A2H GO
Member
Registered: 14th Sep 04
Location: Stoke
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Russ
SamPle woulda been better title
It's just the #tag being used on twitter for the trial.
|
Nismo
Member
Registered: 12th Sep 02
User status: Offline
|
I find the funniest part to all of this is that they sue each other then continue to work with each other developing parts for the internals of the phones 
|
Nismo
Member
Registered: 12th Sep 02
User status: Offline
|
ps (for those picky members0 i know thats a 4 but iirc the memory is still samsung in the 4s.
|
Balling
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Apr 04
Location: Denmark
User status: Offline
|
Samsapple - Think slightly differently
http://teamcoco.com/video/samsung-denies-apples-charges-copying
|
Munchie
Member
Registered: 17th Jul 01
Location: I swap goats for mobile phones
User status: Offline
|
have u clicked that link above?
the M&M's advert is a beast!
|
IvIarkgraham
Premium Member
Registered: 27th Mar 04
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
http://teamcoco.com/video/chaz-returns-again
|
Russ
Member
Registered: 14th Mar 04
Location: Armchair
User status: Offline
|
didnt even smile
|
IvIarkgraham
Premium Member
Registered: 27th Mar 04
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
thats because you're a miserable cunt mate
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Apple going to a technology demo, stealing the idea and then claiming it was their own, sounds strangely familiar.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/13/samsungs-defense-against-apple-patents-begins-with-diamondtouch/
|
A2H GO
Member
Registered: 14th Sep 04
Location: Stoke
User status: Offline
|
Just sounds to me like they built on/improved pre existing ideas, which is pretty much all anyone does.
|
Balling
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Apr 04
Location: Denmark
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by A2H GO
Just sounds to me like they built on/improved pre existing ideas, which is pretty much all anyone does.
Except Apple are suing other people for doing so!
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Balling
quote:
Originally posted by A2H GO
Just sounds to me like they built on/improved pre existing ideas, which is pretty much all anyone does.
Except Apple are suing other people for doing so!
And then claiming it was their idea in the first place 
|
Balling
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Apr 04
Location: Denmark
User status: Offline
|
Exactly.
|
A2H GO
Member
Registered: 14th Sep 04
Location: Stoke
User status: Offline
|
I'd do the same if I thought I could win tbf. They were the first to implement it into mobile technology.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by A2H GO
I'd do the same if I thought I could win tbf. They were the first to implement it into mobile technology.
Not always, no.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Probably hard to find something they have been first at.
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
i was thinking, everyone gives usb cable type chargers now and apple were the first to do that. surprised theyre not suing on that basis
|
Rob_Quads
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: southampton
User status: Offline
|
One could argue anything they have patented they were first at. If someone else had mentioned it beforehand the patent would not be granted
(If stuff is granted where the patent office didn't find the prior art thats not Apples fault thats the Patents office)
Anyone who has registered a patent will know its a bloody minefield as soon as the lawyers get involved
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Because they managed to patent it first, as you've just said in the next sentence, it doesn't mean they done it first.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rob_Quads
..... thats the Patents office...
That's the issue here, patent offices being a bit reckless with what they grant. As mentioned earlier, Apple managed to patent a swipe to unlock method yet Neonode's swipe to unlock patent is near enough the same; anyone with common sense would see that.
Tbf it would surprise me if there are backhanders between big corps and patent offices in getting patents passed.
|
Rob_Quads
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: southampton
User status: Offline
|
The patent system is very very complicated. While two might look similar they could be very different in terms of claiming a patent.
Having worked through a getting a few items patented its a complete nightmare. So many different complicated ways of saying things and the laywer speak is annoying i.e. a patent was blocked from being registered in the US to do with a progress bar ( with marking it with a time stamp) because someone else had a patent for the timeline in a video edit suite but they mentioned the word progress bar (for timeline) which then blocked the new patent even through they were clearly two completely different ideas.
The problem here is simple. If a patent was granted when it shouldn't, the patent office needs to null any such patent.
|
Rob_Quads
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: southampton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by John
Because they managed to patent it first, as you've just said in the next sentence, it doesn't mean they done it first.
Correct BUT once it has been granted they have to be seen to defend their patents. If you don't and its seen they are happily allowing patent violation then the patent can be null and void.
|
A2H GO
Member
Registered: 14th Sep 04
Location: Stoke
User status: Offline
|
If Samsung are seen to get away with this it will open the doors to an array of companies blantantly copying to cash in and knowing they can get away with it, which ironically will dent Samsungs profits too. They've shot themselves in the foot here, win or loose it's bad for them.
Anybody follow the live blog of the closing statements last night?
http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/21/3254424/apple-samsung-trial-closing-arguments
I particularly liked Apples defence, to Samsung saying Apple want them out of the game, "we're not trying to get Samsung out of the game, were trying to get them to compete using their own innovations".
"We have to protect our investment in innovations because if we don't we won't have people like Apple spending 5 years in a room coming up with a phone that revolutionizes the world"
"They copied our product but what they're saying is, we don't want to pay. It took 5 years to create the iPhone. Samsung took 3 months to copy it"
[Edited on 22-08-2012 by A2H GO]
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Samsung's product(s) aren't a direct copy, what ever way you look at it. At most, they're similar (even then i personally don't see it apart from the bevel on the i9000) and if Apple does win then it'll put in doubt the 'similar' term. As Samsung said "...All of the TVs look the same. They're all boxes. They're all flatscreens. They're all minimalist designs", which is true. It'll open a whole can of worms for other industries.
Tbf, both just need to STFU and carry on making decent products.
Edit - When does the jury give the verdict anyway? end of the week?
[Edited on 22-08-2012 by Dom]
|
A2H GO
Member
Registered: 14th Sep 04
Location: Stoke
User status: Offline
|
Yes I guess there are different ways of looking at it.
It just gets me how Samsung knew they were copying(and Google even warned them) and so intentionally made things slightly different so they couldn't be caught out. Like how Apple pointed out the phone is the same Shape with rounded corners and Samsung countered with, the iPhones corners are all exactly the same whereas ours are all a tenth of a millimeter different.
The jury have to fill out a 31 page document, can't see them getting that done anytime soon. There is no limit, it could be a day, a week or even months.
[Edited on 22-08-2012 by A2H GO]
|
