Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Sep 2012 11:58 UTC
Legal "While Apple's technology is a 'very nice invention', the technique used in Android differs from the iOS solution, argued Bas Berghuis van Woortman, one of Samsung's lawyers. Because the Android based method is more hierarchical the system is more complex and therefore harder for developers to use, he said. [...] Apple disagrees. 'They suggest that they have a lesser solution, but that is simply not true', said Apple's lawyer Theo Blomme to judge Peter Blok, who presided over a team of three judges, in a response to Samsung's claim." I just wish these companies and their lawyers could see and hear themselves. If only for a few seconds. Not even Monty Python could write this. By the way, all these patents were already thrown out last year by the Dutch courts, but Apple started a 'bottom procedure', a more thorough handling of the case. Three expert IP judges preside, and due to the earlier ruling, Apple is fighting an uphill battle.
Thread beginning with comment 534414
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15



Neither Apple nor Samsung should be allowed to patent that, there's simply absolutely NOTHING new or inventive in either patent application. Those things -- including the controls and all -- have been done already in the 80s.

Reply Parent Score: 5

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I agree, but that's a whole different subject. This is about Samsung yet again copying Apple stuff. It's becoming hard to sum up all the stuff they copied without leaving something out.

Samsung copies Apple and sells a lot of stuff, Nokia (and RIM) doesn't copy and doesn't sell lots.

This makes me wonder why people claim the Apple vs Samsung verdict is bad for customer choice and innovation. If companies kept on copying Apple we'd end up with iPhones and iPhone look-a-likes. Nokia, who does offer a good and different product, doesn't even get a chance to show its goods because everybody wants an iPhone or something that looks like it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

This is about Samsung yet again copying Apple stuff.


But as I said, that has been done already 30 years ago. How can it be copying Apple when Apple themselves aren't doing anything new either, and are in fact copying what's been done before?

Reply Parent Score: 5

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Nokia, who does offer a good and different product


That's the problem here. The jury in the US ruled that Samsung phones with keyboards and phones with like 5 weirdly arranged buttons below the screen infringed iPhone *design* patents. If those phones infringe, then sure AS HELL Nokia's Lumias would have been found infringing as well, had they been part of the case.

Many people seem to think this is only about the Galaxy Ace - it's not. A whole sew of CLEARLY different devices were found infringing on design patents, and arguing that's okay is arguing nobody should be allowed to compete with Apple at all.

Reply Parent Score: 3

thavith_osn Member since:
2005-07-11

Going way off topic here :-)

I just noticed your avatar, I loved that game!!!

I'm guessing you played on the C64 due to your login, I played it on an Apple ][ back in the day :-)

Reply Parent Score: 2

_xmv Member since:
2008-12-09



Samsung copies Apple and sells a lot of stuff, Nokia (and RIM) doesn't copy and doesn't sell lots.

This makes me wonder why people claim the Apple vs Samsung verdict is bad

when HTC was selling a lot, Apple was suying HTC.
Now Samsung beat HTC to that and got sued by apple
I guess the Nexus One looked like an iphone to you?

Reply Parent Score: 3

BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

This makes me wonder why people claim the Apple vs Samsung verdict is bad for customer choice and innovation.


Let me see if I understand correctly... if a company sells a "copy" that's comparable to a more expensive product, then in your mind that's bad for consumer choice? And to you, being able to produce a product that's comparable to a competitors (but less expensive) isn't innovative? So rounded corners on a rectangle are innovative, but more efficient manufacturing processes aren't?

Even if everyone followed your example & blindly accepted the notion that Samsung does nothing but copy Apple, then you still have to ignore all of those details to conclude that it has no possible benefits for consumer choice.

Reply Parent Score: 3