Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Aug 2012 23:54 UTC
Legal And just like that, within a matter of days, the jury has reached a verdict in Apple vs. Samsung. The basic gist is simple: Apple's software patents are valid, and many Samsung devices infringe upon them. Apple's iPhone 3G trade dress is valid, and Samsung's Galaxy S line infringes, but other devices did not. Samsung did not infringe Apple's iPad design patent. Apple did not infringe any of Samsung's patents. Apple is awarded a little over $1 billion in damages. Competition lost today, and developers in the United States should really start to get worried - software patents got validated big time today.
Permalink for comment 532078
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by darcysmith on Sat 25th Aug 2012 01:22 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
Member since:

Maybe someone here can answer this for me.

People like John Gruber - rooting for Apple here, obviously - support However, is a 1:1 Twitter clone. Zero changes. It's literally a 1:1 copy.

Why is okay, but Samsung's clearly different devices are not? This has been bugging me for weeks.

The API is different than the Twitter API, so no copying there.

The goal of is pretty much the same, which I guess is what you are calling a copy. However Apple isn't saying nobody else can make a phone, they just have to make it look different (the Trade Dress stuff). The software patents, I hate the idea of them, I hope that they go away, but sadly they have them and they were violated.

Pinch to zoom, for example, though, can you honestly not think of some other way for that to work? It is 100% impossible to do it any other way?

From that point of view Apple/Samsung is not the same as Twitter/ set out to provide the same sort of service as Twitter but do it in a different way. Samsung set out to provide a product that mimicked that of Apples. That is the difference.

Reply Parent Score: 3