Apple wins case against Samsung in the Netherlands
0. phoneArena 24 Aug 2011, 10:04 posted on
Patent battles between Apple and Samsung are taking place on several arenas throughout the world, and a Dutch court in the city of The Hague is exactly one of them. Those who keep a close eye on things...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
76. PeterIfromsweden (Posts: 1230; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)
this is just going to far by apple.
According to those so called patent infringements every other android phone would need to be banned as well.
How much do i need to pay someone to set fire to apples HQ and burn them all up ?
78. ilia1986 (unregistered)
You got me for free.
85. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
That is easy for you to say because you do not own a multi-billion dollar company. Businesses do what they have to do to stay competitive and to stay on top. Thank goodness, modern civilization have policies. Otherwise, everyone will just resort to setting everyone on fire, like what UNCIVILIZED people do. Oh, didn't you just want to set Apple HQ on fire? Hmmmmm.
95. ilia1986 (unregistered)
On that note -
Thank goodness modern corporations have creative people working for them. Otherwise, everyone will just resort to suing everyone the hell out of em, like what UNCIVILIZED companies do.
107. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
And what's uncivilized with suing in court? Uncivilized would be something like burning someone's HQ.
Android fanboys have one heck of twisted minds.
117. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Oh, did I write "Uncivilized"? My mistake. I actually meant "Utterly stupid and uncompetitive".
158. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Stupid? How can that be when Apple successfully had Samsung devices banned?
150. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
massive baseless lawsuits are corperate bullying. bullying is uncivilized... therefore since apple feels its better to have massive baseless lawsuits to scare competition instead of innovating, apple must be uncivilized.
159. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Bullying? Are you trying to say that Apple is bullying the courts, that's why they're able to have Samsung devices banned?
Apple is merely exercising their rights in protecting their IP. What's wrong with that? Are you worried that android devices could no longer copy iDevices?
163. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
ok seriously, can you ibots actually go read something other than this outdated, innacurate, and sensationalist piece of "journalism" on PA? you have NO IDEA what actually happened do you? lol
and if u wanna talk about copying, you dumb ibots keep yackin about how an icon looks similar to an iphone icon all the while iOS5 blatantly copys many of the key features that android has had for quite a while.. blatantly.. not even changing them up.
I wouldnt be surprised that if someone opened up the iOS5 files and read the actual code if you wouldnt see little green robots running around and a google logo in there somewhere.
171. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
You're in denial again. There is a ban on Samsung devices. Unless Samsung makes some modifications on their devices, they will not be allowed to sell those said devices.
Just look at the phones before the iphone and after the iphone. It's very obvious that the iphone is being imitated by everyone. Only a blind android fan would deny that. Even the courts agree with Apple. Even Samsung admitted that they have infringed on Apple's designs. Why can't you just admit that android devices are guilty of copying? The truth hurts huh?
180. jroc74 (Posts: 5986; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Copying what? The gallery app? Big deal.
Hardware in the Samsung case....tossed aside based on a phone BEFORE the iPhone. Icons....tossed aside
Where is this copying you speak of?
187. ilia1986 (unregistered)
I think remixfa said it all. : )
200. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Unfortunately for you, what remix says have no effect on the judge's decision, thank goodness, lol.
199. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
So I guess the court banned Samsung devices just for the heck of it, lol.
79. Kangurin (unregistered)
This should be updated as samsung only gots sued for 1 infringing and they will throw and update to fix that and continue the selling... so.. no prob at all.. or that´s what I just read..
87. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Do you know what "monopoly" in business means?
89. gallitoking (Posts: 4718; Member since: 17 May 2011)
me.. me .. me..... Monopoly.... I play all the time... I pass go and do not collect 200.00..lol... Gemini.. this people think they know more than lawyers.. now.. some people are going as far as wanting to burn Apple headquarters.. really?... and all this for a company that nobody here works for or even own.. Android is becoming evil.. look art how crazy fandroids are getting... At least we speak nonse but never as far as having crazy ideas.... and people think I speak from my back feathers..hmmm.. I dont speak.. i whisper... lol...later.
96. Dman (unregistered)
And you actually think he is being serious? I bet everytime says "F*** you", you just pull your pants down and bend over...
It´s like saying: "I want that gadget so much I would sell my liver or my virginity!"
Wait a minute! iTards do that!
110. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
@dman. Wow, your comment clearly shows what kind of people android fanboys are. Ghetto :)
116. gallitoking (Posts: 4718; Member since: 17 May 2011)
@Dman...do this for me..ok loser..... go to the police station and scream F*ck the police.. and tell them what you just told me... and see what happens... and lets see who will really get f*cked
164. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
actually, nothing would happen other than being told to quiet down. there's that whole freedom of speech thing. screaming "F#$K the police" doesnt infringe on anyones saftey or rights and is therefor protected speech because a police station is public property.
172. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
So you have freedom of speech, but Apple doesn't have the right to exercise their freedom to sue those who infringe their IP's? Nice.
174. gallitoking (Posts: 4718; Member since: 17 May 2011)
jajaja notto the LAPD ot the Chicago police... it shows that you just dont know... try it dont sit behind a computer and be a smart ass.. an eye opener
90. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Well, if I'm reading all sources correctly, Samsung will simply change the "infringing" parts of the UI and keep pumping out phones, thus rendering the injunction invalid anyway. Nice to see that the judge threw out the design complaints (the Community Sketch bulls**t).
91. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Well Samsung needs to do what they need to do. And that is to make design modifications. It's about time that they show their creative side, and not just imitate. They've been imitating other devices even before the iphone. They have great technology in their hands. It's time for them to grow up and be more original and stop imitating others.
99. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I agree that Touchwiz takes too many cues from the iPhone. Always have. But other than that they're not really guilty of any major infractions. I can still tell a Galaxy S apart from an iPhone easily.
Nice to see that you agree about the quality of their phones though.
98. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
This is what Apple supporters have been saying. No one will get truly banned, but obviously the blatant copying needs to stop.
102. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
By the way what do you have to say about your perjury accusations? As usual you flew off the handle because it was Apple and the reality was nothing of the kind.
109. dandirk (Posts: 187; Member since: 04 Aug 2011)
If you are refering the the image modifications (resizing samsung pics to match the size of iphone)....
Don't know about purjury... but all those complaints were thrown out...
Essentially Apple threw a fist full of patents, design etc etc and only one stuck.
Interesting that the one that stuck was a stock android 2.2 (or 2.3) feature. Wonder if good will fix that globally since obviously not all phones can have honeycomb or ics...
142. jroc74 (Posts: 5986; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
"Essentially Apple threw a fist full of patents, design etc etc and only one stuck."
Yes. Its not spin doctoring to say Apple basically didnt win anything. Look at what they were trying to sue Samsung for.
And an update to the Gallery negates this win.
112. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Apple still committed perjury, and as you'll note, their accusations based on general design were thrown completely out. I never wholly disagreed with things like the app icon design, etc., but I never thought it justified the s**t fit Apple threw over it.
Nope, my position remains about the same, taco. How are you?
121. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
So can you explain why they didn't get sanctioned for perjury then?
124. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
They already won an injunction they shouldn't have. The actions of a court don't always reflect what actions the court should take.
131. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
I supposed the Netherlands court system is isheep then.
160. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
The court's decision was not based on those photos alone, and I think android fanboys know that. It's been explained that those photos carry very little weight at all concerning the court's rulings. So I don't understand why android fans keep on imposing that those photos are used as main evidence when it's not.
190. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I didn't say that the photos were used as main evidence. I'm just saying that manipulating the photos was still sneaky and dishonest.
201. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
And it was not a big deal. Because if it was, I'm sure someone would've already sued Apple.
93. Dman (unregistered)
Engadget: "According to Tweakers.net, Samsung says that it will replace the software that infringes on Apple's patent (the Gallery application, specifically), which should allow it to continue to sell the phones. Notably, that Gallery application is the standard Android one used in Android 2.3, which also explains why the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is not affected by this ruling. Less clear is what the ruling means for other Android phones that use the same application."
161. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Samsung openly admits that they infringed on Apple's IP's. Thanks for reposting.
168. jroc74 (Posts: 5986; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Looks like you didnt read the post you replied to too well..
"Notably, that Gallery application is the standard Android one used in Android 2.3"
Thats not Samsung....thats stock, vanilla Android....
So after ALL this....one cant even say Samsung is the copy cat...LOL!!
173. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
But it's on a Samsung device, so they are held accountable for using stolen IP's.
Android fanboys should stop twisting facts. It reflects a bad image of you guys. Apple won, and some Samsung devices are banned as of the moment in several countries. That's bad news for you android fans, but that's just how it is. So deal with it.
182. jroc74 (Posts: 5986; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
No....iFans need to learn to comprehend what they're reading...reading is fundamental...
No ones twisting facts.....iFans refuse to read the facts. They always do. Like you saying stolen IP's. No...it A IP not IP's.
Talking about twisting facts...lol
Banned for a vanilla Android Gallery app. Apple needs to take it up with Google.
202. 530gemini (Posts: 2198; Member since: 09 Sep 2010)
Are you trying to say then that there's no ban on some Samsung devices?
I don't even have to be specific as to which complaint Apple won. The fact is, some Samsung devices got banned. And it got banned for a reason or two. The court will not stop a sale of a product just for the fun of it.
Apple sued Samsung, not Google. So why are you dragging Google? And obviously, Samsung is accountable for something, or else the court would've dismissed the case early on. Geez.
103. biscutbob (Posts: 82; Member since: 08 Jul 2011)
If apple can make those thing connect and make them patent infringment then how the hell is apple even a company? ive used a mac and after using a mac i would say it is an exact copy of windows and a PC i double click to open things and can place icons around the desktop so wtf?? how are these bastards getting this though the court?
105. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Well, biscutbob, it seems that US Judges want to use an actual computer, and not some overpriced homosexual toy for the retarded and mentally challenged that Apple claims is called Mac. Hence, they don't know what Macs are.
185. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Bah - right - It's my iPhone man - I meant to write "Half-baked".
I apologize for those who were offended by the 18th word in my previous post - and request the staff to remove it.
129. gallitoking (Posts: 4718; Member since: 17 May 2011)
not surprise....at all. with that kind of offensive language
132. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Ilia doesn't put together very logical arguments most of the time. He doesn't seem very bright.
151. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
this coming from taco, the biggest and loudest idiot on the site. :)
176. gallitoking (Posts: 4718; Member since: 17 May 2011)
jajaja of course coming from someone that thinks T-mobile is the best network...right...
186. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Nope - that would be you taco. Ever looked in the mirror?
111. dandirk (Posts: 187; Member since: 04 Aug 2011)
This is a hit on Android not samsung.
Since ONLY 1 of how ever many compaints stuck. This is not a win for Apple at all. Apparently Samsung themselves are NOT copying Apple apple because what WAS upheld was stock Android, Samsung had nothing to do with it (other then not touchwizing that area).
This is all legal junk, honestly I think Samsung's UI is pretty blatent, icons are sooo similar in the app launcher and bar. That does't mean they illegally copied.
As for the coments about Apple being scared... you bet they are. The mobile OS war is HUGE money, if they loose now they will be forever at the bottom. There were taking the world by storm with no sign of competition... Now Android in that same 2 years has taken close to twice the market share. Apple HAS to slow them down, same with MS.
Fact of the matter is Apple is throwing the kitchen sink and so far Andorid is only getting little stains on its shirt... That could change obviously since there are so many suits pending all over the world.
144. jroc74 (Posts: 5986; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Whats also funny is the LG Prada and some phone called the Neonode came up in court in Samsung's defense and helped them get some stuff tossed. The Neonode was in 2005 and had the slide to unlock that Apple tried to sue Samsung for.
The LG Prada....the same LG Prada that some folks try to dismiss.
I think this other stuff coming up in court and favoring Samsung looks bad on Apple's part.
All prior art helped Samsung. And folks wanna keep calling Samsung copycats....
Samsung is the copycat....for copying their own design for hardware?