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 532330
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by atsureki on Sat 25th Aug 2012 22:23 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
atsureki
Member since:
2006-03-12

Maybe someone here can answer this for me.

People like John Gruber - rooting for Apple here, obviously


Not exactly.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/08/22/drance-apple-samsung
He thinks Apple is right, but he doesn't like the idea of patents being validated in such a big way.

- support App.net.


Not really.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/08/22/tent
He's more apprehensive and questioning, though since every other post out of him is complaining about what Twitter's turning into, I can see why he'd be hopeful about a replacement.

However, App.net is a 1:1 Twitter clone. Zero changes. It's literally a 1:1 copy.

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


I don't personally know anything about App.net, but if Twitter has any applicable patents, I affirm their right to sue. And if they do sue, I expect Gruber will take a side based on facts and reason, rather than shouting about idealism or engaging in the blind loyalty so many like to accuse him of.

As for Apple and Samsung, their devices are only "clearly different" if you're already well versed with the particulars. There are people who can tell the year and model of a car from hearing the ignition across a parking lot, and there are people who would be at a loss to tell a Mazda from a Bentley when they're looking right at the back where the badges are. If you know for sure at ten paces whether you see an iPhone 3GS or a Samsung Galaxy n, then you're much closer to the former category.

The Apple-Samsung jury was made up of people specifically unlike you and me, because knowledgeable people have already made up their mind.* That's why experts speak as witnesses rather than sitting on the jury. The jury was shown iPhones, Galaxies, Lumias, and HTCs, and, like any reasonable person without prejudice, they concluded two of the things were too much like each other, with a very long list of specific charges to affirm or reject.

There are (or were) smartphones out there that are (were) *really* different from the iPhone. Lumia is one. Any Android with a keyboard is plenty distinctive. The Pre was incredibly original and had so much potential, until Motorola and Verizon tag-teamed it and Apotheker put a bullet in it. Even HTCs, Motorolas, and LGs all have distinctive and varied bezel styles. Compared to any of these, Samsung's stuff is a very close, meticulous copy. Combined with the fact that Apple managed to dredge up a document showing that Samsung's engineering goals were based specifically on iPhone functionality, the conclusion was inevitable. Samsung's stuff is not "clearly different" unless your clarity has had some very specific training.

* "The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God Is Within You

Reply Parent Score: 2