As pointed out above, it isn't a matter of Apple taking on some evil empire persona, it's a matter of a giant corporation doing what's in its own best interests. Just as every single other giant corporation does. This apparently comes as a surprise to some, but this is the real world, and playing nice in the sandbox isn't always the best strategy.
It has been presented on numerous occasions that Apple is doing this because legally they are permitted, and that they have an obligation to their shareholders to protect their interests. Which is all fine and dandy if you actually have a solid case.
Apparently they didn't. Apparently they blatantly lied about it and presented false evidence.
I realize much of this is hearsay, but if true, Apple should pay a stiff penalty for it. I'm all for using the system to your advantage if the system allows it, but lying in court and presenting false evidence is obvious abuse, and serves no other purpose then to try and stop your competitor from succeeding by suing them.
Why? Because Apple can't compete? The hell of it is they can.
The Following User Says Thank You to Azure For This Useful Post:
It has been presented on numerous occasions that Apple is doing this because legally they are permitted, and that they have an obligation to their shareholders to protect their interests. Which is all fine and dandy if you actually have a solid case.
Apparently they didn't. Apparently they blatantly lied about it and presented false evidence.
I realize much of this is hearsay, but if true, Apple should pay a stiff penalty for it. I'm all for using the system to your advantage if the system allows it, but lying in court and presenting false evidence is obvious abuse, and serves no other purpose then to try and stop your competitor from succeeding by suing them.
Why? Because Apple can't compete? The hell of it is they can.
All well and good, the BS part is the whole 'Apple is evil' angle people are running. This is par for the course, the whole thing. It doesn't make it right, but the attempt to pretend that Apple is different than any other company is garbage.
All well and good, the BS part is the whole 'Apple is evil' angle people are running. This is par for the course, the whole thing. It doesn't make it right, but the attempt to pretend that Apple is different than any other company is garbage.
Well I certainly don't see HTC, LG, Samsung, Motorola, Google or any of the other big companies involved blatantly lying in a court of law to get their competitor's products pulled from the shelf.
So is Apple evil? Well, if this whole story is true, then the evidence is pretty damning.
All well and good, the BS part is the whole 'Apple is evil' angle people are running. This is par for the course, the whole thing. It doesn't make it right, but the attempt to pretend that Apple is different than any other company is garbage.
they're different in that they kicked off this whole process. and if they had a solid case of Samsung copying the ipad's design, why did Apple go to such lengths to present false evidence that they knew Samsung would be unable to refute?
the iPhone has quickly been overtaken as the #1 smartphone worldwide by Android and the gap is widening everyday, Apple is just coming off as desperate with this stunt to try any tactic that hurts their competitors
All well and good, the BS part is the whole 'Apple is evil' angle people are running. This is par for the course, the whole thing. It doesn't make it right, but the attempt to pretend that Apple is different than any other company is garbage.
The Apple is evil angle has everything to do with offensive litigation, Google doesn't have anywhere near the history of suing companies for anything like trade dress, reseller lawsuits, naming issues, anti-competitive/anti-consumer practices and several times trying to sue outright for things they never came up with nor had the patents for, but it just looked similar. Just go and count the number of these types of lawsuits from Apple, Google hasn't had these.
Apple fought tooth and nail to make it illegal to jailbreak their phones and when the consumers actually won, they wrote in an EULA that doing so would void your warranty. Google has not done the same thing, yet the complete opposite, they've encouraged modding. While you can argue all you want that all corporations are evil, if you're talking pure number of plantiff lawsuits Apple takes the prize.
I think that is one of the reasons for the Google acquisition of MMI. Increase the patent portfolio so that they can help defend manufacturers from Apple's garbage.
I think that is one of the reasons for the Google acquisition of MMI. Increase the patent portfolio so that they can help defend manufacturers from Apple's garbage.
That and the IBM patents they bought a couple of weeks back don't hurt now either. Link
The sales injunction has been suspended in the EU, but still holds in Germany.
Quote:
Dutch website Webwereld, which also raised issues yesterday concerning pictures of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 presented by Apple to the Düsseldorf court, was first to break the news that the Landgericht (district court) Düsseldorf has temporarily -- for at least the time between now and the hearing on August 25 -- suspended the enforcement of the preliminary injunction prohibiting Samsung's distribution of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in all EU countries except in the German market.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
The suspension of the injunction has no mention of the competency of Apple's claims.
The suspension appears to arise because there is question as to whether the German court has jurisdiction to prevent a Korean company from selling in the rest of the EU.
Quote:
The injunction was issued against two legal entities:
SAMSUNG Electronics GmbH (Samsung's German subsidiary domiciled in the town of Schwalbach)
SAMSUNG Electronics Co., Ltd (the parent company based in Suwon-city, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea)
Both entities are enjoined under the preliminary injunction (which hasn't been lifted per se, but enforcement has been partially suspended pending next week's hearing) from selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in all EU countries except for the Netherlands. The partial enforcement suspension changes nothing at all for the German subsidiary: that one is still not allowed to sell Galaxy Tab 10.1's to anyone in Europe, be it in inside or outside Germany. But the key thing is that the Korean parent company is at this point no longer enjoined for any EU country other than Germany.
(from the earlier link I posted.
So the question of the infringement hasn't been discussed.
Personally I think the designs are very similar. I just question that there are enough unique elements to allow the iPad to be the only product to be designed like that. The description sounds very generic to me.
Quote:
- a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners;
- a flat, clear surface that covers the front of the product;
- a visible metal frame around the flat, clear surface;
- a display that is centered on the clear surface;
- under the clear surface, a neutral margin around the sides of the display;
- if the product is switched on, colored icons within the display.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
I think it has become fairly obvious at this point.
Apple wants to be Starfleet.
I say let Samsung sell their technology to the Borg.
The Romulans can have Android.
I guess the Klingons get Windows.
The Ferengi are still on DOS, but I hear they almost have just enough Latinum to upgrade to Windows 3.1!
Apple is the real Borg. They are assimilating every user into their fanboy collective with no individuality.
The Ferengi are the Chinese, marketing every kind of phone and knockoff there is, although Android is increasingly the most popular platform because there is no need to knock-off anything as it is an open platform.
No doubt the patent system needs vast improvements. Looking at the current lawsuit mess gives me a headache.
Anyways Reuter's has a good summary diagram of who's suing who. No surprise at who's at the center of all the litigation mess as I've previously mentioned.
Source: http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index...ic-of-the-day/
Last edited by FlameOn; 08-20-2011 at 04:45 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to FlameOn For This Useful Post:
This is kind of awesome. Samsung submitted 2001: A Space Odyssey as evidence that Apple didn't come up with the whole "tablets are rectangles with screens on the front" thing. Clearly these are actually CRT's buried in the table, but they're meant to look like tablets.
This is kind of awesome. Samsung submitted 2001: A Space Odyssey as evidence that Apple didn't come up with the whole "tablets are rectangles with screens on the front" thing. Clearly these are actually CRT's buried in the table, but they're meant to look like tablets.
Although in embarrassing news for Phandroid, the author of that article appears not to have heard of the movie...
Interesting move but it looks like a static display, it wasn't interacted with but I don't know if that is a core part of the alleged infringement or just the appearance.
Samsung should have submitted Star Trek clips with the Star Trek PADD which was designed up to 20 years before the iPAD. Does Paramount have an infringment case here?
