Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Aug 2012 12:24 UTC, submitted by henderson101
Legal "Comparing Samsung's flagship products before and after release of the iPhone & iPad, and how Apple's intellectual property infringement claims hold up." A terrible visual guide that ignores not only Samsung's own pre-iPhone designs, but also - and worse yet - the thirty-odd years of mobile computing that preceded the iPhone. Typical of today's technology world: a complete and utter lack of historical sense. Worse yet are the claims about icons: only the phone icon is similar, but Apple did not invent the green phone icon. This is a remnant of virtually all earlier phones which use a green phone icon for initiate/answer call, and a red phone icon for terminate/reject call. Claiming this deserves IP protection is beyond ridiculous, and shows just how low Apple is willing to go.
Permalink for comment 530118
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Thom, I see your bias against Apple but I don't care. It's your site and your articles, so you can pretty much write what you want.

Just take care because Apple isn't claiming the invention of the green phone icon. Why this whole thing is against Samsung alone? Have you ever ask yourself why not Motorola, or Google itself? There's more than a stupid fight under this trial and you should be digging on this instead of writing poor jokes about it. Just my opinion.

I see Samsung copying Apple here. I mean, Apple didn't invent all this stuff but it did put it all together on a product. Samsung copy this: putting it all together. The USA patent system is fucked up indeed. It shouldn't allow a company to prosecute another because of putting things together. But it does. That's the real problem.

This tight patent mechanism is anti-innovation and will kill competition. This should stop and OS News should be raising this flag instead of anti-Apple fanboyism...

Apple is right because it's using the patent system to protect it's products. Samsung is right because it's just competing giving buyers what they want: a useful alternative to iPhone. The laws in the middle are wrong but nobody seems to be aware of this.

Reply Parent Score: 1