x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Will the outcome of the Apple vs Samsung case stifle or help innovation?

0. phoneArena posted on 28 Aug 2012, 06:17

The Apple versus Samsung legal battle now has a definite winner. After months of endless discussions and polarizing opinions, it has brought a kind of a legal drama…

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 08:31 2

28. andro. (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)

Exactly!! It will only really have a small effect on in the US,fortunately for the rest of the world apple has very less influence or domineering control as seen recently in Italy and in the UK for instance!

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 10:22

34. LionStone (Posts: 845; Member since: 10 Dec 2010)

Wassup, wassup? Yep pretty much why the whole court thing is going on. You see apple likes to do things on their own time line as they have in the past couple years. Except now they are realizing that they are getting passed up and not as innovative as they once were...and they do NOT like that. Its about their ego and when they stomp their foot down, they make themselves look bad and petty. If they had said, "Oh yes, imitation is the best form of flattery" and gone on with their lives so everyone can too, they would have garnered so much respect and retained more of their fans and customers.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 18:00

50. gallitoking (Posts: 4721; Member since: 17 May 2011)

Apple is number 1 in U.S sales (biggest cellphone market of the world.. craig) Apple is the most profitable company and not to mention has a fanbase loyalty of 95% trust me Apple is anything but scare.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 21:33 1

56. remixfa (Posts: 14605; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

Samsung is #1 in sales.

Gotta update your fanboy bulletpoints.

posted on 29 Aug 2012, 10:50

60. gwuhua1984 (Posts: 1237; Member since: 06 Mar 2012)

He's right, Apple is number 1 only in the US... I won't be surprised if that changes soon.

posted on 29 Aug 2012, 10:05

59. hengnarath (Posts: 14; Member since: 26 Aug 2012)

Yes the most profitable company. Look at the iPhone price. I'm so scare.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 06:35 8

7. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)

No, Apple needs to be kicked off of their high horse and sent back to the drawing boards. They can't patent the basic necessities in order for a smartphone to be practical. Just once, Apple needs to be shot down, and hopefully that will make them realize that they can't do whatever they want, and they will actually start making top-notch products again. Once Apple gets back in the game technologically, and not just legally, we'll see a rush of innovation from everyone.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 06:53 8

9. aggregor (Posts: 2; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)

apple is just jealous of samsung. apple himself doesn't makes smartphones for common people but only for high end people. samsung takes care of all classes, thats why its growing popular and successsfuland apple could not digest this. such a loser!!!!
no one can patent how to peel a banana!!!!

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 06:59

11. Trollonka_KeKe_Jackson (Posts: 14; Member since: 16 Aug 2012)

i dont know man. you can patent shapes now days.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 06:57

10. mercorp (Posts: 1043; Member since: 28 Jan 2012)

Those who chose the second option are likely apple lovets.
(just saying)

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 07:00

12. Trollonka_KeKe_Jackson (Posts: 14; Member since: 16 Aug 2012)


posted on 28 Aug 2012, 07:05 2

13. Veigald (Posts: 290; Member since: 13 Jan 2012)

Obviously the impact of not being allowed to copy other patents will lead to more innovation (and more cross-licensing as well). If companies like Samsung are unable to innovate around these obstacles, they probably don't deserve to be in the business in the first place.

Saying that the blatant copying that was proven here stifles innovation is ridiculous, it's lack of innovation in the first place that led to these carbon-copy phones from Samsung. Android itself does not need to look just like iOS, and the hardware doesn't have to look like an iPhone.

That said, US patent laws are completely out of control and something needs to change.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 11:48

37. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4785; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

So innovation at gunpoint then. Yeah, that would make me real creative. Basically what they've done is lock up the most sensible ways to operate a phone. Now they have to "innovate". The only problem is they've patented the end result and action to accomplish it, not how it was implemented. So how do you come up with a work around? Answer, you can't. So now rather than a pinch to zoom, you'll need some other action to zoom in and out, and one that'll leave people saying that's stupid, why wouldn't you pinch or expand your fingers? Yeah, really looking forward tothe future. Maybe time to go back to my laptop & a flip phone. Unless Apple patented them while I was using my smartphone.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 12:44 1

40. Veigald (Posts: 290; Member since: 13 Jan 2012)

So you're saying people have pinched to zoom since the dark ages? I would assume pinch to zoom is something Apple came up with since they have the patent, which also means that since you and probably a lot of people find that intuitive, they did a good job. And if they did a good job, they have been smart to protect it through a patent to make sure they get value from their good job.

Sure there are other ways to zoom or do whatever on a phone, but that's not the point. The point is that either you come up with something new yourself or you make sure you abide by patent laws and pay someone else for the good job they did.

Samsung copied with these products, they didn't innovate and they didn't license Apple patents. Products like SGS3 however show innovation and thus aren't as liable for patent suits.

And innovation at gunpoint... give me a break. In business you need something to differentiate your product, otherwise no one will buy it. That differentiation is innovation, be it in form or functionality. If a company is incapable of differentiation, it will go bust. So yeah, I suppose that kind of is innovation at gunpoint, just not for the reason you think.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 12:55 1

41. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4785; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

Well considering they already showed that Apple had already seen it when they viewed the touch top table, Apple didn't invent it either, they simply adapted the concept for their product. My point was that given the patent they were awarded, it leaves no way for anyone to implement anything similar. By that I mean if the USPTO had made them patent the actual code that makes pinch to zoom work, rather than the action and result, other companies could come up with something similar while not infringing on apple's version. The problem is apple is more interested in banning their competition rather than being compensated for their patents.

And my innovation at gunpoint is not far from the truth. Every step these companies make will now be over scrutinized to make sure they don't risk a court outcome similar to the apple/samsung verdict. How much more will that add to the cost of r&d to make sure they don't remotely come close to infringing on other's work. And those costs don't get written off, they get passed onto the consumer.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 13:54

42. shuaibhere (Posts: 1986; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)

So what about tap to enter....if someone patented it then we got to have only one touch screen phone provider.....if pinch to zoom is patentable than why not tap to enter.....

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 16:25

44. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4785; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

Exactly. What they have basically done is patent a gesture, which isn't patentable. They could patent the software code that allows that gesture to accomplish the end result, but not the gesture itself.

Also, that whole thing Tim Cook said about this not being about money but about values is BS. If that truly was the case, they should be going after anyone who may be infringing on their patents. Why haven't they gone after the Chinese companies who basically make an iphone and stick their name on it? That's worse than anything Samsung has done. But they didn't go after HTC until they were the top android oem. After that role fell to Samsung, they went after them. Apparently they don't mind if someone infringes until they become a threat to their sales. So until Apple goes after EVERYONE, not just android & not just their closest competition, values has nothing to do with it.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 16:30

45. tedkord (Posts: 14135; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

And, you would be wrong. They showed evidence of pinch to zoom from long before the iPhone in the trial.

Apple did not create pinch to zoom, not did they invent multi-touch (though Steve Jobs did claim they invent it when he introduced the first iPhone). Both existed well before the iPhone.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 18:44

53. Myrith (Posts: 57; Member since: 17 Feb 2012)

Even if patents help with innovation, one downside is that the inconsistency in different user interfaces hurts usability.

These days, it's not uncommon for someone to have multiple devices, such as a phone and a tablet. If the devices had different ways to zoom, it'd increase the chances of the user making a mistake, especially if there's muscle memory involved. Or, for people who are less technologically minded, it can be difficult to learn multiple ways of performing the same action on different devices.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 07:42

16. Aeires (unregistered)

I'd be willing to bet a paycheck that Apple has a room full of people who do nothing but think of new ways to utilize zoom other than pinch to zoom. Next they'll patent the idea so when another OEM comes up with the same idea, they'll be banned because Apple has the patent.

If anyone thinks the Apple vs. Samsung trial was just about trade dress, I have a bridge I'd like to sell to you.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 07:55 5

20. TheRetroReplay (Posts: 254; Member since: 20 Mar 2012)

In all out honesty, this lawsuit was because of early TouchWiz. When I played with the Samsung Fascinate I was surprised how iPhone like it was.

I'll admit that I was angry at Apple for all these lawsuits and I still refuse to own an Apple product because of their litigious behavior. But when I saw the list of phones that Apple want banned, I didn't care, those are phones that are at their end-of-life cycles.

Still, Apple should not of been awarded such silly and broad patents that already existed as prior art that Apple stole and the fact that the jury skipped over it proves that the jury system is flawed.

I think that this will bring about more innovation as OEMs will work around Apple's patents. If Sony can make an Android device that Apple won't sue over, and it's been proven that they'll sue anyone as they sued a no name company in Europe over a tablet (and they lost), that proves that an OEM can work around Apple's broad patents.

And if Apple isn't suing Google directly, then there has to be something going on in the background that we're just not seeing.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 07:58 4

21. whysoserious (Posts: 318; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)

I don't believe Apple sued Samsung to protect their intellectual property in the first place. There are so many iPhone clones which are made in China out there and Apple doesn't give a damn about it. Apple just want to destroy Samsung because they're scared of them. They're realizing the fact that Samsung is getting better and better each day and it's just a matter of time before they get overtaken.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 08:02 1

22. redsox420 (Posts: 90; Member since: 27 Aug 2012)

This verdict is wrong and will be thrown out on appeals. So apple can make a shape and someone infringes on that? If apples claims are true, then anyone making a tv nowadays must pay a royalty to someone else for using a 42inch tv frame, and we all know they look alike. Apple didn't invent the wheel, nor did they innovate after the 4 came out. They are stuck in the 1980s, along with the GOP.

THis verdict is a massive blow to innovation. Apple wants to stifle innovation through the courts rather than on the merits of a quality product and competition. Sammy is going to overtake apple with the Note 2. The iphoney 5 should have a 10+ mp camera on back and 3+ on the front. Removable memory & battery, a screen larger than 4 inches, a stylus if it wants to compete in the smartphone market. A 4 inch screen just wont cut in the real world.

Now lets get to the icrap mini. Sammy is watching close. Remember they came with the smallest tab a 7 incher first. So if its close to 7 inches, Sammy better pounce to seek and destroy and blockade the icrap mini.

I'm waiting for the Note 2. 5.5 inches, a stylus. Unbreakable glass. expandable memory & replaceable battery. Jellybean installed is the rumor. Can apple compete with that? The new LG? NO.. Its a resounding NO!

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 08:18

26. JMeyerSA (Posts: 9; Member since: 01 Jul 2012)

Apple already tried to ban the Samsung 7-inch tablet because it is going to be competition for their icrap mini.
I cannot describe my hate for companies like Apple.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 18:03

51. gallitoking (Posts: 4721; Member since: 17 May 2011)

I am sure you can describe it if you calm down

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 08:41

30. Nikolas.Oliver (banned) (Posts: 1574; Member since: 01 Jul 2012)

"Is that apple-proof ?" LOL

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 11:37

36. kabukijoe (Posts: 102; Member since: 06 Mar 2010)

There will still be innovation as well as competition for those innovating ideas... Every company makes "their verision" of something that's already out, Apple included. For example Apple decided to add an Android notification shade to iOS, and decided to add BBM to their system and call it "iMessage"... They may not be EXACT copies but they are stolen ideas if you look at it the same way that Apple seems to be viewing these scenarios. Apple is just as guitly of "stealing" as everyone else. They are just crybabies when others do it to them.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 12:41

39. tedkord (Posts: 14135; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

Of course the rulings will stifle innovation. That was the objective all along, to slow innovation to the point that Apple could keep up, while discouraging manufacturers from even entering the market.

Apple are very good at simple designs that work. This lawsuit was s prime example of that.

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 15:02

43. gwuhua1984 (Posts: 1237; Member since: 06 Mar 2012)

It wouldn't help the consumer at all. Come on, a patent for rectangular device??? for a shape that we often see and use in our daily lives. The patents that Apple hold aren't innovations, just bunch of existing stuff already. Now they're getting paid for manufacturers using these existing stuff? It's pathetic, a tech company that doesn't actually invent any thing new, but trying to stop everyone else from trying make something better. How does that help the consumers?

posted on 28 Aug 2012, 23:06

57. snowgator (Posts: 3604; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)

In the minority, as I see to be a lot.

I think innovation explodes. It is too big of a market, to much money involved to not react to this ruling with extreme urgency. If Android wants to continue to dominate and really put some distance between them and Apple in the future, the have to ensure Apple can't hurt them In court. They will respond. Google will change up the software side and manufacturers will adjust hardware. I think Apple has peaked, and believe that about their products, sales, and litigation. Their competition will respond, and with extreme malice.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories