cap - it would harm whole market and trigger an avalanche of failing pension funds (lots of them also heavily invested into Apple itself) which in turn would bite government crooks in their lazy asses.

    Because that really stopped antitrust cases against Microsoft in the 90's.

  • Re:Dissonance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheTurtlesMoves ( 1442727 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @01:24PM (#41346859)

    that's one thing the patent system currently does right, which is giving inventors some protection against being ripped off by predators.

    No it doesn't. Unless your legal team and legal budget are bigger than who ever is ripping you off, the current system provides zero effective protection. It has always been a system by the big players (and their lawyers) for the big players.

  • Re:Inherent bias? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gnasher719 ( 869701 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @01:41PM (#41346981)

    Perhaps instead, it could be that there's an inherent bias in being on slashdot, and that apple's case had merit, while samsung's didn't?

    I think slashdot is so overrun by Google fans and Android fans that the exact opposite seems to be the case. There are lots of cases recently where people have been basly insulted for nothing but the crime of uttering an opinion favoring Apple.

  • by toriver ( 11308 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @05:59PM (#41348333)

    How are they stifling innovation if they force companies to do things in a different way - that is, to innovate? "Copy someone's success" hasn't been new for ages.

    Don't fandroids keep harping about all the new stuff in Android that iPhone doesn't? How were those innovations stifled?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 15, 2012 @08:09PM (#41348995)

    A good troll has several accounts set up just to troll, but he actually re-uses them, and each of those has a distinct and well-developed personality, complete with a posting history going back years, that makes him look genuine even after an in-depth check. This allows for truly masterful trolling, such as having those separate accounts actually argue between themselves, calling each other shills etc, lamenting about the sorry state of Slashdot groupthink moderation, and so on. If you pick your topics right (e.g. Apple vs Google), you can get a string of +5, Insightful posts that way for both accounts, and spawn a 100+ comment follow-up thread from all sorts of folks. It's hilarious.

    Ahem. Not that I'd personally know that. Just people sayin'

Money can't buy love, but it improves your bargaining position. -- Christopher Marlowe