We did not copy iPhone says Samsung opening statement
0. phoneArena 31 Jul 2012, 20:00 posted on
Once Apple finished it's opening statement in District Court, it became Samsung's turn to tell the jury (now down to 9), how it intends to win the case; at the same time Samsung says it competed against the Apple iPhone but did not copy it...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. JcHnd (Posts: 81; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
LOL! Loved the samsung part... pretty funny, I really expect they win this, I can only imagine the sarcasm during their part!
4. ardent1 (Posts: 1864; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
One thing that Samung doesn't have that Apple has are the patents. Those patents prove Apple is the innovator working on solving problems in taking a blueprint or prototype to the consumer market.
Samsung can have all the sarcasm they want, they need patents and that is the HUGE hole in their defense.
5. Aeires (unregistered)
Many are vague patents. The scroll overbounce will likely stand up, but a ton of the other claims made by Apple are far too vague and general in scope. Patents have been thrown out before, just because you own one doesn't mean it's the be all end all to whatever it's for.
Samsung's 3G patent isn't vague, and it's worth more than the half cent that Apple is claiming. And likely Apple won't get the $24 for their trade dress patents. A settlement will be reached, but it won't be any where near the $2.5 billion being asked for. That's how it works, you ask for the moon, hoping to get a handful when the dust settles.
6. Pdubb (Posts: 225; Member since: 08 Aug 2011)
They have the significant patents. The 3g tech patents that Apple is trying to diminish the value. Patents that cannot be disputed or invalidated. What will be interesting is how Apple's patents hold up in court and whether Samsung gets to have the full asking price for their license.
12. Angkor (Posts: 108; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
Is Apple owned a patent on "Looks and Feels" ?
Apple copied iPhone and iPad from the Star Trek movie.
41. willard12 (Posts: 376; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
Prior Art = Invalid Patent. The "prior" portion of prior art means they are not innovating anything. Any judge in the world (other than Lucy Koh) can tell you that. Maybe all of us should go buy some patents so we can all be innovators. According to you, that's all it takes.
61. iami67 (Posts: 300; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Is this Taco did you make a new name you can have all the patents you want i rather have the better product and less greedy company
14. Y_S_L (Posts: 22; Member since: 30 Jul 2012)
SAMSUNG TO WIN. THUMBS UP.
APPLE TO WIN. THUMBS DOWN.
2. ardent1 (Posts: 1864; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
Whether you are an Apple fan or a Samsung fan, this is going to be a good trial. For months, we have been waiting for it. This will be an important test case for IP.
As an inventor, I support Apple (this should not be a shock to many) -- because if the courts do not protect IP, then there is no IP left to protect.
What made America prosperous and having one of the highest standards of living in the world based on the metric GDP per capita is that in America, (a) we have very strong property rights, (b) the rule of law, and (c) we encourage entrepreneurship. Absent the native Americans, America was founded by immigrant who took risks and were rewarded for its hard work.
IP falls under the strong property rights.
10. Sniggly (Posts: 6217; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
You forgot to mention slavery. That was an important factor in the founding of America.
22. remixfa (Posts: 13885; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
america was founded by asians who crossed the landbridge to later become native americans. Oh.. then there was the vikings like a thousand years before the europeans... then there was the spanish genocide for gold campaign.. oh yea.. THEN america was founded. Did I forget anything?
I actually like your ABC answers as they are very true.
however, you are a supremely biased troll with a bad attitude.
There is also a difference between "protecting IP", and doubling down on a broken patent system.
When the world's richest tech company whines that their yearly record braking sales are just not enough and that their only real competitor's profits belong to Apple. Because according to Apple's opening arguements CLEARLY "anyone who bought a samsung really wanted an iPhone and was just duped by samsung". yea, they obviously had no interest in an android phone, a bigger screen, Super Amoled beauty, more features, and all of that... Basically Apple just called every samsung customer since 2007 STUPID since they "accidentally" bought a samsung instead of an apple.. which is obviously what they wanted...
u should smell whats really going on. Its not about IP, its about market domination through litigation on the back of a broken patent system.
Apple has lost it in the realm of direct competition, so they are "competing" in the only space they have left.. unlimited litigation and mass filing of broad empty patents that should not be awarded to anyone.
42. networkdood (Posts: 4749; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
Was 22 in response to 2? Seems like it was.
24. paulyyd (Posts: 316; Member since: 08 Jan 2011)
Lol you sound like a liberal. Wouldn't be surprised if you were. Go somewhere with yourself
26. Sniggly (Posts: 6217; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
If a liberal is someone who actually knows a little bit about American history, then yes, I am a liberal.
It's not my fault I actually paid attention in social studies class.
46. jroc74 (Posts: 3459; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
If Apple doesnt go after the folks behind the Meizu phones again.....
It isnt about patents or IP. Its about not being the BMOC anymore...and Apple cant take it.
SO really, lets forget this case.....the one to watch for is the Meizu case..
56. Tux4g63 (Posts: 113; Member since: 21 Oct 2011)
You must have legitimate IP before it should need to be protected.
3. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
"He also went through Apple's list of patents and tossed them aside one by one, knocking them aside as if he were Superman deflecting bullets with his hand. For each patent, Verhoeven had a reason why it should be excluded"
7. Jay_F (Posts: 236; Member since: 29 Nov 2011)
One can only hope after this and all subsequent appeals, which are inevitable regardless of the victor, this feud will be over and both will prosper on their own.
8. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
One can only hope that the customers will some how prosper as well from this fued..
9. Aeires (unregistered)
Looks like Samsung's lawyer isn't a slacker when it comes to IP. Should be a good case, wish I could be in the courtroom to hear the case unfold.
16. tedkord (Posts: 3414; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
I just checked out his recent victories. He smacked down Rambus. Anyone remember them? They produced what was supposed to be the next form of ram for computers. But it was expensive, and had to be installed in pairs and had high latency.
Then double data rate ram came along. The market choose, DDR took off, Rambus was left behind as a footnote.
They then took what today is known as the Apple stratagem - try to apply your patents to stop all competition. The tried to apply overly broad patents in ways they were never intended. They've been beaten back at every turn.
34. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 4736; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
"I just checked out his recent victories."
Sammy has a top notch legal team representing them. Apple's patents are going to get put through a tighter scrutiny than they ever got from the USPTO. Don't be surprised if there are some invalidations of patents that never should have been issued.
11. tedkord (Posts: 3414; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
There will be one clear winner at the end of this. Lawyers.
13. Ohrules (Posts: 298; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)
i have a confusion regarding patents. Android first developed the pull-down notification center. now ios has it too. If it is not patented by google right now, and apple does patent it at this point, can apple say that their patent's been violated?
18. tedkord (Posts: 3414; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Google has a patent pending on the notification, so no, Apple can't patent it as is.
Regardless, as the system is supposed to work, a patent requires uniqueness, no prior art, so Apple should not be able to obtain a patent on the notification dropdown. Unfortunately, Apple has figured out that the patent office is extremely understaffed and under skilled, and they can slip through pretty much any patent the want. They know it's not likely they'll discover that Neonode had swipe to unlock well before the iPhone. Our that multitouch existed for many years prior to 2007. Or that the LG Prada was a black rectangle with rounded corners a year before the iPhone.
20. remixfa (Posts: 13885; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
stop.. making very valid.. points..
your going to hurt our resident trolls' feelings.
39. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 4736; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
It will be a real hard lift for Apple to invalidate the Google Notification function application if it issues as a patent. That is why the application has the Apple people scared sh*tless. Can you imagine if Apple were forced to strip out the notifications from iOS and go back to the beep when a message was received? Apple got pilloried in the market for that dumb-ass approach to notifications.
58. Ohrules (Posts: 298; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)
thanks! That was a really good explanation.
36. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 4736; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Google filed an application with the USPTO regarding the notification function. Based on timing, there is probably a back-and-forth occurring (known as an Office Action) between Google's patent attorneys and an examiner at the USPTO regarding whether the application should be issued. Since Google has already filed an application for the Notification function, Apple is barred from filing its own application. If Google's application is allowed to issue as a patent, Apple will likely be in some serious trouble with its own Notification function.
17. PhoneCritic (Posts: 329; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)
No. it falls under what is know as prior art. which in turn invalidates the patent. By the way I mentioned in another post that Google has a Patent pending for the drop down notification already and when approved it can go after Apple if it so desires. What then will apple then relent on its universal search patent?
19. pikapowerize (banned) (Posts: 1869; Member since: 03 May 2012)
inspiration is copying! sorry sammy!!!
23. wendygarett (unregistered)
Why Samsung doesn't follow stock android... Why purposely putting physical home button just like iPhone... Why the design looks a same every year just like boring iPhone... Can everyone answer me???
27. remixfa (Posts: 13885; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
samsung was doing large center buttons YEARS before the iphone. Its been standard issue on MOST samsung phones. Apple didnt invent a central button.
And samsung makes the Nexus phones, and the G-Nexus is also under Apple law suits for bull crap, even though its stock google code. Apple is a predator, not a defender.
33. taz89 (Posts: 1771; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Lol love it when people claim that Samsung use the large home button because of apple when they were using it long before apple
59. remixfa (Posts: 13885; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
a simple search of samsung phones in PA's phone database page disproves the "samsung is copying apple" theory.. you dont need a lawyer, you need glasses and an IQ over 50.
28. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Samsung is finally going to reap what they sow. For years Apple has asked them to stop stealing their technology. Now it's judgement day.
29. Sniggly (Posts: 6217; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Uh huh. And for years Samsung has been differentiating their products, with only a couple of forays into *infringing* territory.
Trust me when I say this, almost everyone who wants an iPhone, like really wants it, gets one. Only those who are willing to look at the benefits of buying anything different will ultimately do so.
32. taz89 (Posts: 1771; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Apple keeps saying they have lost millions due to Samsung well where are the stats the show that people have been buying Samsung devices thinking they are apple devices... no matter how good a device is better than an apple device a apple fanboy will never admit another device is better or buy a non apple device.
47. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
The average consumer isn't a fanboy of anything. They can be swayed. Samsung making devices look very similar can give them sales off Apples name.
53. Sniggly (Posts: 6217; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Customers can be swayed if they're just going off the iPhone as a name, or a representation of smartphones in general. If they don't have any clue what's out there, and what's out there is properly explained to them, they can be persuaded to buy the better value (in this case, Android).
However, those people don't buy Samsung because of its similarities to the iPhone. They buy because of its differences, what Samsung offers that is different than the iPhone. The Galaxy S 3 and iPhone 4S, for example, couldn't really be more different. They can instantly be told apart, and apart from a center button, bear little physical resemblance.
There is no crime in offering a product which can perform equivalent functions to its competitor, especially if it establishes its own identity. I do take issue with what little similarities remain, but Samsung has largely established its own identity with the Galaxy line of smartphones.
30. taz89 (Posts: 1771; Member since: 03 May 2011)
You really reaping the billions apple make obviously..judgment day lol talk about being over the top.
35. Tekkasonic (Posts: 6; Member since: 31 Jul 2012)
Taco, why is it I get furious every time you talk. It just always seems like you have something retarded to say.
Google/samsung/THE WORLD will win, get over it apple fanboy...
40. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Actually, Apple is going to have it's iAss handed to it on an aluminium retina-displayed multi-touch plate. You should pray for them, taco. They will need it, lest all their precious ludicrous patents get invalidated one by one.
49. remixfa (Posts: 13885; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
it was samsung's technology in the iphone the entire time.. how can they steal it?? fool.
52. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Actually it's Apple's intellectual property. It's designed by Apple. Samsung is just the factory that produces it.
60. remixfa (Posts: 13885; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
typical uneducated troll.
Apple didnt design it. They bought intrinsic, which housed the initial designs that SAMSUNG was using, and is still legally allowed to use. pretty much all advancement and development on A4/A5 has been from samsung, not Apple. Samsung is the designer, upgrader, and manufacturer. Apple is just the customer, regardless if they hold the original patents for the chip. Get it right troll.
54. andro. (Posts: 1890; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
stealing their technology? You seem to forget half of the tech in iPhones is actually Samsung supplied technology.