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.
Thread beginning with comment 532282
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

In the business world, it doesn't matter who got the idea first. It's important who implements something successfully it in the market first

I completely agree with that statement. Do you not understand that it completely invalidates everything else your wrote...

Apple DID achieve market success first with this "class" of product (ie. multi-touch tablet/smart phone). It certainly matters because their headstart paid off in spades, their sales show it... That first to market advantage paid off enormously for them.

Seriously, I respect their ability to make good products. I have some of them. Good for Apple! I'm glad they made a fortune - they deserve it.

Now why the f*ck should that preclude other companies from making similar products and trying to compete with them??? Apple already got the benefits of their advantage - and then some. How does giving them an unfettered monopoly on an entire category of product benefit anyone other than Apple?

Reply Parent Score: 2

kyousefi Member since:

They are not claiming on the entire category. The proof is they don't have and didn't have the same problem with windows phone, touch screen black berries and palm's web OS. They have the problem with the samsung copying their trade dress. Trade dress has nothing to do with technology or freedom of innovation. Trade dress is Casio makes some watch similar to Rolex submariner. In any other trade the winner in court is obvious. OS news is muddying the water by framing this legal battle as a battle of copying technology. It's a war on copying the looks. And looks are important, profitable, and can be stolen.

Reply Parent Score: 0