Judge Koh continues Samsung's legal slump by denying all 12 summary judgment motions
0. phoneArena posted on 01 Jul 2012, 01:17
A summary judgement motion brought by Samsung back in May was denied in its entirety by Judge Lucy Koh on Saturday; the Korean manufacturer had attacked the validity of Apple's IP rights and Apple's FRAND-related antitrust claims...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
24. iShepherd posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:31 27
Yeah let's sue every phone manufacturer that's not Apple out of existence. This way we can have cheap $2000 iphones. If people can't take a loan out for it then they could just buy their newly patented iCan and iString for $200/piece. They may even throw in a proprietary charger for free.
36. Rocksteady posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:50 9
nice, thanks you saved me the effort, you just explained my thoughts.
Have a nice day.
127. InspectorGadget80 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 11:24 2
Yes lets STOP MAKING phones and let Apple be the only manufacteurer then they will realize that NOT EVERYONE wants to buy a iProduct from these greedy bastards then they will drop their law suit
163. Otterbox (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:12 2
The iPhone price is no higher than a high end Android price when its first released. Only difference? iPhones don't become oudated as fast. Apple is still supporting older phones.
Patents are there for a reason, to protect innovation and ideas you came up. Samsung has been guilty of copying many of the iPhone's ideas before.
249. KingGiner55 posted on 03 Jul 2012, 20:16 0
Patents are there for a reason, to protect innovation and ideas you came up. Exactly. But the problem and reason I HATE APPLE is the fact that they patent ideas that have been out for years that the maker has wanted to be usable for everyone. For example slide to unlock was available at least five years before the first iPhone and they patented it and sued a lot of people over it causing a lot of money and time in development o come up with a work around all because Apple is a company of greedy heartless snobs. The only real loss that we see is the loss of innovation because Android IS leading the way in software I don't care how many devices have the latest. If you have Froyo you have more features than iOS6. And where would you be with your precious iDevices if Apple hadn't stolen soooooo many ideas from Android? And since Samsung has made several of the Nexus phones, by default, they are stealing from Samsung. And what on earth did this phone steal from the iPhone? There isn't a person alive that can't tell the diffidence unless they have multiple handicaps. #boycottapple
41. nak1017 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:11 1
Wouldn't putting Jellybean on the phone replace the part of the software in violation of the Siri patent?
No S-Voice, no problem...?
63. TechDroid posted on 01 Jul 2012, 05:10 9
There is no S-Voice on the Galaxy Nexus, so it's got nothing to do with that.
117. taco50 (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 10:13 1
And if tomorrow Posner sided with Apple you'd say he's trash too.
156. PackMan posted on 01 Jul 2012, 12:50 3
Yes, if his decision seems wrong to me, maybe I will. But Posner has better track record than this chicken head, not only in these patent cases but others too. Apple must have promised free supply of iPads for her periods. So its understandable.
Apple -"Samsung copying our product is hurting our business irreparably." Ha ha what a load of bulls**t.
162. taco50 (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:11 1
By wrong you mean any decision that sides with Apple. You're blinded by fanaticism.
194. LOLpple (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 17:36 1
'fanatacism'. Three things:
1) That's a pretty big word for a retarded person, did you have an adult help you with that?
2) You accusing others of fanatacism. IRONY, look it up.
3) WELCHER TRASH, leave.
215. E.N. posted on 01 Jul 2012, 18:07 1
Wow so we're sexist now? Interesting...
I would never say comments like that for anyone reason, especially for a freaking phone company lol. But maybe that's just me, I've always been different......
Congrats Android is now the new cult. Come to think of it, I can't remember a time when iPhone users ever acted as radical. You guys are original, I like it.
193. LOLpple (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 17:34 0
Oh yeah, almost forgot:
WELCHER inbred hillbilly gutter trash.
101. -box- posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:44 4
It is disheartening seeing Koh do this. She was doing great being unbiased and open-minded, now she seems to be dancing to apple's tune. Hopefully this is a play to get apple to lower its guard so she can throw the book at them
137. E.N. posted on 01 Jul 2012, 11:58 1
Or maybe this is a decision that any judge would have made given their arguments....... stop being so biased yourself
23. Gemmol posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:31 3
I do not understand half of yall on this website, in my opinion, if you own a business and someone steal your ideas you sue them, but then yall bring up the point that Apple do not like innovation, if that is the case Samsung and other companies do not like innovation, since they are stealing from Apple....If samsung and other companies are so innovated why dont they just make new things and stop using stuff Apple sue them for.....Then yall bring up the part of Apple not innovated because they buy companies, this is true, but once you buy the company the patent become yours, so even if they do not make the product they own it, which does not give another company the right to copy them.....I own a Galaxy Note, so no I am not a Apple user, but if I were the CEO of Apple I would sue anybody who use any patents I own, if they want to innovated go ahead and make their own product with their patent......If I was the CEO of Samsung I would do the same.....I will not sit there and let a company make money of my patents, if you say letting people make money off your patents is okay with you, then you do not need to run a business.... I know that I will receive a whole bunch of negative votes because theres a lot of samsung owners on this website, including me, but I am just speaking my opinion.....look at things from a business point of view and not because you like a certain product and if you do not agree with me then its fine......the comment section is for where people voice their opinions, so I would love to hear your opinions
43. ilia1986 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:18 18
A huge part of management is COMPANY ETHICS.
Ethics dictate that a company will strive to do things which do not generally cause it direct profit - ethical things.
BANNING A COMPETITIVE PRODUCT IS NOT ETHICAL. No matter how you look at it.
If Samsung has indeed infringed upon patents from Apple - Apple could just demand Samsung to pay them some money to settle this. No need to demand an entire product to be banned.
But no. Instead Apple choose to demand the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany, Australia and US banned, and the Galaxy Nexus banned in the US as well.
THAT IS UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR.
Companies infringe of each other's patents all the time. Never before had a company demanded the absolute prohibition of selling the product in the entire country just because of patent infringement. Never before - until Apple and the lawyer death squad came along.
Remember: Apple is the first company in the history of the world to demand a product banned due to patent infringement.
54. D.Aceveda posted on 01 Jul 2012, 04:31 8
Terri Schiavo probably had more intelligence than Taco50. Sad really.
195. LOLpple (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 17:37 0
More personality too.
And she wasn't A GODDAM WELCHER!
72. Gemmol posted on 01 Jul 2012, 06:15 1
I understand that, but as a company they should have the right to say no. If I have something and I do not want to share, I am guessing you would say I have unethical behavior.....the whole thing about it, they own the rights, it does not mean every company should share what they own.....do you share everything you own......no matter how you put it, apple own the rights to the patents, if the companies want to give better competition, make new stuff and if apple copys then ban them
80. ilia1986 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 07:15 2
If you had a patent on glass - and were making TVs - would you demand to ban all the other TV maker's products?
If so I am truly sorry for you - you have no idea what management is all about.
85. Gemmol posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:06 1
I am not saying what they doing is right, I think this is where everyone is getting my post confused, all I am saying they have the right to ban things, if they do not want someone using it, and for your example, if they wanted to ban them from making TV, then the other companies should make a new product to build TV's, if you look at technology, everything we once used is replace with something better and by having these patents, this is suppose to improve innovation, but samsung do not, they want to piggy back, which is okay with me because I love my Galaxy Note......but I still think everyone on PhoneArena is a joke to think Apple should not sue, this is their bread and water, this makes them profit, if someone making profit of your bread and butter, you should either get paid by them or ban them.....would you like it if someone took your product and made you go bankrupt.....this is the better question everyone should be asking themselves, these companies are trying to survive and if you say apple do not innovate all they do is buy companies, well its true, but now they own those companies patents, so it still do not give you a right to use their patents..........
88. OptimusOne posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:14 0
so what you said is that apple suiing people is the only way for it to survive as in bread and water
yes companies should sue if someone takes their ideas. but they should not use litigation to create market share and to ensure competitiveness. Apple instead should make the iphone 5 awesome with all that litigation money.
and suiing should be for something legit. like lets say samsung make an all glass phone with a metal rim around it with, and then add the exact same camera sensor on it. not for something as a rectangular device with rounded corners. If samsung coped the phone icon. BIG DEAL! what else do you put for a phone icon, a contacts book?
anyway suiing should be for something legit, and obvious
158. gallitoking posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:02 1
Nike banned the sales Reebok's Tim Tebow jerseys.as they have the rights to sale the jersey.. to me this sounds more ridiculous than what Apple is doing.. is normal it happens every day.. deal with it
196. LOLpple (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 17:38 2
Society should have banned your parents from breeding. So much tragedy and fail could've been avoided...
224. Pdubb posted on 01 Jul 2012, 23:06 0
That is completely different!!!! Reebok had an exclusive contract with the NFL and it expired and Nike had the exclusive contract. When Tebow was traded Reebok tried to make the new jerseys to capitalize on the popularity of Tebow. Reebok tried to sell those jerseys after they knew their contract was expired and Nike had the exclusive deal. They didn't ban the Bronco jerseys just the new Jets jerseys that were made after the contract was over. That is why they banned the sale of those jerseys.
95. -box- posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:35 2
I think a lot of the rancor against apple stems from the proven (in courts) facts that they infringed on many other patents and tech from other companies when they released the original iPhone and every subsequent model, and only got punished in fines and licensing costs (Nokia gets some big payments from apple from using a lot if it's tech, now that the courts proved the infringement), so they essentially got away with it. They're now exerting the success they had standing on the shoulders if giants to try to disrupt the sales of honest competing products (the Tab 10.1 is sort of infringing, but all this other junk is just laughable), instead of continuing the graciousness given to it by the world electronic manufacturer community when they allowed the iDevices to go on sale despite their infringements, being ungrateful and hypocritical in their actions. Honestly, I wish Nokia had not been as nice, and had been as ferocious with their patents as apple has been with the ones they got (most of which they shouldn't, prior art and products and features, etc) and had apple banned. Apple wouldn't have a leg to stand on, Nokia might still be as dominant as they had been, and Android would have flourished in its own right without B.S. suits attacking its leading products.
226. bayusuputra posted on 02 Jul 2012, 01:19 0
you still can say no, ask them to pay and remove the infringing features and let them sell it still.. we'll see how much sales will be affected if SGS3 dumps the S-voice..
135. vbetts posted on 01 Jul 2012, 11:42 0
While I don't agree with Apple going after so many patents and while I also believe the whole US patent systme is the most rediculous system on the planet, it is not unethical to want to protect your products. I hate what Apple is doing, but I can easily understand why. The main reason is to protect their products and design, now we all know too there's another reason and that's to knock out competition, but that's not the point.
And great claim there on Apple, I'm going to call BS on that because if Apple was the first company to ban a product because of patent infringements, that would completely and utterly defeat the purpose of having a US patent system. That's why it's there, if I patent a cookie with a speaker in it and someone else tries to make one and sell it without paying me royaltees, I'm going to shut them down.
73. groupsacc posted on 01 Jul 2012, 06:21 6
I'd like to see you say this when you get sued by Apple for making your toast with rounded corners.
Of course, companies have the right to intellectual properties, but what we are pissed about here is the ridiculousness of the nature of these lawsuits.
Please reply after looking up what kind of patents Apple is suing for.
74. PhoneArenaUser posted on 01 Jul 2012, 06:26 2
True.
86. Gemmol posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:07 1
read the post above you number 85 I answer your comment
89. OptimusOne posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:16 0
when you sue something. it is for something that is really harming your marketshare and will cause inreparable harm to your market share
what apple is suiing for are things so subtile, they won't make a difference in the average consumer
100. -box- posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:40 0
@optimusone Yes, exactly
138. E.N. posted on 01 Jul 2012, 12:07 1
You guys sorta contradicted yourselves. If thsee features that Apple is suing for are so insignificant that the average consumer won't even notice, why doesn't Samsung just remove them?!?!?! Its no biggie right? Features like slide to unlock are silly suits, but why nit just remove them instead of putting your device at risk of being banned? Additionally, there are more important suits like the "unified" search patent for voice search...not all of them are subtle.
146. Whateverman posted on 01 Jul 2012, 12:20 0
Be honest here. You don't really think people choose a Samsung over an iPhone because it has slide to unlock, or because it has a rectangular shape do you. Apple has every right to protect siri because they paid for it. But sueing for menu buttons, screen bounces and things 99.999999% of customers don't even notice just looks weak. I don't care how many phones you sell, if you have to sue your way into first place, your still just second best.
153. taco50 (banned) posted on 01 Jul 2012, 12:47 1
So why doesn't Samsung remove those things if no one cares
159. gallitoking posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:06 2
because Samsung works around what Apple does.. las year the wanted to compete head to head with the iphone 4S vs their SGSII and lost here in the States... they released the SGSIII with a app similar to Siri which they can but they are just mocking Apple ... remember when Samung mocked Apple on their commercial.. well pay up. Sammy
ps. the only reason the SGSIII did so wel is because they again copied Apple's way of creting hype and complete mistery,,,
176. DigitalBoy05 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:50 1
so youre saying it has nothing to do with having a good product but entirely on how its marketed?
221. gallitoking posted on 01 Jul 2012, 18:54 1
So when it comes to the iphone fandroids have always stated that it sells because is well marketed.. so is not me saying it... but when it comes to SGSIII is because is a good device... please even on thta Samsung copied Apple marketing ways..
220. Whateverman posted on 01 Jul 2012, 18:21 0
I don't know, but that really isn't the point. Pdubb down below hit the nail on the head. Apple uses/steal technology from all its competitors then expects their little after thoughts to be treated like sacred ground. They can't have it both ways. Either your going to be a competitor in this industry or destroy it. An all iPhone industry, like someone said earlier, would lead to $2000 iPhones with no other alternatives.
At first, I wanted Motorola to be the more honorable company and NOT enforce the injunction they just won. But now my hope is that Motorola bans both the iPad and iPhone and put they iPhone 5 on ice for a few months if not years. That would be justice. :)
169. Pdubb posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:34 1
I think the main problem people are having with this is that Apple found it reasonable to use other company's tech and license it for their use but do not want to do the same. Innovation comes from building on what is there and making it better. It is rare to completely change the way something is done which is what Apple is essentially asking other companies to achieve. They were not asked to do this but, they are seeking to ban other companies for building off what they have used. Innovation would almost cease to exist if each company started to use these tactics.(notice I used almost) What if the tire axle was patented and used this way? What about the doorknob? Apple came after all the hard lifting had been done. They use FRAND but while those companies cross licensed a lot of their tech Apple just wants to pay a nominal fee and join in while keeping its tech to themselves. Then sue when they feel they have been infringed. Many of us feel much of the patents Apple has inserted(notice I said much not all) are just logical and not innovative. Slide to unlock comes to mind as well as their "trade dress".(a rectangular screen with rounded edges) In business you want your patents to be licensed usually. That brings in extra income to develop and make your products better and you do not have to go it alone. Look at RIM when their tech got old there was nothing to grow or build. The BBM was it and they had nothing to help grow the service. With the tech out there you can find more uses kind of like MS has done with Kinect.
46. mandkeee posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:40 4
Judge Koh you did great job.....
samsung copied way too much stuffs from apple.....
and im telling you guys....from this website....most of users are love android....
so if you say something good about apple??? trust me...you will get bad reply...
245. joey_sfb posted on 02 Jul 2012, 21:46 0
I am glad that apple did not ship any TV otherwise Apple will be suing Sony, LG and Samsung for making a rectangular TV.
113. PAPINYC posted on 01 Jul 2012, 09:20 6
Judge Lucy is just on the iRag; she just needs a few MiDol (Extra Strength) down her ('love you long time') throat.
2. Scyllax posted on 01 Jul 2012, 01:23 9
Good for apple. Good for a tech company that cannot flow through the fast growing of technological innovations.
3. ardent1 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 01:30 7
Samsung, you reap what you sow. When Apple asked you to stop stealing their ideas and even offer to license some low level patents as an inducement, you guys exhibited such unbounded hubris.
That hubris continued with using FRAND patents to extort Apple. As if you believed your 3G FRAND patent can be used as leverage. Btw, that strategy is also backfiring for Motorola.
Samsung, if you are going to steal, don't steal IP from Apple because they will sue you as they have a long, long history of protecting their IP.
Samsung, you reap what you sow.
5. ilia1986 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 01:32 21
And of course Apple never stole anything from anybody, right?
10. RORYREVOLUTION posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:07 13
These mindless sheep can't be reasoned with. Apple police could break into their homes and steal all their money and belongings and they would just thank Apple for it.
141. E.N. posted on 01 Jul 2012, 12:10 3
If Apple stole, it's up to those companies to protect their property. That's no reason for Apple not to protect theirs
8. RORYREVOLUTION posted on 01 Jul 2012, 01:57 6
Lol too bad Apple steals from its own app developers all the time and claims they invented it themselves. You fanboys need to snap into reality and wake up. Apple stole and copied from the very start of their organization.
11. chadrick0814 posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:09 8
So its okay for Apple to steal the notification menu, reply to a phone call with a message, and a million other things from android? All of Apple's patents in question are things they've bought from other companies. Get out of your fantasy world thinking they created any of it. Apple bought a galaxy nexus, ripped it apart to find something, and they came up with a Siri patent. Copying is not the issue for Apple. The will try to ban any competitive device. They will tear every high end Samsung, Motorola, and HTC device apart until they find 1 of the trillions patents they've PURCHASED being infringed upon in order to eliminate products that they know a better than their featureless devices.
45. mandkeee posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:39 2
Judge Koh you did great job.....
samsung copied way too much stuffs from apple.....
and im telling you guys....from this website....most of users are love android....
so if you say something good about apple??? trust me...you will get bad reply...
64. TechDroid posted on 01 Jul 2012, 05:13 3
Can you please put together coherent sentences, because all I'm seeing is words.
-
Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom
-
Samsung GALAXY Ace 3
-
ZTE Vital
-
Nokia EOS
-
LG Optimus L4 II
-
Samsung Galaxy S4 Active
-
Sony Xperia M
-
Asus Fonepad Note FHD 6
-
Samsung Galaxy S4 vs Samsung Galaxy Note II
-
Samsung Galaxy S4 Review
-
Samsung Galaxy S4 vs HTC One
-
Camera comparison: Samsung Galaxy S4 vs HTC One, Sony Xperia Z, iPhone 5, Nokia Lumia 920 and Galaxy S III
-
Screen Comparison: Galaxy S4 vs iPhone 5 vs Xperia Z vs One vs Galaxy S III vs Lumia 920
