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 534416
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

If I replace my house with a pyramid and a few months later my neighbor suddenly also lives in a pyramid then I'd conclude he copied me.

Yes, pyramids have been around since aliens visited earth thousands of years ago, but really where did my neighbor get the idea from?

Samsung copied Nokia, BlackBerry and now Apple. Each time the went for the company who was doing best. The recent court case revealed how they were going to make their current products look and behave more Apple like.

The bright white earphones were a sign of an iPod in someone's pocket. Of all the colors and designs Samsung could have picked/copied they chose Apple's.

If Nokia suddenly sells millions of phones in all kinds of colors you can bet we'll suddenly see Samsung phones in all kinds of colors.

Well, let them, but don't claim Samsung innovates or offers customer choice. They offer copies, more of the same.

Reply Parent Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

If I replace my house with a pyramid and a few months later my neighbor suddenly also lives in a pyramid then I'd conclude he copied me.


He'd be imitating you, yes, but that's not wrong. It just shows poor taste.

Well, let them, but don't claim Samsung innovates or offers customer choice. They offer copies, more of the same.


http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/smartphones/
http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/mobile-phones/

Hmm. I see A LOT of stuff there that doesn't resemble anything by Apple. The fact that you are completely oblivious to all the products Samsung ships does not negate the fact that they exist.

Reply Parent Score: 3

BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

If I replace my house with a pyramid and a few months later my neighbor suddenly also lives in a pyramid then I'd conclude he copied me.

Yes, pyramids have been around since aliens visited earth thousands of years ago, but really where did my neighbor get the idea from?


A better parallel would be if several other people on your street had purchased pyramids before you - but you still conclude your neighbor copied you specifically, because of some superficial similarity. That's not only an example of the post hoc fallacy, but a sign of narcissistic personality disorder: assuming that everything is somehow about you.

Apple fanboism is nothing more than narcissistic personality disorder by proxy: iFanboys assume that everything is somehow about Apple. And if there's anything more pathetic than a narcissist, it's a narcissist who needs a proxy.

Samsung copied Nokia, BlackBerry and now Apple.


And, in turn, Apple copied Microsoft (Windows Mobile), Palm, and Nokia with the iPhone - Apple released a smartphone years afterward, so the only possible conclusion is that they were copying. Or, at least, that's the conclusion you would reach if you were honest enough to apply your "post hoc" reasoning consistently.

Of course, that's just SOP for Apple. They couldn't even be bothered to come up with an original name for their smartphone, and instead choose willful infringement of CISCO's "IPhone" trademark.

Reply Parent Score: 3