Samsung v. Apple

[chris200x9]

SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA—The gargantuan Apple v. Samsung trial isn't just about Apple's claims that Samsung copied its flagship products. After it was sued, Samsung used its own patents to go after Apple, and the San Jose jury will soon issue a verdict on both sides' claims.

Today Samsung unleashed its counterattack, putting an expert on the stand that accused Apple of infringing three patents with incredibly wide-ranging claims to basic smartphone functions.

The Korean electronics giant claims to have one patent that covers multi-tasking while playing music (No. 7,698,711); another that covers "bookmarking" the last-viewed photo in a smartphone for easy retrieval (7,456,893); and even one that the company says covers sending an e-mail with a photo attached (7,577,460).

A Samsung expert witness, Harvard Professor Woodward Yang, walked the jury through the claims of the patents he said were infringed by Apple products like the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad 2, and the 4th-generation iPod touch. Yang, who was paid $550 an hour for his work on the case, described each claim in simple terms, and narrated along as videos on the slide showed a demonstration of how each patent was used by Apple products.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-patented-iphones-best-features-before-apple/

This case is just getting funnier and funnier, apple goes after samsung for allegedy ripping off their ground breaking rounded corners design while apple is infringing on very real functionality patents.

note: I'm againts software patents all together, I just like seeing apple get their just desserts for going ******* crazy over rounded corners.

 

[MonkeySee....]

Samsung vs Apple? Is this new? I've not seen any threads on this.

 

[chris200x9]

Samsung vs Apple? Is this new? I've not seen any threads on this.

yea I know, it's been over done. I just posted because it's not posted on the front page LIKE ALMOST EVERY OTHER APPLE V. SAMSUNG THING! I think it's a conspiracy to cherry pick articles in which Apple looks good. This site should be called "macrumors: here to rally the fanbois"

 

[dejo]

...I just like seeing apple get their just desserts for going ******* crazy over rounded corners.

You're oversimplifying it. There's more to this lawsuit than just rounded corners.

 

[MonkeySee....]

yea I know, it's been over done. I just posted because it's not posted on the front page LIKE ALMOST EVERY OTHER APPLE V. SAMSUNG THING! I think it's a conspiracy to cherry pick articles in which Apple looks good. This site should be called "macrumors: here to rally the fanbois"

I think you need to sit down with a coffee and dedicate a few hours and have a good read through the lawsuit.

As mentioned above, its not just about round corners.

 

[chris200x9]

You're oversimplifying it. There's more to this lawsuit than just rounded corners.

care to elaborate?

Bonus points name one thing without prior art.

edit: I mean I admit both samsung's and apple's patents are beyond retarded but at least samsung doesn't have 10+ years of prior art.

 

[Tander]

I think you need to sit down with a coffee and dedicate a few hours and have a good read through the lawsuit.

As mentioned above, its not just about round corners.

Where could one find more information on the lawsuit?

I'm trying to follow as closely as possible as I find it interesting.

 

[chris200x9]

I think you need to sit down with a coffee and dedicate a few hours and have a good read through the lawsuit.

As mentioned above, its not just about round corners.

oh I'm sorry I did forget, It's also about icons in a grid and slide to unlock...

 

[BaldiMac]

Design patents and trade dress are about a complete design, not individual elements. Any prior art argument for any of the individual elements of the design (rounded corners, bezel, glass front, grid, etc.) is missing the point.

 

[MonkeySee....]

Where could one find more information on the lawsuit?

I'm trying to follow as closely as possible as I find it interesting.

I believe there is a massive thread going on the front page.

I'd go get a link if I wasn't to lazy

 

[Patriot24]

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/31/3207848/apple-vs-samsung-complete-trial-coverage

That's about as comprehensive of coverage as you're going to find.

 

[MacDawg]

This site should be called "macrumors: here to rally the fanbois"

If I went to an Android or Windows site, I would expect to find people there who are passionate about the products they use, with users asking questions about functionality, asking about timelines for upcoming products and release dates, and troubleshooting their devices and software, etc.

I say if, because I have no need to ever visit those sites. I would never consider going there to poke somebody in the eye, stir the pot or make fun of them, their devices or their choices. I have no need to go there to point out the shortcomings of their device or the absurdity of their choice. I have no need to call them names like iSheep, fanbois, or the like, nor do I have a need to tell them the only reason they buy products is because of their leader, a reality distortion field, or because of a name. I would assume they bought their products because they meet their needs better than other products do without projecting my own choices and needs on them.

I don't doubt the existence of users on Macrumors who are very defensive about the product choices they have made. I would expect some to be very radical about it, while the vast majority would be balanced and realistic.

But color me confused over the number of Macrumors members whose sole existence on the Forums is the disparage Apple and those who use their products. While they are free to have their opinion, it just strikes me odd the venom with which they dole out their tripe. I have to conclude it is purely a form of entertainment for them.

As far as being on topic, as others have pointed out, the trial is far from being about one little sound bite item
It is easy to pull out some point and have it sound absurd
All of the evidence and testimony (and patents and law) have to be taken as a whole
Certainly part of the trial is being played out in the court of public opinion
But the legalities will have far reaching consequences for both companies as well
How either fares in public opinion and in the court of law is still uncertain

 

[Crazy Badger]

How can anyone patent attaching a file to an e-mail? Bonkers

 

[KnightWRX]

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/31/3207848/apple-vs-samsung-complete-trial-coverage

That's about as comprehensive of coverage as you're going to find.

If you're looking for Apple biased coverage, sure. If you want more factual converage, just read the court documents directly, Groklaw has set up a timeline :

Apple v. Samsung Timeline

----------

All of the evidence and testimony (and patents and law) have to be taken as a whole

Actually, no. Apple has levied many claims against Samsung and it won't be ruled on and judged as a whole. Each claim will be ruled on individually and each claims has evidence related to it to prove and disprove it from both sides.

Apple can win some claims, lose others. There is no whole.

 

[chris200x9]

Design patents and trade dress are about a complete design, not individual elements. Any prior art argument for any of the individual elements of the design (rounded corners, bezel, glass front, grid, etc.) is missing the point.

got it so you can make a device with rounded corners or icons in a grid, but not both.

How can anyone patent attaching a file to an e-mail? Bonkers

How can one patent slide to unlock, or one button check out, or rounded corners + a grid, or having two text messages show up as one, or countless other idiotic patents? Don't hate the player hate the game.

If I went to an Android or Windows site, I would expect to find people there who are passionate about the products they use, with users asking questions about functionality, asking about timelines for upcoming products and release dates, and troubleshooting their devices and software, etc.

I say if, because I have no need to ever visit those sites. I would never consider going there to poke somebody in the eye, stir the pot or make fun of them, their devices or their choices. I have no need to go there to point out the shortcomings of their device or the absurdity of their choice. I have no need to call them names like iSheep, fanbois, or the like, nor do I have a need to tell them the only reason they buy products is because of their leader, a reality distortion field, or because of a name. I would assume they bought their products because they meet their needs better than other products do without projecting my own choices and needs on them.

I don't doubt the existence of users on Macrumors who are very defensive about the product choices they have made. I would expect some to be very radical about it, while the vast majority would be balanced and realistic.

But color me confused over the number of Macrumors members whose sole existence on the Forums is the disparage Apple and those who use their products. While they are free to have their opinion, it just strikes me odd the venom with which they dole out their tripe. I have to conclude it is purely a form of entertainment for them.

As far as being on topic, as others have pointed out, the trial is far from being about one little sound bite item
It is easy to pull out some point and have it sound absurd
All of the evidence and testimony (and patents and law) have to be taken as a whole
Certainly part of the trial is being played out in the court of public opinion
But the legalities will have far reaching consequences for both companies as well
How either fares in public opinion and in the court of law is still uncertain

Yes I point out a huge bias in coverage and my sole purpose on these forums is trolling

 

[kdarling]

There are three types of issues in the trial:

1) Utility patents. Whether Apple and/or Samsung infringed the other's patents on things like bounceback, radio technology, etc.

2) Design patents. Whether or not devices like the Samsung Tab infringe on Apple's rounded rectangle with flat front design, or the phones on the iPhone bezel design, etc.

3) Trade dress. Whether Samsung infringed on, or diluted, customer iPhone/iPad recognition while buying(*).

I posted a sample jury checklist the other day in this thread.

It's a concise reference as to what the legal issues are.

(*) Yes, I'm simplifying. In a rush

 

[KnightWRX]

There are three types of issues in the trial:

1) Utility patents. Whether Apple and/or Samsung infringed the other's patents on things like bounceback, radio technology, etc.

2) Design patents. Whether or not devices like the Samsung Tab infringe on Apple's rounded rectangle with flat front design, or the phones on the iPhone bezel design, etc.

3) Trade dress. Whether Samsung infringed on, or diluted, customer iPhone/iPad recognition while buying(*).

I posted a sample jury checklist the other day in this thread.

It's a concise reference as to what the legal issues are.

(*) Yes, I'm simplifying. In a rush

You forgot the 4th issue, Trademarks. Apple's trademarked icons.

 

[MacDawg]

Actually, no. Apple has levied many claims against Samsung and it won't be ruled on and judged as a whole. Each claim will be ruled on individually and each claims has evidence related to it to prove and disprove it from both sides.

Apple can win some claims, lose others. There is no whole.

My point was to see the big picture of what is going on you have to take it all as a whole. Not the legalities of it.

----------

Yes I point out a huge bias in coverage and my sole purpose on these forums is trolling

I did not call you out personally
It was a generic observation

 

[KnightWRX]

My point was to see the big picture of what is going on you have to take it all as a whole. Not the legalities of it.

As this is a lawsuit, anything outside of legalities is flamebait for forum goers to start a subjective insult war. One side will claim Samsung is a "IP thief, guilty of blatant copying", the other side will claim Apple is a "sue happy court bully that can't innovate anymore, so they choose to litigate".

That is just a silly position to prone, especially from a moderator. No, regarding the lawsuit as a "whole" is a mistake. Each claim is separate, tried separately and ruled on separately. Discussion should revolve around the claims individually and opinions formed about each one independant of the others. To do it any other way is "picking sides", which never leads to intelligent discussion about this issue.

 

[MacDawg]

As this is a lawsuit, anything outside of legalities is flamebait for forum goers to start a subjective insult war. One side will claim Samsung is a "IP thief, guilty of blatant copying", the other side will claim Apple is a "sue happy court bully that can't innovate anymore, so they choose to litigate".

That is just a silly position to prone, especially from a moderator. No, regarding the lawsuit as a "whole" is a mistake. Each claim is separate, tried separately and ruled on separately. Discussion should revolve around the claims individually and opinions formed about each one independant of the others. To do it any other way is "picking sides", which never leads to intelligent discussion about this issue.

As this is a lawsuit, only what the jury decides matters and your opinion is irrelevant

There is a court of public opinion and both companies will be judged by it as well

 

[KnightWRX]

As this is a lawsuit, only what the jury decides matters and your opinion is irrelevant

Ultimately. But discussing the issues, related case law and merit of each side's arguments and evidence is educational about IP lawsuits, IP laws and industry history in general (as prior art is often enlightening as to what the industry was actually doing prior to commercial success of a technology).

There is a court of public opinion and both companies will be judged by it as well

Enjoy cleaning up forum threads then. That's the only thing letting rampant biased side picking leads to, insults and shutters.