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


Forgot your password?
The Courts Apple

Will Apple Vs Samsung Verdict Be Overturned? 300

An anonymous reader writes "While there's much talk of Apple asking for more money from Samsung, there's less talk of the likelihood that the verdict will be overturned completely. Based on voir dire, and the foreman's subsequent statements to the press, it seems he failed to follow the law."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Will Apple Vs Samsung Verdict Be Overturned?

Comments Filter:
  • by hillbluffer ( 1684134 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @09:51AM (#41436057) Homepage
    Yes, but Slashdot's new corporate owner has the editors posting stories that will bring the most clicks from the general public, not "news that matters".
  • Re:Again (Score:4, Informative)

    by BMOC ( 2478408 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @10:32AM (#41436579)

    Recent benchmarks? Oh wait, did you forget that you're comparing against a bazaar of active innovation (funny how actual innovation moves fast, isn't it?) that comes out with a new phone once a week? So just wait a few days and Apple will again be lower on the bar in terms of performance again. Of course, it'll take Apple another 2 years to again get themselves back on top, but it will have been worth it to have the best specs for such a short time frame.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 24, 2012 @10:42AM (#41436737)

    The USPTO is a patent minefield, granting obvious stuff simply because certain Americans think its hard to do.

    Corroborative commentary which by no means reflects the view of the author of this comment and merely serves as an indicative backdrop to the post as a whole.

    Even understanding simple issues like what was actually at issue seem too hard for most.

    It wasn't Android that was in dispute but Samsungs own extensions that made it more Apple like which is why Google didn't pile in.

    Note: Google/Motorola has now piled in and is asking for a United States wide ban on all Apples products.


    One might see this as a retaliatory strike, who can tell, you reap what you sow.

    But you have a to call to question the sanity of a process for instance that in the SCO v IBM case is still rumbling on after 9 years in the USA where as in the rest of the world, Germany for instance ... a simple and commensense approach was merely to say go away SCO and pay £30,000 euros every day you keep spouting bollocks.

    How long will the Apple v Samsung go for I wonder?


  • Re:Again (Score:5, Informative)

    by h4rr4r ( 612664 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @10:50AM (#41436859)

    It's not. Read the article again, they rigged the tests.

  • by Tough Love ( 215404 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @11:51AM (#41437867)

    I think Apple has a case here for the specific devices that the look/feel were copied.

    There is no such thing as look and feel [wikipedia.org] in law. There is only a creative attempt by Apple to make some new law by suing Microsoft over trashcans etc some years ago, and there is "trade dress" in copyright law... a long shot.

  • Re:Again (Score:5, Informative)

    by Enderandrew ( 866215 ) <[enderandrew] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday September 24, 2012 @11:54AM (#41437923) Homepage Journal

    The S3 came out months before the iPhone 5. The S3 has:

    Higher resolution screen
    Twice as much ram
    SD card slot
    Faster CPU
    Most powerful battery
    Nicer front camera
    USB 3.0 support

    So Apple can't keep up with Samsung's hardware months later, and Samsung's hardware is cheaper. As for size, the iPhone 5 is slightly thinner and weights just a little less, but the S3 has a much bigger screen and more internal components. And how has Apple innovated with hardware engineering the past few years with the phone?

    And I can go on all day about software innovations that blow the iPhone away. I still carry an iPhone 4S for work, and have been an iPhone owner for my personal phone since the 3GS. As someone who literally carries both an S3 and a 4S every day, the S3 is a far superior phone on pretty much every level.

  • Re:Again (Score:5, Informative)

    by Nursie ( 632944 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @11:55AM (#41437941)

    Yes it has got quad in most markets, the US is the exception. The benchmarks I've seen didn't put the iPhone ahead either.

  • Re:Again (Score:5, Informative)

    by Zemran ( 3101 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @12:24PM (#41438481) Homepage Journal

    The S3 is a quad core as standard, not overclocked or any other dumb comment. The only market that it is not a quad care is the US because the people there cannot cope with real phones yet. Stop reading the US propaganda and look at the real world. The iPhone is slow. The S3 does so much more and has applications that are not even on the iPhone. Just because you live in a backwater does not mean that rest of us are still using the old tech that you have to put up with.

  • by whitroth ( 9367 ) <whitroth&5-cent,us> on Monday September 24, 2012 @12:35PM (#41438667) Homepage

    For that matter, didn't anyone here read google news the next day? There was an article about one of the jurors saying that the foreman had a patent, and explained to them IN THE JURY ROOM how it worked, and they thought that prior art was so complicated that they skipped it.....

    That's as miscarriaged as it gets.


  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 24, 2012 @12:55PM (#41439013)

    Wow, that's one of the more ignorant statements I've read on Slashdot, and that's saying something!

    grenadeh, you might want to go read this:
    http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#iiih [justice.gov]

    " Microsoft attaches to a Windows license conditions that restrict the ability of OEMs to promote software that Microsoft believes could weaken the applications barrier to entry. "
    "Microsoft charges a lower price to OEMs who agree to ship all but a minute fraction of their machines with an operating system pre- installed. "

  • Re:Again (Score:3, Informative)

    by Murdoch5 ( 1563847 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @01:14PM (#41439331)
    Being a Fandroid would mean I support it no matter what, I'm just making a correct statement. The Android development time right now for a hardware / software co release is about 6 months and Apple is riding a year, so in the time the "new" iPhone comes out it's already sitting behind the curve. In fact Apples is losing the smart phone market slowly, they no longer have the biggest mobile OS and they don't have the best hardware. All they have is a fan base forged in stone that will take a bullet out of blind faith for them. So I'm not a Fandroid, I'm just practical.
  • by Petron ( 1771156 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @01:37PM (#41439705)

    We do have copyright laws for style. Fonts are protected, even though the alphabet is clearly in public domain. We have many lawsuits over the look of a logo, even the use of color in an advertisement... Plan on Red background with white cursive lettering? Coca-Cola will be in touch with you.

  • Re:Again (Score:5, Informative)

    by Enderandrew ( 866215 ) <[enderandrew] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday September 24, 2012 @01:47PM (#41439875) Homepage Journal

    That the processor can barely drive

    Have you used the phone? Even with tons of apps installed and running, it is snappy and fast. The EU and NA versions of the S3 have different processors. The EU is actually a quad core processor, and the NA version is a dual core that is compatible with LTE. The clock speed is higher (1.5 GHz vs 1.0) than the Apple CPU, and it is built on the newer ARM core. The Samsung CPU is based on the A15 ARM core as opposed to the A9 core used by Apple.

    Everyone I've demoed the phone to has been blown away by how fast it is, even with about 50 apps running in the background. Once Jelly Bean drops, it will be even faster.

    Needed on the memory-hungry Android platform

    I've never seen any evidence that Android is more memory-hungry than iOS. I do appreciate that I can directly kill processes in Android and I have zero control over that in iOS.

    Compromising design and SD cards are a relic from a time when you wouldn't just stream your media.

    What if you don't want to eat up your bandwidth if you have a data cap? What if you don't have a signal? Loading from SD is just faster than streaming. Being able to expand local storage and stream as well is a clear win.

    An unproven technology that has security (see recent Galaxy S3 hack through NFC at Pwn2Own) and privacy implications that appears to be focused on mobile payments where we believe Passbook to be a superior solution.

    Microsoft is requiring every single Windows 8 phone and tablet to have it. Apple has a number of NFC patents and clearly intends to use it at some point, but has yet to deliver on it. NFC has been around since 2002 and is heavily used in Japan. It isn't new, unproven technology.

    Made possible only by making the S3 1.2mm thicker than the iPhone 5.

    The S3 is 1 mm thicker, not 1.2. It is 13% thicker, but has 33% more battery. Samsung engineering win there.

    With a scratch-prone lens, as opposed to our high scratch-resistant sapphire lens.

    Both are listed as scratch-resistant lenses. But the iPhone 5 sapphire lens should be more scratch resistant. That is a minor win for Apple there. It should be noted that the front-facing camera is still nicer on the S3, and Apple just now caught up to features many Android phones have had for over a year (photos during video, panorama mode, etc). And Apple still can't do burst photos like Android.

    We believe our connector...

    It is inexcusable to change to yet another proprietary connector in 2012 and not support USB 3.0. It will have slower transfer speeds and require proprietary adapters.

  • Re:Again (Score:5, Informative)

    by LordLimecat ( 1103839 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @01:57PM (#41440003)

    But a fast dual core processor is going to give you better performance hands down in a phone while also giving you better power performance.

    Someone tell that to Intel. They seem to be under the impression that if 2 cores are idle, you can shut them off, decrease the TDP, and ramp up the remaining cores.

    But who are they to talk, they only design the things.

  • by rgbscan ( 321794 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @01:57PM (#41440005) Homepage

    Already moderated in this forum... but posting anyway.

    That is NOT what the jury said if you read the full statement. Your as bad as fox news with taking a snippet and carrying on with it, totally out of context. The jury said they took the easy questions first, that could be agreed upon with only a small amount of discussion. And saved the ones where people were really far apart and divided and saved those for later discussion. This is the same way you take standardized tests. You knock out the easy questions first. When this person said they skipped prior art... they didn't disregard it or refuse to consider it. They tabled it for the lengthier discussion due to its complexity (skipped it from the initial discussion) and did indeed discuss it in quite a bit of detail. Please quit putting your faux-news tidbit spin on this. That's been discredited several times. Go read up on it.

  • by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @02:29PM (#41440477)

    Fonts are protected, even though the alphabet is clearly in public domain.

    Interestingly enough, fonts in America are not covered by copyright [wikipedia.org], although the computer instructions that describe a font are. It is legal to clone fonts in America of you do it optically, and don't copy any code. This is how, for example, Microsoft could create Book Antiqua, which looks virtually identical to Hermann Zapf's Palatino.

  • by oshkrozz ( 1051896 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @03:24PM (#41441271)
    Fonts are NOT protected by copyright US copyright law (much to the chagrin of font designers ... yet somehow we survive and people still come up with new ones) what is protected is the "software" to display the font can be covered by an end user license agreement (the infamous EULA) and restrict you from using the font package as provided for you in the software on another computer without a license. You can and it is entirely legal to do so in the USA is copy the exact characters (Manually not with a software program) and document with a video that is how you are doing it, then release it into public domain. The font file is protected by copyright because it involves "code" and the judge and jury on the precedent setting cases didn't know what computers were .... and felt that the code that displays the font as true type (or a font manager program) can be copyrighted without any knowledge of the code itself being unique in anyway or worthy of a copyright.

    What you are referring to is a Trademark (style) this is not a copyright and a company can protect its logo or colors and can sue if another company tries to use their trademark look they have to prove though that it will cause market confusion or give them impression that it is being endorsed by that company. For example a HS football team can not take the look and colors of an NFL team without permission, however a car dealer can wave flags and display the colors of the local football team without any special permission (or any team for that matter)

The best defense against logic is ignorance.