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 532343
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

What a bunch of horseshit...

The irony is this is coming from an Apple supporter.

"...Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal. We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

Steve Jobs, 1996

He believed this when he said it. It isn't taken out of context.

The truth that if you were to select a representative cross section of the uncommitted population and, in a scrupulously balanced forum, give them access to...

blah blah blah blah

...see the obvious truth. Samsung copied Apple, it did it deliberately, it did it in breach of patents, it did even after it was asked to stop and it did it wilfully.

Copying (to a point) is a good thing. It is the engine of innovation - you cannot innovate in isolation. Everything is derived from something that existed before it. Innovation is coming up with ingenious ways to make things better, do things better. Jobs knew this, he practiced this, he did it better than most in fact.

Innovative != Original...

There is admittedly a line where you can go too far, I concede that, but I personally don't believe that Samsung crossed it. Im not taking about the technicalities of whether they violated patents or not - Im just talking about general principle. Of course the jury did what they did, so that is that.

But it doesn't really change the argument. Im not upset that Samsung lost the case. I personally don't care about Samsung, or Google for that matter. Im not a fanboy - I don't post here to defend companies. All of your comments are directed at some "subculture" - I don't belong to a subculture.

Copying is not wrong - it is not "unethical". Being able to monopolize a sofware method for 20 years in the technology industry, where product life cycles last maybe 10 years at best, is what is wrong. That is a fricken enternity! That is unethical!

I don't care that Apple won. I don't care that Samsung lost. But I do care that this case upheld (decidedly) Apple's 915 and 381 patents...

It doesn't matter whether or not Apple 'invented" these. It is not fair to the industry. Virtually every single multi-touch device in existence with a browser on it can be argued to violate one or both of these patents... Sure, they can be worked around with a bit of work - but that would not satisfy your argument. Subtly changing something to avoid violating a patent is certainly copying, is it not?

So what is your solution? That Apple have a monopoly on multi-touch devices until about 2025? That is fair to you? You have a device - the interface is a screen, and the only input is your fingers... There are only so many ways you can implement things, and the obvious and optimal ways are now the exclusive property of Apple, Inc. - and they don't license to anyone.

Apple certainly didn't invent multi-touch technology, Jeff Han and even Microsoft were doing things with it prior to Apple. Are you saying that just because Apple holds these patents it is fair to give them a 20 year monopoly on the entire product segment?

You think it is good for consumers for Apple to have no real competitors? If everyone else is doing something completely different... they are not competitors. You think lack of competition is good for a free market? For consumers?

The reality is that other companies are going to keep building multi-touch devices. All this verdict means (if upheld for the long haul) is that they have no choice but to work around these patents. They will suck just a little bit more than they would have had to otherwise. They will still be, for all intents and purposes, iphone and ipad "copies" in your eyes - but they will all be legal.

How does this help Apple? How does this help consumers? Apple is a billion dollars richer. I don't even think they would notice at this point...

All this does is create pain for an entire industry - one that Apple did not create and has no right to hold hostage. Everyone suffers.

Reply Parent Score: 5