General discussion

Apple vs. Samsung: Who are siding with in this patent battle?

Discussion is locked
Reply to: Apple vs. Samsung: Who are siding with in this patent battle?
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Apple vs. Samsung: Who are siding with in this patent battle?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
- Collapse -

If Apple can't obtain an exclusive patent, then they should expect others to copy them. Some of the first cars were steered with tillers. Should whatever company installing the first steering wheel be able to sue others who did the same? Apple has sold itself on innovation. What they have done is glorify an appliance which looks good but isn't any more functional than anything else.

- Collapse -
Function vs. Form

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with your argument. While the intent of function of similar items are also similar, Apple's actually works consistently and reliably. While waiting for Verizon to finally move on the iPhone, I was a Droid owner. And while I didn't hate it, as I have every device before, it had consistent and obnoxious malfunctions that my iPhone never has. Since Apple is a hardware company that creates software for its devices, they just work. Other companies, like Microsoft and Google, are primarily software companies, whose products are (unfortunately for them - and the rest of us, as well) are guess-work-designed to work on all kinds of hardware, ranging from cheap junk to high-quality components. How could they work properly right out of the box, as each hardware manufacturer is looking to shave pennies off their costs? They are having to design software for hardware that doesn't even yet exist. This is why Windows runs better on a Macintosh than on many Windows machines - the hardware is consistently good.

- Collapse -
Function vs. Form

Your argument that Apple makes excellent products, so good that there is very little comparison in the end product, is a reason to toss the suit out, not uphold the claim. Each of the products are different and they fit into their own niche in the grand scheme of things. Technology is advancing so rapidly the suit is over obsolete products. Maybe that's why Apple is suing; it anticipates not being able to keep up with the competition and decided to try a money grab to weaken or eliminate competition. The point is, whatever they are trying to do, holding back the competition through lawsuits is not worthy of a company that has been king of the hill for so long. I'm sure lawyers like it, though.

- Collapse -
Everydody has an Operating System for their Gadget

For decades Windows Operating Systems dominated, however, many Inventers just ship, thus, New Operatings Sytems began to appear. Did Microsoft challenge these inventions, which, are merely an offspring of the origianal. Did Apple tweak it's MAC Operating?,because, the technology is the same. All must meet the same TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocal/Internet Protocal )for IPAD2, Tablets, Kindle, Smartphones, Netbbooks, Notebooks, Laptops, Servers, Routerss,Desk-Tops, etc.

Selling these Gadgets to a Target Audience is big business & their is much diversity in taste, because, one don't fit all. We could argue all day about which Computer or Smartphone is best, base on our experience or what one individaul has experienced, or what the ADs say.

I my opnion Apple need to concede, that the challenge is there and they lost!. Everybody makes IPAD2's in all models. You don't have a monopoly.

- Collapse -
Here is a vote for Samsung -- and other non-Apple tablets

You must be getting quite a few people with a financial stake in Apple replying that people are stealing from them. The fact is, if Apple could they would patent a rectangular screen, a flat computer with an electronic keyboard, and many other things that were simple progressions in the industry. A pinch???? They built their reputation on innovation, but now have stopped innovating and counting on limiting competition. I have several friends with iPads that would like to trade for my Galaxy because without a GPS the WiFi model is brain-dead for many nice mobile apps. I am 100% behind an open industry as far as basic functions are concerned. Competition lowers price and offers diversified buying choices. Time for Apple to invent -- or move on....

- Collapse -
Apple needs to get over it

Why should apple give up what is rightfully theirs. Samsung and all the rest should try to bring some originality to their products and stop copying apple. ( Siri , retna display, ITunes ) and so on. Please wake up. Never wonder why their product never go on sale and always keep their consumers happy? Apple is original and the best. They should win and hopefully teach a lesson to the copiers.

- Collapse -
Patent Battles

If Apple wins, funnels will only be made by one company, since they all have the basic shape and design. Shape, design, size, etc. are not innovation. Innovation lies in the functioning of the unit that is unique and functional.

- Collapse -
They pointed out Samsung

A Samsung tablet that is "different" was used by Apple in the trial and others made by Samsung that are different making the point that they can be different.

- Collapse -

is regarding Trade Dress by Apple

- Collapse -
Patent Battles

It's your invention which needs to be patent , so always make your software patents.

- Collapse -
No Court Battle Necessary, 138 Trillion Internet Connections

For years Steve Jobs v. Bill Gates or Apple v. Microsoft, yet these gentlemen played the best man win game, without a court battle. With 138 Trillion slots on the Internet, it's enough business for both Samsung & Apple.

Follow your leaders and stop whinning, when another beat you, just go back and invent something new.

- Collapse -
No court battle necessary

Actually, I think you touched on the problem. Apple has been the 800 lb gorilla in the room for many years -- and they see Samsung at 700 lbs and growing too fast for comfort.

- Collapse -
i hate macs

Maybe Apple has been.that 800 pound ape but only with phones. Pc has always been bigger and hopefully will stay that way. I'm against Apple and for anything that stands against them.

- Collapse -
Apple needs to get over it.

Apple needs to stop with all the stupid suits against the company who supply's most of the parts for the iPhone. They need to come up with something new or get left in the dust. Re-hashing the same phone design over and over is not innovation but stagnation.

- Collapse -
Apple needs credit for inventing wheel.

Not really, but when does stagnation near perfection? Innovations aside. I should care less.

- Collapse -
Before Phones There were PDA's

There used to to be devices called PDA's around before the iPhone and Android Phones they were Square and and few if any buttons. If you look at the MS & Palm devices the roots of these interfaces were built in these portable computers, they ALL started to merge their OS's into phones - so sorry it has been done before. There may be some patents in the software, but rectangular shaped computing devices and PHONES have been here a long damned time. They were not as efficient and accessible as they are now with modern technology and prices and were not sold in the mass numbers that these devices are, so there is a lot to loose for everyone. This really should be about what software patents were violated.. NOT a sleek rectangle.

- Collapse -
Prior art

I wonder how many of RIM's patents Apple infringed on.

- Collapse -
And there were other smart phones before the iphone

For a few years before the iphone, I used a Windows mobile phone that had similar shape and higher functionality than iphone did when it was first released. I had a voice interface program (like Siri today) and a voice GPS program (though I had to attach an external GPS reciever). It had a data plan through Sprint, wifi, & bluetooth connectivity. I could store limited songs and even more importantly access MS documents. It managed my calendars, contacts, and I "pushed" email from multiple accounts. These phones were small, rectangular, some had limited hard buttons, some had slide out keyboards, and all had touch interface for the screen. I couldn't understand the hoopla over the iphone when it arrived, seemed I already had all the functionality on my Windows phone. I thought at the time Apple had copied my device. Where is HTC in this legal brouhaha, Apple ripped them off with iphone.

- Collapse -
I concur

I had a Handspring PDA which featured an expansion slot allowing you to plug in a camera, GPS module, modem etc. Handspring then went on to produce the Treo which was an PDA with integrated phone. None of this is new and to me Apple were riding the coat tails of what had gone before.

This is the big stuff that made the iPhone possible and created the market for it. It seems ridiculous for Apple to be making such a noise when they should lead by design by law.

I'm out of contract on my phone and would not even consider an iPhone as Apple have soiled their reputation in my eyes.

- Collapse -
Apple has a way of ignoring the truth

Will be interesting to hear the outcome to this. It will not be the first time they have decided they are above the law, it has happened before.

Cost them a multi-million dollar settlement for stealing a copyright (I was there).

- Collapse -
Apple Has a Long History of Patent Infringement

Apple has this longstanding habit of trying to patent concepts that were actually invented by others, concepts for which they never paid the real inventors for any rights or anything. Nothing is clearer in this regard than their effort to enforce a patent against Microsoft for the graphical user interface, a concept that, as far as I know, was invented by Xerox before Apple was as much as a gleam in Steve Jobs' eye. That didn't stop Apple from trying to bring the whole force of the lawyering world down on Microsoft.

They're doing the same now with Samsung. Apple didn't invent the tablet computer; they've been around now for more than a decade. They're just the best at marketing it and seek to parlay their marketing power into a defacto patent ownership.

Apple is the ultimate triumph of style over substance. Their cult following has kept the world on an inefficient and troublesome dual-track, complete with all the inefficiencies and incompatibilities it causes, for O/S, applications, and the data they create. It would be a better world today had they gone under when they had the chance in 1998.

- Collapse -
Nokia who? Razor what?

The real battle is about patent aggregating. The real battle here is between Apple and Google; Samsung is the offshore target to add a political plus to Apple's argument. In today's patent world, it appears the intent of an invention can be patented. Motorola did the first slimline phone, can they sue Apple for copying the aesthetic? Nokia were front-runners in ubiquitous peer antenna technology, but are their patents now aggregated by Apple?
Our patent office is as useless as our Congress, and of course they both are overflowing with lawyers. If we could only figure out how to teach lawyers to use common-sense in writing law, but then what would the lawyers do?

- Collapse -
1/2 an Apple and loosing steam....

I truly believe that an open market drives better service/products for everybody. As for Apple, you can patent the "world" otherwise the Caveman from Geico would have done it already. I do think you have a better chance of suing Google for their Android OS, not implying that the CEO of Google wasn't sitting on Apple's Board of Directors at the time of invention has anything to do with it. Happy) So why isn't Apple suing Google instead? Maybe Apple isn't the 800lbs gorilla afterall?

...but let's sue somebody anyway because we're losing market share and this Samsung dude isn't taking anymore shares either:

This is why I say an open market is better for everybody, Apple iPhones are made in China (probably some sweat shop with 10yrs old) and the iPhone accounts for nearly 40% of their profit. Let's just say, "Apple's introduction of its latest iPhone today perfectly illustrates the company's route to corporate dominance: generating huge profit by selling high-margin, high-value-added hardware, with the iPhone's Average Selling Price at a whopping $600." With this kind of confidence, what's wrong with a little competition? Patent infringement? Good luck trying to convince jurors that a turkey is a chicken. *but I just saw one cross the road on my way to work this morning, does this mean he's a chicken?

Fun facts about iPhone BOM:
Cost to make iPhone 4S:

Cost to make iPhone 4:

Let's just hope Samsung isn't pissed, otherwise consumers will pay for it:

- Collapse -
Where Are the Courts?

There seems to be something very wrong with our Patent Offices which seem to be quite willing to grant any patent application that crosses their desks. Their policy of allowing everything has brought the entire patent business into disrepute and only a few very expensive but salutary court decisions will sort it out.
Patenting an absolutely obvious shape - we are not talking Coke bottles here but simple rounded corner rectangles - and one that has almost certainly appeared in Sci Fi movies and futurology journalism over and over again, should never have been possible. The patent should not have been granted.
The same goes for code. If there is no manufacture involved, no physical rendition of an idea, then it shouldn't be patentable.
The repeated abuse of patent law only serves to encourage and justify the stance of those countries like the Russian Federation, China etc, that refuse to recognise international patents. Perhaps more countries should do this?
We are, sadly, where we are however and until the courts start banging some heads together, things will only get worse.

- Collapse -
Patents/Infringement fears

This is exactly the reason why humanity doesnt accelerate in advanced technology as it could - Patents -!!! How backed up is the freaking USPO 2+ years or so, not to mention how many other ideas people pass up on because these issues.

- Collapse -
Patents/Infringement fears

But... the ability to patent encourages research and development. That said, a rectangle with rounded corners or an icon showing a handset is NOT an invention. The resolution of a screen is not an invention, although perhaps the hardware to do it is. If speaking a command was an invention, it was not Apples because I've been 'Naturally Speaking' for many years.

I am not anti-Apple, and I certainly do not resent them for putting out a good product and doing superior marketing of it. ("It is so good you have to wait in line to get one.") Give them credit for being very good at generating excitement over an incremental improvement of something already available! That said, this lawsuit is a terrible idea. Perhaps consumers can and will make them pay even if a judge does not.

- Collapse -
Patents/Infringement Fears

Encourages what with intent to own ( $ ) the concept/idea without giving the rest opportunity to use it - hence to move forward. We could go at this all day but at the end patents are without a doubt holding us back.
Im just trying to say the market would be flooded with many different products incorporating the best of whats in use in combination with what they are currently creating resulting in a much nicer product. Competition for new products would sky rocket opening the doors to and for everyone.

Quick example off top my head car that runs on water was created back in 06, as much as thats needed right now they wont release it because they are trying to obtain a World patent.

- Collapse -
Patents/Infringement Fears

I agree that the patent process is being used in a way that holds back progress.

Re: Side topic of water for fuel. That is "vapor-ware" in every sense of the cliche. O & H doesn't separate without a catalyst, and that is additional fuel. The claim is that the water engine recharges the batteries but in the demo of the car running down the street who verified that the batteries were being recharged and they were not simply using the starting charge as the power source? Hey, there's an idea for Apple: patent the use of air as fuel. With the number of lawyers about equal to the number of researchers they should be able to pull off the smoke and mirrors we-were-first trick there as well as with the phones and tablets.

- Collapse -

The good with Apple is the NEW patents (like multi touch and Siri). However I can't stand the fanboys..
The good with Samsung is that they use patents in a more smart way in order to defeat Apple. However, I can't stand the hateboys ("iPhone sucks" etc).

There is no comparison and no battle. Their products are almost the same! Technology is advancing rapidly, so tomorrow we might have laser keyboard and holographic display on our phones. Don't forget the Google Glasses, too! Wait till you see the real difference and then start finding the winners of that battle..

I don't like the way those companies work, like Apple suing everyone or Samsung copy-pasting the former.
I personally have an iPod Touch 4 and the new iPad, but I wouldn't mind buying a Samsung or a Google tablet (if I had the money of-course).. My point is that those 2 companies aren't trying to WIN, they just want all this fuss we make..


- Collapse -
Shouldn't we focus on the bigger question?

The question of what the implication of the rulings will be for the future of the industry? I interviewed a professor at China Europe Business School who feels that in this court case Apple sent clear warning shots at competitors which may change the pattern and pace of innovation.

Do you think this will slow down innovation, if companies have to worry about coming up with entirely new products rather than building on the existing ones?

CNET Forums