Apple Claims New Infringement After Being Ordered To Tell Samsung HTC Secrets 287
An anonymous reader writes "Ordered to tell Samsung all of the company's HTC secrets, Apple throws a tantrum and adds a bunch of new products to the never-ending list of products Samsung has infringed on. Apple's tantrum stems from a ruling on Thursday that could have a large effect on the Apple lawsuit. The Apple lawsuit, which was filed in February, alleges that Samsung violated Apple patents related to user interface, technology and style. The first decision was found in favor of Apple to the tune of $1 billion, but Samsung is trying to get that ruling thrown out. But as the Apple lawsuit has gone on, the Apple lawsuit has gotten fiercer, and because of a ruling on Thursday, Apple throws a tantrum and is trying to add even more products into the lawsuit."
Tantrum? (Score:3, Insightful)
Biased summary much?
Any value Slashdot once had as a source for tech news is entirely gone now. Sensationalistic crap for the win.
Meh.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Steve Jobs was well known for throwing tantrums. I fail to see how this is not a suitable word. He may be gone, but his legal team is still carrying on his maniacal vendetta against Android.
Re:Tantrum? (Score:5, Interesting)
> his legal team is still carrying on his maniacal vendetta
To complete your statement with direct quotes:
Apple has built such a Fuehrer cult around Jobs, that they now have to realize his last wish even if it greatly harms them, or risk admitting that he was crazy, at least with regard to his irrational hate for Google.
Re: (Score:3)
If people were indeed "confused" by Samsung's devices and thought they were iPhones, wouldn't there be a mass return to the store when they found out it wasn't an iPhone? I don't give the great unwashed much credit, but in this case you've just made everyone who bought a Samsung phone out to be a dupe who got suckered into Samsung's "Apple Trap" and are too clueless to know the difference...
Apple went after Samsung because Samsung is the #1 vendor of Android devices. The fact that the jury's verdict was in
Re: (Score:3)
Apple won one lawsuit, but that verdict may not stand. Even if it does, it's unclear whether it has any business significance or doesn't harm Apple more than it helps. The incremental value of $1bn for Apple is nearly zero, and the amount is lost in the noise given Samsung's brisk sales. But the lawsuit has pissed off a lot of people in the tech industry and made Apple look increasingly like a bully who can't
Re: Tantrum? (Score:3)
There was no tantrum, just a web sites 'report'. Samsung must've thrown a tantrum to get the iPhone 5 added
http://allthingsd.com/20121123/samsung-wants-ipad-mini-added-to-apple-suit/ [allthingsd.com]
Then another to go after the other devices?
No of course not. Come on /. You're trolling your own readers now
Re: (Score:3)
In this case, biased article perhaps, but not biased summary. The article (TFA) title uses the word "tantrum", so actually, the summary tones down the sensationalist phrasing.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, biased article perhaps, but not biased summary. The article (TFA) title uses the word "tantrum", so actually, the summary tones down the sensationalist phrasing.
But the summary did not have to use the "tantrum" weasel word. Further, OP didn't have to cite a biased article; there were hundreds to choose from that didn't call it a "tantrum".
Re:Tantrum? (Score:5, Insightful)
I care far less about whether the summary is biased than I care that the summary is horrible.
Apple throws a tantrum and adds a bunch of new products to the never-ending list of products Samsung has infringed on... because of a ruling on Thursday, Apple throws a tantrum and is trying to add even more products into the lawsuit
Here's a tip: Repeating bad grammar doesn't improve it; repeating bad grammar in what should be a summary is both embarrassing and redundant.
Re: (Score:2)
...entirely gone? Slashdot has always had wildly inaccurate summaries. You were always better off ignoring it, with a better summary usually showing up in the fourth or fifth top level comment, after wading through a sea of tripe based on the sensationalist, poorly spelt and edited bullshit put on the front page.
This summary is just slightly below par for a site with a long tradition for getting almost everything wrong.
Re:Tantrum? (Score:5, Insightful)
Biased summary much?
Any value Slashdot once had as a source for tech news is entirely gone now.
You're doing it wrong. The value of Slashdot is not in the flawed and often biased summaries, it is in the discussions. And it is not in the majority of discussion comments that you find fault with, it is in the rare gems that make you think. You have to work for it. Facile criticism is moderately useful in chastening fan-bois and -grrls, but you could be getting more, and giving more, if you tried.
The real magic of Slashdot is on the other side of the pen. When you start doing some real analysis and putting your rich and well-formed thoughts out there, that's when it really starts to shine. It's tough; you will have to suffer shallow potshots from armchair critics, but you will get a thousand times more upside from those few people who constructively explore a subtle flaw in your perception. Those people give you the opportunity to improve your world view. What you gain by putting a more substantive post out there, facing the slings and arrows, and evolving your hypotheses to subsume an ever more accuate picture of reality is truly extraordinary.
I've looked through your posts. Once you get past the daggers you have a lot to add. You have more to give than cheap shots at easy targets.
Re: (Score:2)
The sole reason I continue coming back is because of exactly the comments and conversations you're talking about. Hidden amongst the inane are some exceptionally insightful and informative posts that help inform me. Unfortunately, they're getting drowned in a sea of biased nerd-rage. Worse is when I see article summaries with such a blatant bias, where no hint of an attempt is made to hide the bias. That only serves to drive away thoughtful commenters and distract from a conversation I might otherwise be in
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple's plans are unraveling fast. While thier initial actions were very successful, the cases brought by Apple were getting increasing amounts of criticism and I have little doubt that judges are well aware of that sort of thing because to rule in Apple's favor while public attention is focused on it is causing what might have been a casual trouncing by Apple into a careful application of jurisprudence.
The $1B judgement against Samsung is unquestionably going to get tossed for a variety of reasons. Firstl
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is also successful because they build decent hardware, but moreso, because ecery news and tech site also advertises for them without charge. Because of this, their misbehaviour and general dickishness will also be broadcast more than with otehr companies that don't get the free advertising. It will eventually catch up with them. The sad part is that all they really need to do is stop suing and start competing again. They're not gaining fans with their current behaviour, they're losing them.
Re: (Score:2)
All juries do this. Laypeople are too incompetent to decide just about anything.
I'd say the biggest threat to Apple isn't image per-se; it's the commoditization of its key profit centers: smartphones and tablets. With Google selling zero-margin products at unbelievable prices, all players will be forced into a zero-marg
Re: (Score:3)
In short, Apple will need to do something for "free" in order to compete and remain relevant. I agree with this. Apple will not agree with this. They have always capitalized on their "elite" and expensive image. This has served them well, but has also relegated them into a niche market mode. Apple tried to allow clones, but they couldn't deal with people making things better. So they resorted to heavy litigation.
Throughout, Apple has been a fairly litigious company. They make something and then they
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's far too hack-y for even the hackiest of pr hacks.
Re:Tantrum? (Score:5, Insightful)
Good source, but still extremely biased (Score:2)
But then the owner tells you that up front, unlike mainstream news sources like MSNBC, CBS and Fox.
And unlike them, if want to make up your own mind, Groklaw always has the original documents for you to read for yourself. You don't even have to read the commentary.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
RTFA. Or at least hover over the link to it. "Tantrum" isn't editorializing by Slashdot, but exists within the article itself. At best, it's repeating editorializing without taking a neutral tone.
Re:Tantrum? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, just accurate.
"Apple throws a tantrum" is "accurate"? Nobody had headlines like "Samsung loses $1billion case, throws a tantrum and demands HTC documents." This is biased reporting, pure and simple.
Re: (Score:3)
It is not biased, samsung did throw a tantrum by raising 20% the price of processors sold to apple. A very justified but anyway still a tantrum because a 20% raise out of the blue would likely not have happened otherwise.
Re:Tantrum? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Tantrum is the pattern of Apple's decisions lately though, from this episode to the couple of childish pranks they tried to get away with when ordered by a judge to publicly
Conspiracies Everywhere! (Score:5, Insightful)
FTA: "So, most likely in response to that judge's ruling..."
No evidence, no reasoning, just one persons unsubstantiated opinion that these two items are connected. Combine that will biased language like "tantrum" and you get a content free piece of click bait. Congratulations.
Re:Conspiracies Everywhere! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Slashdot should stop accepting submission from anonymous readers, so at least if submitters troll in the summary we at least know who they are. Or perhaps, I don't know, the editors could actually edit the submissions so they're not blatantly trolling.
Wouldn't help... The same editor, Samzenpus, posted both this and the story 4 days ago when Samsung did the same thing [slashdot.org].
bit more dramatic summary than necessary (Score:5, Insightful)
What is actually happening can probably be better summarized something like this: highly paid legal teams in huge patent lawsuit continue to jockey for position with miscellaneous legal moves.
Re: (Score:2)
or more like:
highly paid legal teams in huge patent lawsuit continue to jockey for to extend the case and their own paychecks.
Are you trying to say... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Are you trying to say... (Score:5, Funny)
They've thrown enough of those recently. They should switch to something different... like chairs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
its all a mis-translation.
what they meant to say is that apple motherboards tend to blow tantalums.
it seems, apple does not have the, uhhh, capacity to compete anymore.
The diclining path of douchebagery (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, if Apple thinks their frivolous lawsuits will win them new customers or get old customers back, they'll be in for a surprise in 5-10 years from now.
Re: (Score:3)
This is fairly true.
I've used mac laptops for 7 or 8 years and my office uses macs too for all user positions. What I personally like most is that X11 forwarding over SSH is totally straightforward and the command line tools I'm used to work great. Add to that headache free Netflix streaming and I readily admit that I've found my mac systems to be both enjoyable and productive.
But I feel pretty bitter toward Apple because of these lawsuits. So when my wife said she wouldn't mind a tablet for Christmas, I
slashdot has been hacked (Score:2)
I don't believe this article made it through whatever review process slashdot uses to decide if a story should be posted or not.
Slahdot has gone to the dogs (Score:2, Insightful)
The slashdot of today is a pale comparison of the slashdot of 3-5 years ago.
Back then it was worth reading daily, there were well thought out, reasoned, and articulated articles.
Now its become a place I come to once a week, and seeing articles like this piece of crap makes me wonder if that is too often.
Bye slashdot, I will remember your good days fondly and are deeply saddened at what you have become.
I guess you can take solace in knowing digg beat you there.
Re: (Score:2)
The slashdot of today is a pale comparison of the slashdot of 3-5 years ago.
Slashdot of 3-5 years ago pales in comparison of the Slashdot of 12-10 years ago.
The louder one yells... (Score:2)
The louder one screams out against something, the less secure they feel.
You're shooting yourselves in the foot here, Apple. If you were truly the winner in this case, you wouldn't have any problem just playing the game and staying cool about it. Now you've raised eyebrows...
Re: (Score:2)
The louder one screams out against something, the less secure they feel.
You're shooting yourselves in the foot here, Apple. If you were truly the winner in this case, you wouldn't have any problem just playing the game and staying cool about it. Now you've raised eyebrows...
Read more about the actual case. Samsung added devices after the HTC agreement; Apple has to counter to keep up. It sure is interesting how you are singling out Apple when it is very clear in this case that it takes two to tango.
Re: (Score:2)
The louder one screams out against something, the less secure they feel.
You're shooting yourselves in the foot here, Apple. If you were truly the winner in this case, you wouldn't have any problem just playing the game and staying cool about it. Now you've raised eyebrows...
Read more about the actual case. Samsung added devices after the HTC agreement; Apple has to counter to keep up. It sure is interesting how you are singling out Apple when it is very clear in this case that it takes two to tango.
FTR, I didn't single out Apple for any reason sited in the case. I singled them out for being the ones to make the most noise. Red flag.
Anyone else (Score:5, Funny)
Getting goosebumps at all the innovation this is spurring?
Gone (Score:2)
Meanwhile, Ballmer is laughing his ass off (Score:2)
Samsung and Apple are going MAD (mutually assured destruction). Bottom line is after this is all said and done there will be such a high cost premiums for Apple or Samsung devices to pay each other's royalties that pretty much Microsoft will walk in offering cheap Windows 8 phones that will flood the market.
Microsoft's saving grace is that nobody wants to copy their ugly shit.
Re: (Score:2)
MADPS == Mutual Assured Destruction, patent style (Score:2)
Where is this escalation going to end?
Can we somehow resurrect Nixon, and reactivate Kissinger, and get some SALT talks going between Apple and Samsung?
Yes, folks, it's come to, "Nixon now, more than ever!"
Re: (Score:2)
See, they did it wrong; They should have gone with MAD,GS, then we'd all love it. (Come on, you know what it stands for...)
Dress classy, litigate cheesy, my friend. ;-)
Bias? (Score:2)
I'm not an Apple lover by any stretch, but any time I see such a skewed summary or article, I tend to ignore it. Wouldn't it be better to just say that Apple added several more Samsung devices to ongoing patent litigation?
Imagine the cars we'd be driving if (Score:2)
car manufacturers acted like mobile phone children
Dodge Omni:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Omni [wikipedia.org]
vs
Vw Rabbit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Golf_Mk1 [wikipedia.org]
Dodge Mirada
http://www.autogush.com/images/dodge-mirada-05.jpg [autogush.com]
vs
Ford Futura
http://storm.oldcarmanualproject.com/ford/Fairmont%20Futura%201978%200203.jpg [oldcarmanualproject.com]
Nissan Armada
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2009&make=Nissan&model=Armada [msn.com]
vs
Rambler
http://www.stationwagonfinder.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/1959-rambler-ambassador1.jp [stationwagonfinder.com]
Really bad summary (Score:3)
Apple throws a tantrum and adds a bunch of new products to the never-ending list of products
Great sentence there...
Apple's tantrum stems from a ruling on Thursday
There's that word again...
...but Samsung is trying to get that ruling thrown out. But as the Apple lawsuit has gone on...
Sounds like babbling.
and because of a ruling on Thursday, Apple throws a tantrum and is trying to add even more products into the lawsuit
Holy shit, didn't you already say that a few sentences ago?
The Global Patent Thermonuclear War is Here (Score:2)
All the posturing about "defensive" patents is now gone, the patent war is on in full force. The only thing left to do now is to wait and see how much damage the tech sector needs to take before we outlaw all these fucking software (and even worse, business method) patents.
Will we be left with a technological innovation wasteland?
Is it wrong for me to hope that Samsung gets an injunction on the iPhone and iPad at the same time that Apple gets an injunction on the Galaxy and Galaxy Tab? How about six month
Just to clarify... (Score:2)
Apple wasn't ordered to tell Samsung all of the company's HTC secrets (i.e., the HTC settlement agreement).
They were ordered to hand the HTC settlement agreement over to Samsung's lawyers only (i.e., "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only").
There's a difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple wasn't ordered to tell Samsung all of the company's HTC secrets (i.e., the HTC settlement agreement).
They were ordered to hand the HTC settlement agreement over to Samsung's lawyers only (i.e., "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only").
Yea, kind of like how political candidates can't directly influence the spending of SuperPACs, but they can have a staff member directly under their aegis, who also happens to influence the aforementioned SuperPAC.
There's a difference.
Said difference being transparency and accountability.
One hand washes the other. Meanwhile, consumers get drenched by the runoff.
Did Steve Jobs lie? (Score:2)
"Nobody wants a stylus."
Once again they add a device whose primary raison d'etre is a stylus.
Before it was the Galaxy Note 10.1, now it is the Galaxy Note 2.
Apple must be selling their iShit with hidden wacom styl, to be claiming these copy Apples crap.
Oh, come on... (Score:5, Informative)
Apple, also famous for (Score:2)
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:4, Insightful)
I completely agree. Apple certainly is not adding more devices because Samsung just did the same. That could never be the cause, it has to be they are throwing a fit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Insightful)
It could also affect dollar amounts. This is the same Apple who wants to offer $1 per device total for several major feature parents from Motorola, but thinks minor design patents means Samsung should pay $30-$40 per device to Apple. Divulging the deal with HTC will likely show that Apple never negotiated in good faith with Samsung and that damages should be much lower, or perhaps change the verdict in an appeal.
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:4, Interesting)
You're confusing me guys. So is Apple refusing it out of hand or asking 30-40$ for glorious "pitch to zooms"?
"thermonuclear". what do you think that means? it means blocking - presumably this is because samsung is the one who made the commercially hugely successful android phone and because they figured that samsung doesn't have a bunch of patents that would force apple to pay half a billion to samsung.. licensing to htc or moto isn't such a big deal because moto and and htc aren't really doing that well.
the claim(apples view) is that apple is losing good profits money because of samsung products and that (reasonable) license fees aren't enough to compensate for that. samsung is trying to of course turn the table and show that there exists in fact reasonable licensing fee for these patents and thus the damages aren't that huge.
and apple isn't total stranger to cross licensing. nor is apple a total stranger to paying hundreds of millions to a competing company for patent rights..
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am sorry you are so ill-informed. The patent system is not broken. It is purposefully confusing and complex to help drive innovation in fast paced industries like the smartphone sector. Don't believe me? Just ask hundreds of envious countries and tens of millions of employed American workers [slashdot.org].
Hmmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Interesting)
IANAL but I believe the issue that Samsung has is that Apple repeatedly seeks injunctions which would bar the sale of products by Samsung because Apple claims that monetary compensation, i.e. licencing fees, is not enough. Samsung is contending that many of the patents that Apple has used to have injunctions placed on Samsung products are included in the HTC licencing deal. In other words, monetary compensation clearly IS enough, and therefore any injunctions should be removed and Samsung should be offered similar licencing deals to the one that HTC has.
Re: (Score:2)
"but refuses out of hand to do the same for them"
Sammy says they'll never settle
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57549927-37/samsung-wont-talk-settlement-with-apple-yeah-right/ [cnet.com]
"Shin said he doesn't intend to negotiate at all with Apple, illustrating just how far apart the two companies are. While Apple scored a significant victory in the U.S., there are a number of legal clashes going on around the world, all with varying levels of success so far for either side."
but asks to see the terms of the HTC settle
Re: (Score:2)
Here's why at best it's neutral and, at worst, it hurts them badly...
Apple claims it is irreparably harmed and nothing short of a permanent injunction can make up for infringing its patents, however...
"If" Apple licensed the same patents in question to HTC, (for monetary gains) then Samsung should, by law, be allowed to pay licensing fees instead of suffering from a permanent injunction.
In essence, "Throw an equitable amount of money at Apple" becomes the solution to the Samsung case, -not- a permanent inju
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Interesting)
Wouldn't the HTC settlement help Apple's case? If HTC will settle patent claims with Apple, why doesn't Samsung do so on similar terms? Why does Apple have to sue Samsung when Apple is this big reasonable company that just wants to cross-license its patent portfolio at a reasonable price?
Well, Apple doesn't _want_ to cross-license its patents. However, the fact is that Samsung used these patents without permission, and Samsung sales have gone up, while HTC sales have gone down. So here is what most likely happened:
Someone at the negotiation table said, look, HTC isn't really Apple's enemy, Samsung is. And Apple isn't really HTCs enemy, Samsung is. So much better to join forces, license these patents to HTC, and to Microsoft, and to anyone other than Samsung. And do their best to f*** Samsung together. Samsung shouldn't be too surprised if there will be some HTC lawsuits following.
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:4, Insightful)
Only if said patents are FRAND. At which point they MUST. But for non-FRAND patents, they don't have to.
If they aren't, then it's perfectly fine for Apple to not license to Samsung at all - because the "ND" part doesn't apply. Hell, the "F" part doesn't have to apply as well.
And Samsung has stated clearly they are NOT willing to form any sort of agreement.
Heck, Microsoft has licensed patents with Apple (cross-licensed). Apple doesn't have to charge HTC the same rates that Microsoft is paying.
For the FRAND patents, Microsoft and Apple are arguing the rates specified by Samsung and Motorola are unfair. Unfortunately, the big issue there is no one really said what fair was as a lot of the rates include cross-licensing. And Samsung wants injunctions because Apple's violating their FRAND patents, while Samsung's arguing that since Apple licensed patents to HTC, Apple cannot force an injunction on Samsung products (the problem being that Samsung is, by FRAND forced to license, so they can't argue that they deserve an injunction for licensable patents while Apple doesn't for other potentially licensable patents).
Of course, the business case may be that it's very helpful to license it because if HTC is paying, and Samsung is paying, so should LG, Motorola/Google, ZTE and everyone else (who may include Amazon and B&N).
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Interesting)
However, in a civil suit, actual damages are based on fair market value. The best guide to that is how much Apple freely chose to license the patents to third party for.
I think this is about Anti-trust (Score:2)
The problem here is that Apple can face anti-trust issues! While it does not have to license its patents, it does have to face anti-trust issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple are claiming that no monetary amount is recompense for the patents, and so ask for a permanent injunction
They then licence the patents to HTC, indicating that a monetary amount CAN recompense.
Can you not see the disconnect there? Samsung can
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Apple wants to drive Samsung out of the smartphone/tablet business. If HTC licensed the same patents for a reasonable price, Samsung would have some leverage to get the same deal and stay in the market.
There is of course the argument that if A uses patents illegally and gains a competitive advantage against B, then the patent holder would quite reasonably license the patent to B so we get better competition, and not ever license the patent to A.
Re: (Score:2)
Because Apple wants to drive Samsung out of the smartphone/tablet business. If HTC licensed the same patents for a reasonable price, Samsung would have some leverage to get the same deal and stay in the market.
And Apple is succesfully steering Samsung out of the smartphone market. Oh wait..
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't it help Apple...? No.
Apple is trying to push for an injunction barring Samsung from selling its products at all. I.e. kill Samsung sales totally. Apple has claimed that the value of it's patents is so great, or impossible to calculate, and the only possible remedy for Samsung's infringement is to stop sales entirely. Apple has claimed that it is not possible for Samsung to pay license fees for the patents.
But now, it would appear that HTC *has* licensed (at least some of) the patents, so Samsung is claiming that it *is* possible to put a value to the patents, and thus a full injunction is not necessary, because a financial solution can be found.
That is why it sucks for Apple... because, if the court agrees with Samsung, Apple a) won't be able to stop samsung sales b) will be shown to be lying about licensing
gus
Re: (Score:2)
Judge: Sorry plaintiff, turns out you lied to me, I find in favour of the defendant.
Plaintiff: Fuck, who can I sue now?
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Insightful)
No, because Apple want to completely ban the Samsung devices and claims that money can't make up for the harm that Samsung's devices are causing. However, if Apple licensed their patents to HTC, then clearly money can make up for the harm and thus, Apple is only entitled to money damages, not a complete ban (if Samsung's devices are found to be infringing).
Re: (Score:2)
Fallacy. Because if Apple had the money upfront, they might have done A, whereas now they have to do B.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because Apple want to completely ban the Samsung devices and claims that money can't make up for the harm that Samsung's devices are causing. However, if Apple licensed their patents to HTC, then clearly money can make up for the harm and thus, Apple is only entitled to money damages, not a complete ban (if Samsung's devices are found to be infringing).
Except that it's highly unlikely that the licensed patents include the design patents at issue in this case. Design patents are more like trade dress, in that a lot of their value relies on them being distinctive. Apple can respond that if only the utility patents were infringed, then monetary damages may have been adequate, but that no such damages would be adequate for infringement of the design patents.
Re:OPINOPS ?? LIKE ASSHOLES ?? YES !! (Score:5, Insightful)
From 3 days ago, "Now Samsung has responded in kind, adding the iPad mini, 4th generation iPad and 5th generation iPod touch to the mix."
"Samsung’s additions shouldn’t come as a surprise; when a judge ruled that Apple was indeed allowed to add Android 4.2 Jelly Bean as it pertains to the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, as well as the Galaxy Note 10.1 and Galaxy S III to the proceedings, he specifically warned that in granting that alteration, Apple should be prepared for return amendments from Samsung. Specifically, he said that the iPad mini and latest iPad were likely additions."
"Samsung had previously moved to have the iPhone 5 added to the filing, and that motion was successful."
And back. And forth. And back again.
Apple is making a mistake, I think. (Score:5, Insightful)
"Samsungâ(TM)s additions shouldnâ(TM)t come as a surprise; when a judge ruled that Apple was indeed allowed to add Android 4.2 Jelly Bean as it pertains to the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, as well as the Galaxy Note 10.1 and Galaxy S III to the proceedings, he specifically warned that in granting that alteration, Apple should be prepared for return amendments from Samsung. Specifically, he said that the iPad mini and latest iPad were likely additions."
I see what Apple is trying to do, here: they're concentrating their fire onto Samsung because it's the most successful Android company. Apple thinks that by "teaching these guys a lesson" they'll instill fear in all the rest of the Android companies, and steer them to crappier alternatives (like Windows Phone, Windows RT) that could never compete with iDevices. Like the biggest bully beating up the guy that could pose the biggest threat to his hegemony. But Apple is making a mistake, I think, for two reasons:
- The guy Apple decided to bully is proving to be a tough nut to crack, and that might, instead of discouraging, actually encourage the other vendors. If for no other reason, then because Apple is being distracted by this huge war they got themselves into.
- There are Android companies that won't stop making Android devices, regardless of what Apple does to Samsung. Win or lose, these companies will continue making Android devices, and enjoy their small profits. I am talking about all those nameless Chinese companies that are more than happy to make cheap Android tablets or phones for the masses. Yes, Apple probably doesn't much care about those, since they aren't even catering to the same market as the iDevices are, but moreover, these are nimble companies working in the gray areas that are mostly out of bounds to Apple's lawyers. But their combined effect may very well make Android the dominant player.
- Google has enough muscle to help one Android company at a time, releasing Nexus-branded Android tablets and phones. Google takes a financial hit on each of these, but it's small enough compared to the profits Google makes. This is another source of Android devices that Apple cannot easily quench. And something tells me that Google's corporate policy is one to not give in to bullies, so there might be a bit of a personal thing going on there, especially if Apple insists being dicks.
So, I personally think that Apple needs to stop doing what they're doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt Apple feels any desire to go after 'Android'... that is really more of a fanboy fantasy thing then a company plan.
There's a bit more than just "fanboy fantasy" [zdnet.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Even if he were, rants do not policy make.
Re: (Score:3, Troll)
No, it has nothing to do with Android, which is not a company that you can sue, or a competitor that you can compete with. It is an open source software component like Apple WebKit. Samsung is totally and only responsible for the infringement that happens with Samsung devices. Apple really is after Samsung, the giant tech cloner, who is like a hardware Microsoft. Samsung held an iPhone up to the light and used that for a blueprint for their smartphone line. When you copy your #1 competitor's product, you sa
Re: (Score:3)
No, it has nothing to do with Android, which is not a company that you can sue, or a competitor that you can compete with. It is an open source software component like Apple WebKit. Samsung is totally and only responsible for the infringement that happens with Samsung devices. Apple really is after Samsung, the giant tech cloner, who is like a hardware Microsoft. Samsung held an iPhone up to the light and used that for a blueprint for their smartphone line. When you copy your #1 competitor's product, you save a ton of money on designers, but you waste it all on lawyers later. That is the way the world works.
Apple has already won. They already got what they wanted, which was to show the process by which a 2008 iPhone 3G became a 2010 Galaxy smartphone, including the paperwork. What that did was it cast suspicion over every hardware maker that created a phone post-iPhone that was in any way influenced by iPhone, which is all of them. Before the Samsung Galaxy, there was this common fiction that everyone in generic tech created that their products were not clones of Apple products, but rather, they were competing products, independently designed and produced, that just happened to be way too much like the Apple products of the previous 2â"5 years. Now, when the whole world has been shown a months-long, company-wide paper trail of an iPhone 3G going through a set process to become a Samsung Galaxy, it is like when people finally realized that pro wrestling was not sports, but rather âoesports entertainment.â
You can see that Apple won because Samsung and the rest of the generic tech industry have changed their ways. Samsung's new tablet looks like their pre-iPad tablet, even down to the flimsy construction and the stylus. Other companies are hiring designers before they make a product so that they don't have to hire lawyers later. There are generic tech manufacturers complaining that Samsung blew their whole follow-and-copy-Apple business model because now the lights are on all the time.
Go home gig, you're drunk.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that the judge rolled out the red carpet and practically suggested it to Samsung, of course they did.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Was this summary written by a 9 year old?? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I would agree it is written by a 9 year old based on the sensationalism and redundancy. Because of redundancy in the summary, along with sensationalism, I agree that it was written by a 9 year old.
Mojo-Jojo?
Re:Is 'Tantrum' the technical word? (Score:5, Interesting)
The legal term is argumentum tantrum. It translates to argument by tantrum and refers to the legal technique of making additional arguments based on rulings that are not made in the lawyer's favor. It's a seldom-used term since it's basically a trait of all lawyers.
Re: (Score:2)
2000 AD: Apple begins selling its products to hipsters, more than just self-righteous gear nerds.
2012 AD: The hipster mentality takes over Apple entirely. When faced with a court ruling, Apple stamps its feet like a petulant child, lights up an "American Spirit," and talks about how music was cooler back when it was DIY and this court has never heard of that.
This is what irks me the most. I smoke American Spirit and I did it before it was co.....oh SHIT! DAMMIT!
Can't we just kill them? It wouldn't be euthanasia but self-defense. In a "stand your soapbox" kind of way.
American Spirits are good cigarettes. (Score:2)
No argument from me there. American Spirits are tasty cigarettes. In fact, it's hard to go back to the 'bros or Camels after a pack of those.
To keep people from thinking I'm a hipster, I wear a suit and carry a Bible whenever I smoke one!
Re: (Score:2)
This is what irks me the most. I smoke American Spirit and I did it before it was co.....oh SHIT! DAMMIT!
Lucky Strikes. Unfiltered. Smoked 'em because they were the cheapest cigs you could buy (like, $1.25/pack back in the late 1990's).
Quit the Lucky's about a decade ago, when the trendy hipster crowd caught wind of them (pun not intended, but noted) and started buying out every smoke shop in the state, trying to pick up some street cred with the punk rockers they were trying so hard to imitate, subsequently driving the price up 4-5 times.
I smoke a pipe now, have for the last few years - doesn't get an
Re: (Score:2)
It reminds me SCO vs Linux case. Like Apple has nothing better to do.
Like what?
No, seriously - other than churn out slightly-improved versions of the same product every 6 months, and attempt to sue their competitors into oblivion, what does Apple do?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, seriously - other than churn out slightly-improved versions of the same product every 6 months, and attempt to sue their competitors into oblivion, what does Apple do?
Get their crowd of hypnotized tech fans and "because it's cool" hipsters to be early-adopters and drive THEIR version of "the next thing" into the position of being the first commercially successful version - creating the appearance that they came up with the concept (rather than just the first commercially successful design) - and leverag