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 534420
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

So Samsung is copying Apple because they both have "volume up", "volume down" and "answer call" on the earphones remote control? That's a ridiculous claim. There are tons of earlier earphones with a similar design. What other buttons would you put on a earphones remote control?

Reply Parent Score: 4

Tony Swash Member since:

This sort of back and forth could go on a long time. It seems to me that one should clarify what one is arguing about.

Does anyone think that Samsung did not deliberately try to copy Apple's iPhone, iOS and trade dress (packaging , retails styles etc)?

There seems to be a lot of evidence that they did, not just lists of obviously similar designs (in some cases very, very similar) but also the documents that came out in the trial that showed that copying Apple was a strategy. It's probably not really worth arguing about whether they did or did not because if you think they did not, in face of the huge amount of evidence that they did, then I doubt anything would change your mind.

A more interesting argument is that which says that Samsung did copy but there is nothing wrong in doing that and that there should be no legal restraint on copying (or at least the sort of copying Samsung undertook).

Reply Parent Score: 2

MOS6510 Member since:

A lot of people deny human induced climate change and I'm starting to suspect these are the same people who deny Samsung copied Apple.

Samsung admitted they did it via their how-to-copy-Apple documents.

Reply Parent Score: 1