Apple Is Really Overdoing It Now

[Lostlover]

I agree with Samsung copying them, but now it seems like Apple is using the court system to stop sales from a competitor. I don't like that component but I do like scaring Asian companies from doing this in the future whether it's cars, technology, or industrial design.

The New York Times

This injunction stinks to high heaven.

Any one else's thoughts?

All the products Apple wants Samsung to stop selling:

http://gizmodo.com/5938238/apple-wan...msung-products

[swerve]

For some reason, my apple macbook didn't like the NYT link...

But, from what I read in USA Today this weekend was that even Google ADVISED Samsung to NOT copy Apple SO BLATANTLY...

Maybe the should have heeded the warning...

It took Samsung 90 days to copy 4 years worth of R&D from Apple...

I think a company SHOULD be able to recoup their investment on ONE hand -- and on the other, I think that patents CAN lead to stifling innovation...

Maybe this ruling will lead to differentiation which wouldn't be a BAD thing...

Oh -- and I have a Motorola Android phone -- so its not like I'm super one sided for Apple...

[Lostlover]

I'd love to read said USA Today article. And I don't mean to talk with blanket terms, but Asian companies are known for copying/lifting ideas. I keep reading that consumers will lose from the $1.1B verdict. I see it as the opposite. A big company like Samsung will have to offer a different enough product to compete, legally. It will be forced to do its own R&D. We, the consumers, win.

[swerve]

Here is the link to the article I referred to...

As usual for USA Today -- it is not in-depth or biased -- just an overview...

Jury: Samsung violated Apple patents

And an important quote which pretty much made me side with Apple on this one...

In closing arguments on Tuesday, Apple attorney Harold McElhinny alleged that Samsung documents show that in three months, it was able to copy four years of Apple development. He said they show "hundreds of pages of copying directions" for icon design and functions such as tap-to-zoom that were put into the Galaxy phone and tablet line.

He also said Samsung met with Google, which advised the company to change Galaxy designs, but Samsung declined

[Lostlover]

Thank you^^^.

[looseliam]

I have to side with apple on this - and that makes my eye twitch. The UI was an intentional rip-off. The tap-to-zoom, dimensions, etc. should be thrown-out.

I think back to the IBM and IBM compatible days; what would have happened if IBM went after those who re-engineered their BIOS? What if early auto makers went after others for using 'similar engines'? You have a 101 keyboard too? Can't have that. Serial mouse with three buttons? Ohnoes! Where would we be in computing were companies this litigious 30-40 years ago.

If people were buying samsung devices expecting an apple experience then I see grounds for enforcement. But I doubt people say to themselves, "gee, I really want an apple but I'm going to buy samsung because it looks like the same thing." He who want apple products buys apple products and usually doesn't go looking for alternatives.

[Telstra]

.
I don't understand patent laws and i think copying the design is ok

[Lostlover]

I have to side with apple on this - and that makes my eye twitch. The UI was an intentional rip-off. The tap-to-zoom, dimensions, etc. should be thrown-out.

I think back to the IBM and IBM compatible days; what would have happened if IBM went after those who re-engineered their BIOS? What if early auto makers went after others for using 'similar engines'? You have a 101 keyboard too? Can't have that. Serial mouse with three buttons? Ohnoes! Where would we be in computing were companies this litigious 30-40 years ago.

If people were buying samsung devices expecting an apple experience then I see grounds for enforcement. But I doubt people say to themselves, "gee, I really want an apple but I'm going to buy samsung because it looks like the same thing." He who want apple products buys apple products and usually doesn't go looking for alternatives.

I respect your opinion and I'd like to hear more of it since I have about a minute experience with Samsung's products. You had me until the comparison to engines and other innovations. Why would any company invest in R&D if what they're investing in can be lifted with no consequences by a competitor? Why put all the money into it if it won't be yours?

[ZmercTheDuke]

Best professor I ever had in college 2 years ago told me this after talking to him after class. He said best field of law to get into right now is copyright and intellectual property law. I mean look at all the major cases in past 5 years or decade. More and more high profile cases are becoming more frequent. Not to mention theirs some crazy laws that some label companies and others are pushing, like singing a your favorite song even to your self, they are trying to make illegal you have to pay to be able to sing it. Honestly we have only seen the start of whats going to come in following years with copyright and intellectual property cases.

[silverbelt]

Take Windows Phone as a prime example of seeing the iPhone and thinking, "Wow, Apple were brave to try that. I wonder what we can come up with?" The new Metro UI is beautiful, functional and so far removed from iOS. Samsung worked hard to make Android work, look and feel like iOS.

This sort of win for Apple means that we should see more competition and variety in the market, not less. We'll finally have some proper differentiation of products, instead of everyone trying to release another iPhone clone.

[JB3]

I agree with Samsung copying them, but now it seems like Apple is using the court system to stop sales from a competitor. I don't like that component but I do like scaring Asian companies from doing this in the future whether it's cars, technology, or industrial design.

The New York Times

This injunction stinks to high heaven.

Any one else's thoughts?

All the products Apple wants Samsung to stop selling:

Apple Wants to Ban These Samsung Products

It doesn't stink. The jury already decided Samsung infringed, so Apple has the right to ask for a ban on infringing products.

[Nishin]

I hate apple, they are a bully and I hope this firebacks to their arrogant sorry asses

[JB3]

Gee, thanks for that scintillating addition to the thread.

[Lostlover]

Take Windows Phone as a prime example of seeing the iPhone and thinking, "Wow, Apple were brave to try that. I wonder what we can come up with?" The new Metro UI is beautiful, functional and so far removed from iOS. Samsung worked hard to make Android work, look and feel like iOS.

This sort of win for Apple means that we should see more competition and variety in the market, not less. We'll finally have some proper differentiation of products, instead of everyone trying to release another iPhone clone.

I agree 100% with what you said, especially about the Windows Phone (stunning UI) and increase variety in the marketplace. Companies will now have to compete with their own ideas.

[maxpowr9]

Samsung is one thing (I love my Galaxy sIII btw), but if Apple tries to go after the android OS and Google, I see Google putting an injunction on them using their "products". Google has already barred Apple from using youtube and gmail apps on their products and I know my iPad defaults to Yahoo! search engine (Msft has bing so that's another rival).

BTW, guess who owns the copyright on 4G LTE technology? Samsung. That's the delicious irony in this case so expect a counter-sue on the iPhone 5.

[swerve]

BTW, guess who owns the copyright on 4G LTE technology? Samsung. That's the delicious irony in this case so expect a counter-sue on the iPhone 5.

Uh-oh...

[looseliam]

Let us not forget, though, that the patents that are crucial for LTE operability are required to be licensed (see FRAND).

As I recall there are some not-so-important patents pertaining the LTE that could be used in fighting apple.

[maxpowr9]

Despite the recent release of 4G LTE phones, the technology has been around since 2007. South Korea, a country the size of Kentucky, already has full 4G wireless capabilities in their country [I won't go into their strict internet laws] and is actively working on 5G tech already.

Again, Apple is not an innovator but an excellent marketer and only that. You look at the iPhone 5 and it has very similar specs to the Samsung sIII galaxy.

[JB3]

Samsung is one thing (I love my Galaxy sIII btw), but if Apple tries to go after the android OS and Google, I see Google putting an injunction on them using their "products". Google has already barred Apple from using youtube and gmail apps on their products and I know my iPad defaults to Yahoo! search engine (Msft has bing so that's another rival).

Google has no interest in fighting Apple. If Apple sues them, there will be a quick settlement. Since the iPhone, Google has made more money off of Apple's products than they have off Android. Google will not cut off a revenue source that contributes billions of dollars in ads every year when they know they can settle.

Also, Google has not 'barred' Apple from using anything. There is a Gmail app in the app store (which sucks, by the way), Google is building a new YouTube app for iOS 6, and may build a Maps app as well. Apple has been moving away from using some Google services like Maps, but that's because Apple thinks they can do it better. All Apple products are defaulted to search Google in Safari. Google pays millions a year for that privilege.

BTW, guess who owns the copyright on 4G LTE technology? Samsung. That's the delicious irony in this case so expect a counter-sue on the iPhone 5.

No, the copyright is owned by ETSI. Samsung owns 12% of the LTE PATENTS. But that is largely irrelevant. For Samsung to own LTE patents, they are required to ask for licensing on FRAND terms. That means they can't seek outrageous licensing fees, can't sue for an injunction, and can't treat Apple any differently than any other licensee. Samsung has already been slapped around in court for abusing their 3G patents, so they won't be likely to do the same with their 4G patents.

But that doesn't even matter; Any components Apple buys will already be licensed by Qualcomm, which is one of the biggest patent-holders, which itself will have licensed patents from the other patent holders. ( Apple itself also owns a pretty big handful of LTE patents. ) Further, Samsung is already under antitrust investigation in the EU and US for abusing Standard Essential Patents (like those required for 3G and 4G), and any action taken against Apple will be met with skepticism and subpoenas.

[JB3]

Despite the recent release of 4G LTE phones, the technology has been around since 2007. South Korea, a country the size of Kentucky, already has full 4G wireless capabilities in their country [I won't go into their strict internet laws] and is actively working on 5G tech already.

Ha uhm, no. 5G isn't even a blip on the radar. Hasn't even passed conceptual phase yet, and won't, considering that LTE is still in its infancy. (it only started deployment in 2009, and took until 2011 before the biggest carriers started rolling it out)

The next phase is true 4G, which no nation has yet. It is called IMT-Advanced, and will be found in the form of LTE-Advanced. The bandwidth available will be more than three times as much as LTE has now (1 Gbit/s vs. 300 Mbit/s), and will also have a number of other improvements. Its going to be at least another year before LTE-A is ready to be rolled out for customer use, and at least five years before it reaches saturation.

Again, Apple is not an innovator but an excellent marketer and only that. You look at the iPhone 5 and it has very similar specs to the Samsung sIII galaxy.

Oh really? Name me one capacitive touchscreen phone with multitouch capabilities and a screen bigger than 3 inches that came out before the iPhone.

Oh you can't?

There's your innovation right there.

[Lostlover]

Despite the recent release of 4G LTE phones, the technology has been around since 2007. South Korea, a country the size of Kentucky, already has full 4G wireless capabilities in their country [I won't go into their strict internet laws] and is actively working on 5G tech already.

Again, Apple is not an innovator but an excellent marketer and only that. You look at the iPhone 5 and it has very similar specs to the Samsung sIII galaxy.

I generally agree. Apple has the second mover advantage. Someone else comes up with the idea and Apple perfects it.

Apple didn't create computers, tablet PCs, or even mp3 players. They've marketed their products so well, that iPods are synonymous with mp3 players.

[Paws]

Apple just won because it was a U.S.-based court...

[JB3]

Apple just won because it was a U.S.-based court...

That's an overly simplistic view.

The more complicated (and correct) answer, is that the US has different IP laws than other nations.

[star-warrior]

Apple won because the jury were idiots.

Groklaw - The Foreman's Aha Moment in Apple v. Samsung Was Based on Misunderstanding Prior Art ~pj - Updated

The foreman in the Apple v. Samsung trial has now done an interview with Bloomberg News, giving him an opportunity to answer some of the criticisms of the verdict. It's a video on YouTube, titled "Apple Jury Foreman: Here's How We Reached a Verdict", and while he answers the criticisms, he describes how the jury, under his instructions, decided that the Samsung prior art didn't invalidate an Apple patent. In doing so, I think he has revealed the biggest mistake of all made by the jury, one so large I don't believe it can be ignored. At a minimum, Apple shouldn't want to win like this. His aha moment, as he calls it, and assuming what he says on the video is accurate, was based on a misunderstanding of what constitutes prior art.

[star-warrior]

Moreover, the foreman, Mr. Hogan who made the interview above makes others elsewhere and the more he speaks, the more it looks less tenable for Apple:

Groklaw - Apple v Samsung Foreman Gets More Things Wrong ~pj

Back at you, Mr. Hogan. Back at you. But someone calling himself Firewheels responded much more effectively:

Firewheels @Velvin Hogan
You're suggesting, then, that the patent is on the particular implementation, not the overall concept? In that case, isn't it clear that in many of the patents no infringement is possible, as clearly an implementation in Java (Android) is distinct from an implementation in Objective-C (iOS)?

If, however, you're suggesting the patent is on the concept, then clearly there IS prior art, and therefore the patents are invalid.

Either way, Samsung should not have been charged the exorbitant punitive damages you clearly believed were due.

Mr. Hogan has not replied, and it's been 4 hours. As another questioner, Bazzatoyou, phrased it after waiting an hour for a response that never came, "Looks like The Hogan has left the room ...!"

Samsung must be loving the way he's so open, and I'm surprised Apple hasn't gagged this Hogan guy yet.

[maxpowr9]

^At that rate, I would not be surprised if Samsung motions for a mistrial. It's too late for the juror to be gagged as he has already spoken and at the worst case, Samsung will owe Apple nothing except lawyer fees.

[looseliam]

^At that rate, I would not be surprised if Samsung motions for a mistrial. It's too late for the juror to be gagged as he has already spoken and at the worst case, Samsung will owe Apple nothing except lawyer fees.

What the judge should do with this information is set aside the jury's verdict and rule as he sees fit and let the appellate court sort it out.

[Nishin]

Chinese Knockoff Maker Reportedly Copies, Patents iPhone 5 Design | Gadget Lab | Wired.com

[evanrick]

yeah samsung played games before but apple is probably overreaching now. whenever a giant tech company, like apple, says that they want to 'preserve innovation' i want to vomit.

[maxpowr9]

This article quite well summarizes my stance on Apple atm...

Viewpoint: Apple's iPhone launches no longer excite

[justdra]

The launches may no longer excite but I guarantee the sales will go thru the roof. A lot of them will be first time iPhone buyers and since they have a different connection, it may slow some old users but they can get a simple attachment if they need and extra one. If I didn't have time left on my 4S, I would be getting the new one but all the bugs are usually worked out by the time I'm ready for an upgrade.

[gewhite3]

I've got my first iPhone 4S, and my last Apple product, ever. Never again.

[swerve]

I've got my first iPhone 4S, and my last Apple product, ever. Never again.

Why is that???

I thought it was a pretty good phone based on what I read -- other than the fact it lacked 4G...

BECAUSE it lacked 4G -- I ended up with the Droid Razr...

I'm CURIOUS because my partner is thinking of getting the iPhone 5...

[gewhite3]

I just think it's way overpriced and overrated. I don't use the browser that much and I don't text often. Why do I want to pay that much money for something I just want to use for talking? So...... when I get rid of the 4S, I will get something much simpler and cheaper.

[justdra]

So basically you let the hype talk you into something you really didn't want? Did you decide after you paid for the phone that you didn't really want to text or surf the web? I don't talk much or send more than 100 text a month but I use my phone for almost everything and i'm always using the mp3 player or listening to audiobooks or playing games if I'm stuck in a line. Some people, like my mother, just wants a phone that rings, lol. Next year when I get the new iphone, I will let her use my 3GS as an ipod and shelf my 4S for back up.

[star-warrior]

I've taken the sim card out of my Apple 3Gs phone and I am using it for the games and other apps. It readily connects to wi-fi if in range and I can go on-line to do stuff.

[gewhite3]

So basically you let the hype talk you into something you really didn't want? Did you decide after you paid for the phone that you didn't really want to text or surf the web? I don't talk much or send more than 100 text a month but I use my phone for almost everything and i'm always using the mp3 player or listening to audiobooks or playing games if I'm stuck in a line. Some people, like my mother, just wants a phone that rings, lol. Next year when I get the new iphone, I will let her use my 3GS as an ipod and shelf my 4S for back up.

I don't pay attention to "hype". I bought the phone because it had just come out, I was really sick and tired of my old phone (it was touch screen but didn't function well at all). My partner and I were in the mall, we stopped in to the Apple store so he could ask one of the staff about his iPad, then we decided to check out the phones, and I bought one. I like the phone, I just think it's overpriced and overrated, like I said. I won't make the same mistake again and now I know for certain that when I hear the fan boys talk about how "perfect" Apple is, they are full of it.

[JB3]

Apple won because the jury were idiots.

Groklaw - The Foreman's Aha Moment in Apple v. Samsung Was Based on Misunderstanding Prior Art ~pj - Updated

Grok law is not reputable. The judge will not overturn the verdict based on what he's said.

[star-warrior]

Mid-October
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19989750

Apple has lost its appeal against a UK ruling that Samsung had not infringed its design rights.

A judge at the High Court in London had originally ruled in July that the look of Samsung's Galaxy Tab computers was not too similar to designs registered in connection with the iPad.

...

Apple still needs to run ads saying Samsung had not infringed its rights.

November
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20165664

Apple ordered to re-write 'inaccurate' Samsung statement
Apple has 48 hours to re-write a statement on its website relating to its design rights dispute with Samsung, UK judges have ruled.

Apple was forced on 18 October to publish a message making it clear that Samsung had not infringed the iPad's registered design.

....

One of the other judges, Sir Robin Jacob, added: "I would like to see the head of Apple [Tim Cook] make an affidavit about why that is such a technical difficulty for the Apple company."

Slap in the face!

Apple's Ad : http://www.apple.com/uk/legal-judgement/

[Nishin]

More Apple non sense: http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple...Mexico_id36199

[swerve]

more apple non sense: http://www.phonearena.com/news/apple...mexico_id36199

yightz!!!

The bad guys WIN for ALL the RIGHT reasons...

It is ASTOUNDING that APPLE didn't trademark the iPhone name until 2007 in Mexico...

And -- THEN -- they chose to fight it in court rather than just PAY the BAD GUYS OFF for its SNEAKY yet LEGAL iFone trademark...

How bizarre...

[JB3]

Apple... what's the deal with the Ipad mini? No HD video, piss poor sound, a mediocre display... and it costs $329 ($360-370 after tax)? I'll take the Kindle Fire HD ($199) over it. People talk about innovation, but how is that device innovative? And who in their right mind would spend close to $400 on a tablet with no HD?

People that want a tablet that can, you know, actually do things. The Fire is good as a multimedia consumption device, but not for anything else.

[JB3]

More Apple non sense: http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple...Mexico_id36199

Not quite. That story has been debunked. Apple still owns the iPhone trademark in two other classes, and can still use it as it sees fit.

[JB3]

That table can actually do things? The Fire has a lot of capability on it... and quite a few different options. It's a versatile device. And there are other tablets cheaper than the ipad mini that can do many things... the ipad mini is a piece of overpriced crap.

The Fire uses a highly curated and limited app store, and is missing basic features like a decent email app and a calendar app. The only reason anyone should buy the Fire is if they've already bought into the Amazon ecosystem or only plan on using it for media consumption. Buyers are better off choosing the Nexus 7 or iPad mini.

Also, the mini is not an overpriced piece of crap. For what it brings, the price is fair. You should also note that the mini is in a different class than the Fire or Nexus 7. It actually competes against the Galaxy Tab 7.7/8.9. The 8.9 is actually more expensive than the mini, while the 7.7 rings in less expensive. Both, however, have worse specs.

- - - Updated - - -

On my last post I said table.. I meant to say tablet... referring to the ipad mini. I still stand by the statement that it's useless.

You stand by your statement because you've obviously never used one.

[JB3]

I agree.

My OH just got an iPhone. I thought it was a piece of shit. In fact, it was defective that he had to return it.

The biggest thing I don't like about the iPhone is that the SIM card's not transferable, unlike any other cellphone I've ever own. I won't stand for that. I frequently switch my phones out by moving my SIM card from one phone to the other.

What are you talking about? You can move the sim between the devices as easily as any other GSM or LTE device.

[andysayshi]

Unfortunately, in this world of ever-thinner and lighter phones, SIM cards have had to change. Standard sized SIM cards are the domain of old clunkers now.

The iPhone 4 and 4S switched to the MicroSIM, which has now become quite common on smartphones, like the Samsung Galaxy S3 etc. Apple have moved the iPhone 5 to the NanoSIM, which will no doubt become the standard for all phones over the next year or two.

All of these cards are actually the same electronics, just stuck to a smaller piece of plastic. With a Stanley knife and a steady hand they can all be "upgraded".

With regard to tablets, I'm also with JB3. The Kindle Fire HD is okay - great if you're an Amazon customer, but otherwise pretty limited. The Nexus, however, is an awesome little tablet for the money. I recently bought 20 of them and used them as giveaways for my business at a convention, with my company brochure on it rather than on paper. Needless to say, when you give the Marketing Manager of a company a free tablet while all the other guys are handing out their paper brochures, you get quite a bit of positive attention!

Haven't tried an iPad mini, so I can't vouch for them, but as a heavily invested iOS customer, it would make sense for me to buy an iOS tablet if I was in the market for one.

[andysayshi]

You're going to have the same issue with most contemporary phones you buy. Just put an adaptor in your wallet in case you should need it. You can buy them on eBay for a dollar or two each.

[JB3]

The SIMs are different sizes, JB3.

Okay, go to ebay and get an adapter for 50 cents. Problem (even though its not really a problem) solved.

[JB3]

Not convincing at all. The Fire has a very expansive app store. I've seen it.

It is tiny compared to the App and Play stores. A very large number of apps are not available in the Amazon app store that are available in the Play store, and Amazon has neutered Android's ability to side load applications in their version of the OS.

Are we really going to argue about this? The price for the mini is NOT fair. It's far from that. And don't even look at the Fire... take a look at the other tablets out there running off Droid. Yes, the mini is overpriced... ridiculously.

Edit: OH and I have used it. Nice try, JB. Attitude, attitude. One can't handle the facts.

Yes, we are, because you are incorrect. The price being charged for the Mini is fair, especially compared to the competition I listed above. The Mini does not compete with either the Nexus 7 or Kindle Fire HD 7 inch. It competes with the larger tablets from Samsung, Amazon, and others, all of which are priced the same or higher than the Mini. (Galaxy Tab 8.9 is $469, Kindle 8.9 is $314, IdeaPad is $299, Nook HD+ is $299) It is priced comparably to the tablets it actually competes with.

Oh, and it is Android, not Droid. One is the name of an operating system, the other is the marketing name for a lineup of handsets on Verizon Wireless.

[TitaniumSky]

I've played with the galaxy S2 and iPhone 4S... extensively. I myself own an LG Thrill (because of its 3D capabilities). When I got to play with someone's iPhone 5 I saw nothing new to explore. Everything seemed like the same old, same old...boring. When I got to play with the S3, the UI felt fresh and made me want to play around with it and there were so many new features from Samsung to explore, like the popup video, burst shot, all the NFC stuff.

When jellybean hits for S3... there will be a smoother UI and Google Now which will be fun to try out.

It feels like iOS 6 offered just improvements... nothing new.

Yes, we are, because you are incorrect. The price being charged for the Mini is fair, especially compared to the competition I listed above. The Mini does not compete with either the Nexus 7 or Kindle Fire HD 7 inch. It competes with the larger tablets from Samsung, Amazon, and others, all of which are priced the same or higher than the Mini. (Galaxy Tab 8.9 is $469, Kindle 8.9 is $314, IdeaPad is $299, Nook HD+ is $299) It is priced comparably to the tablets it actually competes with.

The iPad Mini is 7.9" while the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD 7 are 7", but they have higher resolutions and better displays, the better resolutions compensates, making them comparable. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...-mini-display/. Also, the iPad Mini was released at such a specific price and time because obviously, it is trying to compete with something popular, e.g., the Nexus 7. Why would the iPad Mini be targeted to compete with something that is outdated by a year (does not include Kindle Fire HD 8.9")? One should compare the most updated mini tablets with each other, if you compare outdated tablets, you won't be comparing the most updated OS version.

Also, the Galaxy 8.9 and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 have a 1" difference vs the iPad Mini 7.9" and the IdeaPad 9"/Nook HD+ 9" have a 1.1" difference with the iPad Mini, this makes them less comparable with it than the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD 7".


From a personal perspective, the Apple iPad Mini advertisements seem to display the iPad Mini as the same thing as the iPad, where everything performs at the exact same speeds. This advertisement is leading me to feel... are they trying to discourage people from buying the iPad?

Apple seems to be slipping...
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411811,00.asp