Apple has pre-emptively loaded up its LTE patent defense gun against Samsung
0. phoneArena 04 Sep 2012, 08:38 posted on
Last week, Apple won a huge victory in court against Samsung as a jury of 9 people decided that the Koreans have infringed on Apple’s patents and should…
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
36. MartyK (Posts: 730; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
Wow!, one of the co-founder (Paul Allen) of Microsoft and one of the orginal workers of Xerox PARC is suing everybody..
Thank you Apple for bring this BS to everyone!!..
83. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Apple....I just warned you about your ego a few days ago.....
53. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
you thats not gonna go anywhere... apple will continue to be a successful company. and all your american cousins sister and brothers will be the reason. lol it must suck to be an apple hater now days. all u do is lose
67. tedkord (Posts: 7202; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Read up on it. All these companies may be in a world of hurt over these patents. OSX is being added to the list, that already includes iOS as infringing.
70. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
man does that sound like a familiar person.. hmm..
38. shammont (Posts: 30; Member since: 22 Jun 2012)
Here is a plan for you Apple. Split all that money you have among yourselves, close the doors at 1 infinite loop and go home. Stay closed forever and stop torturing us with crappy products and lawsuits.
40. sudbury78 (Posts: 129; Member since: 12 Jul 2012)
Shammont, they wont do that. Most valuable, greatest, powerful company in the world. Here to stay and will haunt your dreams and your wallets. Just concede you will own an apple product if you don't already as most of you do.
49. -box- (Posts: 3968; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Greatest? Heh, sad that you think slavery and pillaging the earth if precious materials to make a profit is great.
59. lyndon420 (Posts: 2849; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
I would kill my first born before I ever lower my standards enough to buy an apple product.
73. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
If Enron can disappear so can Apple. Nothing is permanent :)
45. gallitoking (Posts: 4704; Member since: 17 May 2011)
wow some people's comments are full of hate towards a company that is not going anywhere anytime soon. these patents war just got out of hand, but fandroids don't care anymore as long as Apple rots in hell.. lol.. get a life people..
47. sudbury78 (Posts: 129; Member since: 12 Jul 2012)
That is my point. These people are hating a company that is not going anywhere, anytime and will continue to have sales records. It's a phone and people are flipping out. Cracks me up!!!
50. Sniggly (Posts: 7281; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
It's not about the phone or the sales, it's about the principles Apple demonstrates and stands for. It's an issue of control versus freedom.
52. gallitoking (Posts: 4704; Member since: 17 May 2011)
so hating on a comapony every second you get solves things?
55. Aeires (unregistered)
What does loving the same company do?
56. Sniggly (Posts: 7281; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Every second I get?
Oh, Gallito. You're so adorable sometimes.
63. levvy (Posts: 33; Member since: 01 Aug 2012)
Apple's Market Strategy NO.1 - "I am ONE and ONLY DOMINATOR & Monster Raised FROM Crappy Patented iHELL". You All are simply my patented istupid with no Innovation at all.You use what I invent.
51. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
more stupidity! samsung copied apple to th tea of how the iphone looked! yes apple is greedy and didnt need to sue over this. but samsung planning to sue over this lte b.s. is just stupid. this rediculous and annoying. they both need to grow up
54. johnbftl (Posts: 264; Member since: 09 Jun 2012)
Yes! Copied everything exactly. Right down to the 4" Super AMOLED screen with the camera with LED flash. Let's not forget the row of 4 captive buttons at the bottom of the phone. Oh, oh, oh what about the expandable microSD slot or the removable battery and battery door? That's all on the iPhone too right?
78. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
well samsung is the one paying a billion dollars do to infringing....so what you say is irrelevent. samesung copied, and they suck. simple as that. u lose. end of discussion
85. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
You lose on rational thought processes.
End of discussion.
When did this become a competition....u lose? lol
91. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
right i lose on rational thought processes....? wtf? once again a new arguement to get in that last word cuz you where wrong. cuz we where talking about thinking rationally. you are so correct....rediculous. when where we talking about this? i thought this was about how samsung lost to apple in crt cuz they copied apple? lets stay focused bud
93. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Stay focused.....??? Your orig comment was...
"Samsung copied Apple to a tea"
Thats what me and a few other have been addressing. You wanna try this again...and tell yourself to stay focused?
96. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
clearly im focused. you went on about thinking rationally which isnt at all about anything. so yes please, you need to stay focused. and you seem a little mad
97. johnbftl (Posts: 264; Member since: 09 Jun 2012)
No, you said they copied Apple to a tea. So ALL off what i said was relevant. They lost litigation based on the opinions of 9 people in a Northern California District Court. How convenient, Apple's HQ is up there. There was absolutely no way Apple was going to lose this case. To the average American consumer, they are infallible as an electronics company. It's all because they market themselves to be the greatest thing in the world. I'm sure next week Tim Cook is going to imply in some way that the 4" screen has never been done, or it is their innovation that took years to complete. Or that LTE is their geniuses mad at work for 4 years now getting it right. They're a joke.
So you say Samsung copied Apple. I had the original iPhone and I had the original Galaxy S. My wife still has the Galaxy S, I upgraded to the Galaxy Nexus. Please, tell me exactly what Samsung copied. Was it the widgets? Or the live wallpaper? How about the app drawer? Maybe the true multitasking? Tell me good sir because I would like to know. Support your case with evidence.
99. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
Johnbftl....like you said; "there was no way apple was gonna lose this case" cuz they disnt copy. Samsung copied. Here u are argueing but then admitting that samsung copied. And great point.....9 people sat down and went through the evidence and it was obvious samsung copied! Get real. And the look of the s 1 Nd the way the apps are set up is like the iphone. They were going for an iphone look. Everything else like the live wallpapers and stuff is just android features. So your arguement is invalid. Dude samsung tryed to make an android/iphone OS its obvious when look at both phones. So please stop the bickering. After all you said it yourself it was proved in crt by 9 people.
101. johnbftl (Posts: 264; Member since: 09 Jun 2012)
First off dude, take an English class. Holy hell I can't read half of what you said. Secondly, I never once said Samsung copied Apple. You completely misread what I said. Apple's HQ is in Northern California. The US District Court in which these proceedings occurred were in Northern California. People are going to back what stimulates the local economy. That would be Apple's HQ.
9 people went through evidence that was given to them. Evidence that did not include the Samsung F700, a key phone that was developed before the first iPhone and released a month after. The phone shows the natural progression of Samsung's products into the eventual Galaxy S Series. That phone was denied as evidence by Judge Koh which is why I said there was no way Apple was going to lose.
If Samsung was going for the iPhone look, why is the screen half an inch bigger? Why does the camera have an LED flash (keep in mind this is back when the 3gs was Apple's flagship device)? Why does the Galaxy S have expandable memory? Why does the Galaxy S have a removable battery? Why does it have widgets? Why is there live wallpaper? Why is there an app drawer? Why are there 4 capacitive buttons at the bottom of the phone and not one big round physical button? Why doesn't the Galaxy S have a mute switch on the side next to the volume? I'm sorry dude, but none of that screams copy to me.
Like I said, I had the original iPhone and the original Galaxy S, my wife still has the Galaxy S, I upgraded to the Galaxy Nexus, and there is no similarity. If you think there is, then support your case with evidence. You just keep saying "they copied, they copied. That's why they're paying $1 billion to Apple." Prove to me what Samsung copied. I've pointed out handfuls of things the Galaxy S Series has that the iPhone does not, yet somehow you want to keep saying my arguments are invalid because they lost litigation. A court case doesn't change the features a phone has. So now please, support your argument with facts, or kindly shut up.
84. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Lets not forget that Samsung also has different speaker placements, different power and volume buttons, the iPhone has a mute button...that doesnt look like copied to a tea....lol...tea...to me.
Anyone else wanna chime in?
87. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
jroc74 come on man....this is so stupid. we go through the same thing everytime. no need to micro manage my statements and prove nothing. bro they copied! theyre paying money for that as well. yes its stupid, the whole apple sammy thing is stupid. but it is what it is. i honestly could give a s**t less who is still around yrs later. they both are the top in the game. i just dont like sammy phones. ill get a sammy tv tho. thats it.
76. willard12 (Posts: 1163; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
"Samsung copied apple to the tea"----- see Samsung F700, released less than a month after iPhone and get back to us.
80. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
willard12....refer to any magazine or top news article about who won the battle between apple and samsung and get back to me.....you are irrelevent as well. samesung copied and its been proven in crt. youre arguement is pointless. so just end it
86. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Key phrase in your orig post, that willard12 so graciously re-posted:
"Samsung copied apple to the tea"
Try reading comprehension....before you hit Post Comment....and try again.
Samsung lost the case, true...but appeals havent even been done yet. And you have to be insane to say "Samsung copied apple to the tea"
88. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
they did. they lost the case exactly like you said. "they lost" shut up already
89. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
the funny thing is first we argue did sammy copy or not. you lose that arguement and sammy has to pay a bill now. then i say they copied to the tea and now its a spell check battle. shut up youre missing the point. the point is they copied apple and they lost in crt. that fact stands. so dont come with stupid points that have no relevence to whats really going on. because you arent supporting what you feel. youre just choosing a new arguement cuz youve already lost the first one. take your losses like a man.
90. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I'm just lost when you said "Samsung copied apple to the tea"
Do you understand what that means? Samsung phones would have to look like this:
THATS copying to a tee. If you gonna be a fanboy or hater...at least keep it real.
92. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
the same could be said about yourself. if your gonna be a fanboy you need to keep it real and get ya mind right bro. if it was apple copying these fools and this whole thing was turned around the other way then s**t my mouth would be closed. no sense in making excuses and taking a discussion off track. it means nothing
94. jroc74 (Posts: 5394; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Off track? Are you serious??
"Samsung copied apple to the tea"
Did you or did you not post that? Are are you just typing with your eyes closed...
95. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
i did post that. sammy did copy apple. thats the point. you taking it to another arguement puts you off track
98. tedkord (Posts: 7202; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
That case isn't over. Much of it will be vacated on appeal. Judge Koh herself may vacate quite a bit on September 20th. She obviously thought that Samsung's defense was compelling, hence the warning to Apple just before the end that this was going to go bad for both of them. Add in the jurors falling all over themselves to tell anyone who will listen about their misconduct via jury instructions and the definition of prior art, and it all add up to Apple getting nowhere near a billion.
100. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
Thats a good point. It isnt over yet. But sammy will in the end pay apple because they actually did copy them. I think some things will get thrown out but in the end thet will still pay. When the s1 first came outand i was selling them all people would say ohh this looks like an iphone. Its obvious what sammy was trying to do
102. chaoticrazor (Posts: 2347; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)
find all this irrelevant when the real fact apple sued samsung is becuase they are threatened by them , samsung are bringing out better phones then apple can so apple is just trying to stop them.
the whole case is a joke really, apple sueing over things that were around before the iphone yet apple lay claim to these so called 'innovations'...apple has no innovations.
besides samsung only lost in apples backyard but it aint over as others have sed so time will tell
i hope people have had enough of Apple and there disgusting business model its basically ' samsung is over taking them so instead of putting more work into our phone we'll sue them and get them banned'