Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Aug 2012 06:23 UTC
Legal "The 2010 report, translated from Korean, goes feature by feature, evaluating how Samsung's phone stacks up against the iPhone. Authored by Samsung's product engineering team, the document evaluates everything from the home screen to the browser to the built in apps on both devices. In each case, it comes up with a recommendation on what Samsung should do going forward and in most cases its answer is simple: Make it work more like the iPhone." Pretty damning. We still need to know a few things: how many of these were actually implemented? How common are these types of comparisons (i.e., does Apple have them)? Are these protected by patents and the like? And, but that's largely irrelevant and mostly of interest to me because I'm a translator myself, who translated the document, and how well has he or she done the job?
Thread beginning with comment 530272
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Common practice
by maccouch on Wed 8th Aug 2012 12:42 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Common practice"
Member since:

from this verge article: (

"So while Apple started off in full assault mode with a colossal list of trademarks, trade dress registrations, design patents and technical utility patents in its complaint, everything has been trimmed back for trial: all of its trademark claims have been dismissed, only one registered and limited unregistered trade dress claims remain, and the patent infringement allegations have been reduced to four design patents and three utility patents."

[how does one get links here? ]

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Common practice
by Soulbender on Wed 8th Aug 2012 12:48 in reply to "RE[9]: Common practice"
Soulbender Member since:

In other words, they didn't have much of a case.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[11]: Common practice
by maccouch on Wed 8th Aug 2012 12:51 in reply to "RE[10]: Common practice"
maccouch Member since:

maybe. but i have the impression that is the judge that's aggressively slimming the case for both parties because she's out of patience and because she doesn't want a million claims in her process.

Reply Parent Score: 1