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 500937
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

The question posed was "Does anybody here think Samsung did not copy Apple?".

This has nothing to do with prior art. And I don't consider non-tablets, mock-ups and props as prior art, because that would mean warp speed starships wouldn't be innovations/inventions. I don't see the makers of Back to the Future sue the first person to market a time traveling car.

Like I stated many times it's not just one thing Samsung copied, it's multiple things. I have seen cheap Android tablets that also took a large dose of iPad inspiration, but their creators don't seem to get sued.

It doesn't matter is stuff has been done before or is obvious (with hindsight), it's Samsung making a product after the iPad that took a lot of hints from it.

If Samsung made a black rectangular shaped bezel bearing tablet I don't think Apple would have sued them. But they added an iOS clone as its operating system, made adjustments to make it look even more like iOS and put it in a box that looks like an iPad box. At tech fairs they even used the Apple app store logo (amongst others) and now a (family) related company even made covers that look like Apple's iPad 2 ones.

So it beats me why some people deny Samsung copying Apple. It's an obvious way to lift on Apple's marketing and success, like a lot of companies do in either small ways or slightly bigger ones.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lustyd Member since:
2008-06-19

If Samsung made a black rectangular shaped bezel bearing tablet I don't think Apple would have sued them. But they added an iOS clone as its operating system, made adjustments to make it look even more like iOS and put it in a box that looks like an iPad box. At tech fairs they even used the Apple app store logo (amongst others) and now a (family) related company even made covers that look like Apple's iPad 2 ones.


Not that it matters, the iPad still vastly outsells the Samsung clone despite all of that ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

The question posed was "Does anybody here think Samsung did not copy Apple?". This has nothing to do with prior art.

Whether or not someone copied someone else has everything to do with prior art. Such a concept is fundamental in the world of innovation.


And I don't consider non-tablets, mock-ups and props as prior art, because that would mean warp speed starships wouldn't be innovations/inventions.

One can consider anything the way one wants to consider it, but one's considerations don't change fact.

Any drawing, film, verbal description demo, etc. can constitute an invention if it is original and novel.

Warp speed starships are not an innovation -- speed is not an invention, speed is a matter of degree. Now, the process and componenents that it takes to travel faster than light speed -- those would be innovations.


I don't see the makers of Back to the Future sue the first person to market a time traveling car.

Bad example. Who would actually want to make a time traveling car.


Like I stated many times it's not just one thing Samsung copied, it's multiple things. I have seen cheap Android tablets that also took a large dose of iPad inspiration, but their creators don't seem to get sued.

We've certainly heard that vague statement many times. Still waiting for more specifics and a list of the "multiple things" for review.


It doesn't matter is stuff has been done before or is obvious (with hindsight),...

Of course, it matters if stuff has been done before or if an idea is obvious. If an idea has been done before or if the idea is obvious, no one can claim the idea (except for the originator).

Perhaps it doesn't work that way in the RDF, but that is the way it works in the real world.


it's Samsung making a product after the iPad that took a lot of hints from it.

Samsung also made the product after the JooJoo, the Knight-Ridder tablet, the Samsung Digital picture frame, and a couple of other pre-Ipad items. One can claim that Samsung took hints from Apple, but, in light of such prior art, such a claim is not fact.


If Samsung made a black rectangular shaped bezel bearing tablet I don't think Apple would have sued them. But they added an iOS clone as its operating system, made adjustments to make it look even more like iOS and put it in a box that looks like an iPad box.

Wait. Are these points the "multiple things?" If so, more specifics are needed.

What exaclty is cloned from IOS.

What adjustments exactly where made to Samsung's OS to make it look like IOS.

What exactly is it about Samsung's box that looks like an Ipad box.

Furthermore, even if Samsung did what you claim, what exactly is original to Apple regarding such traits?


At tech fairs they even used the Apple app store logo (amongst others)

If Samsung violated a trademark, that is definitely wrong. Please show links/evidence.


and now a (family) related company even made covers that look like Apple's iPad 2 ones.

Huh? What exactly are we talking about?


So it beats me why some people deny Samsung copying Apple.

Perhaps some of us rely on fact, instead of vague notions.

Reply Parent Score: 2