Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Dec 2011 11:27 UTC
Legal I'm guessing Apple is getting desperate, since its software patent lawsuits aren't doing particularly well. Moving on from software and design patents, the company is now suing Samsung over... Patents for mobile phone and tablet cases (more at The Verge). I think Apple has more offensive lawsuits than products now, so technically, "patent maker" is more accurate than "gadget maker" or "device maker". Fun times.
Thread beginning with comment 500810
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Tony Swash
Member since:
2009-08-22

"The question I am interested is if anyone really thinks Samsung did not copy Apple?


Apparently the way Apple shapes its products, designs its icons & GUI, puts in boxes, advertises them and makes accessories for them has become the only logical, practical and even only way to do it. Therefor nobody did copy Apple, but it's the only possible way to do it.

Besides tablet computers colored black and shaped rectangular have been around for a very long time as people have come up with examples like a children's slate, an embedded monitor in a table in 2001 A Space Odyssey and a piece of wood in Star Trek.
"

So I infer that you are saying yes you think Samsung copied Apple - correct?

Reply Parent Score: 0

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

In my mind there is no doubt they copied Apple.

It's not just one thing, or two, it's well, almost everything.

People cite prior art, but this involves things that have been around for years and years, yet Samsung came with their stuff after the iPad turned out to be a success. So there is no doubt who they got their inspiration from and it wasn't Star Trek or the JooJoo (RIP).

So it beats me why people here ignore reality and claim Samsung didn't copy Apple or even call copying progress, even though Samsung isn't progressing anything.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

In my mind there is no doubt they copied Apple.

It's not just one thing, or two, it's well, almost everything.

People cite prior art, but this involves things that have been around for years and years, yet Samsung came with their stuff after the iPad turned out to be a success. So there is no doubt who they got their inspiration from and it wasn't Star Trek or the JooJoo (RIP).

So it beats me why people here ignore reality and claim Samsung didn't copy Apple or even call copying progress, even though Samsung isn't progressing anything.



It's because of Apple phobia plain and simple. Serious and intelligent people will put forward the 'angels on a pinhead' type arguments about this or that obscure product or drawing or whatever that means that Apple didn't invent the iPad and then try to argue that somehow Samsung didn't copy the iPad. That's the sort of intellectual collapse that a phobia can precipitate. It is painfully obvious to more objective observers that:

a) Apple try to make their products have original and distinctive designs and functionality

and that

b) Samsung try to copy Apple's entire product designs

Reply Parent Score: -1

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

In my mind there is no doubt they copied Apple.

Everyone has a right to their opinion.


It's not just one thing, or two, it's well, almost everything.

Such vagueness does not convince.


People cite prior art, but this involves things that have been around for years and years, yet Samsung came with their stuff after the iPad turned out to be a success.

Actually, Samsung was selling its digital picture frame several years before the Ipad "turned out to be a success." So, Samsung was "coming with their stuff" years before the Ipad.

Furthermore, Samsung cited a lot of prior art in its defense against Apple's litigation, so there is no reason to believe that Samsung did not get inspiration from the prior art that it cited.

Additionally, it's further damning to the pro-Apple arguments that a fanboy would admit that prior art to the Ipad has "been around for years and years." Such an admission means that a tablet with rounded corners and a shiny, black, flush bezel was invented outside of Apple much earlier than most fanboys would care to contemplate.

Finally, we must also consider the obviousness factor of such a simple tablet design. The design was so obvious that a newspaper publisher made a mock-up with a demo video 16 years before the Ipad was introduced!


So it beats me why people here ignore reality and claim Samsung didn't copy Apple or even call copying progress, even though Samsung isn't progressing anything.

Samsung cited solid prior art to the Ipad in their defense against Apple's litigation. One of the prior art items is Samsung's own digital picture frame, which the Ipad design resembles almost exactly. So, Samsung probably got their inspiration from those decidedly non-Apple sources.

Who is saying that Samsung is "progressing" anything technologically? It may or may not be, but that is not the point. A product can be obvious, and, thus, it is not "progressing" technology, while it is also not "copying" -- such is the case with the Ipad.

Edited 2011-12-21 19:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3