Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Patent disputes....aka Apple vs Samsung

bensonga

bensonga

Well-known member
I like the Nexus 7 a lot too.

Since other companies came out with a 7 inch tablet BEFORE Apple (with the rumored release of an iPad mini in October), I would HOPE that Apple can't obtain a patent on a 7 inch tablet now and then force Samsung, Google etc to pull their tablets off the market.

On the other hand, maybe Steve Jobs secretly had Apple's lawyers obtain an obscure, but expansive patent on a small tablet, while lulling his competitors into complacency with his derisive comments about the same. Then, after Samsung, Google etc have invested big $$$ in design, manufacturing etc....Kaboom! Apple drops the hammer and walks away a winner again. :eek:

Gary
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
If you watch this from the distance then all of this is either funny like hell or very sad. Don't want to know what only these legal battles cost. Great entertainment with very little substance for all of us.
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
And here lies a problem, patent laws, like copyright, are regional. Technology in the internet age is not. Giving up sovereignty over anything is not considered in the national interest. Laws are design to protect the powerful more than the weak. If you want an interesting read, read Amazon's agreement for their cloud hosting--and this is not unique to Amazon. You will give up copyright over everything you post there and Amazon will cooperate with any government agency if they need to access your files. If Amazon is sued in relation to your files, frivolous or not, they will pass on the legal bills--I don't think they have cheap lawyers. Amazon has covered its @$$.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The verdict in this case was delivered by a jury and not some lawyers. Also, it is preposterous to imply that Samsung or anyone else can not afford to hire the "best" lawyers.

Patent laws are there to govern innovations/novelty and not the rich!
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
Vivek said:
Patent laws are there to govern innovations/novelty and not the rich!
Click to expand...
Well, you as an individual, try taking a large corporation to trial over patent infringement--they will simply outspend you. You will also find the laws will also bias corporations over individuals in regards to protections. You may think patents over the human genome are good for large medical corporations, but don't you find it odd that someone can patent something found in nature? But then the medical companies are not in business for their health.
 
J

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
Bob said:
The Apple v Samsung case is quite unique in that the plaintiffs were able to document a deliberate and systematic attempt to copy Apple's features and presentation in their products.
Click to expand...
Not only that, but Apple had shared these elements with Samsung under NDA as part of the design documentation provided to Samsung, to manufacture Apple phones. Samsung then turned around and made their own product which freely stole from Apple's design documentation.

This is actually one of the greatest risks in having your products manufactured in Asia - they'll rip off your designs and go make their own. A small startup would go bankrupt since it lacks the means to litigate, but in this case Samsung f*cked with the wrong guys. I can only applaud Apple for standing up for what's right!
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>Samsung then turned around and made their own product which freely stole from Apple's design documentation.

THat is an important point and I did not know they did (did not read all these long articles).
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
My take is that patents are important and as someone who has only owned "smartphones" since 2003, I'd say Apple is a bit liberal in literature in what they've created. I have never owned an iPhone because it simply was a joke until iOS4 was released (I have owned the last 2 generations of iPads and I've been Mac exclusive at home since 2004.) What they have done is make smartphones accessible to the average person but this lawsuit is somewhat frivolous in the way they were trying to sue for other companies using the term "app" as if they created the mobile application. I can't say that I've ever confused an iPhone for a Treo, Blackberry, HTC, Motorola, or Samsung phone. For one most of the high end Android phones have much larger screens and haptic feedback buttons on the bottom. All slate style phones look similar but I can't say that Apple was the first to release a slate style phone in the market at this point.

In reality I'm sure there is some fault on both sides (there usually is) and I think most of the international courts that have ruled are showing this. If Samsung was smart they would've pushed to have the trial done outside of California if possible.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Shashin said:
Well, you as an individual, try taking a large corporation to trial over patent infringement--they will simply outspend you. You will also find the laws will also bias corporations over individuals in regards to protections.
Click to expand...
I discuss more cases in a year than many. It is not a question money.

There are some basics to establish novelty and prior art. No amount of money could rewrite that.
 
J

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
Good design is always simple and obvious. Which leads to the question why no one did it before? The answer is it's only obvious in hindsight.

It's like photographers who when faced with a good photograph wonders what's special about it, they could have shot this (then they dutifully proceed to go out and mimic it). Yet they didn't. Why? Because they're poor photographers.
 
T

T.Karma

New member
I believe originally patents came into existance to protect inventions made by inventors against theft. What the modern industry has made out of it is simply a joke, a hype out of control. If you can patent the shape of a rounded rectangle then what comes next? I remember once a designer called an egg-holder eiPott, which is German language and means simply egg holder. Apple filed a case that the phonetic similarity between eiPott and ipad is too close. Court decided that the egg-holder can not be called eiPott.
Good bye sanity, but I am also asking myself how insecure the people at Apple must be to come up with such ideas.
 
Jorgen Udvang

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Apple has apparently copied the design of the station clocks of the Swiss State Railway (SBB) for the clock in iOS6. The original design was made by Hans Hilfiker in 1944 and is manufactured by watchmaker Mobatime. A wristwatch with the same design, made by Mondaine, is also available.

The Swiss clock to the right, Apple's copy to the left:



If I was Apple, I would be very, very embarrased to put it mildly.
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>If I was Apple, I would be very, very embarrased to put it mildly.

They only care if others copy.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Jorgen Udvang said:
Apple has apparently copied the design of the station clocks of the Swiss State Railway (SBB) for the clock in iOS6. The original design was made by Hans Hilfiker in 1944 and is manufactured by watchmaker Mobatime. A wristwatch with the same design, made by Mondaine, is also available.

The Swiss clock to the right, Apple's copy to the left:



If I was Apple, I would be very, very embarrased to put it mildly.
Click to expand...
Did they infringe on any valid patents?

How many make Leica M mount cameras and lenses? It is allowed because the M mount patents have expired. This is the way the laws are setup and work.
 
Jorgen Udvang

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Vivek said:
Did they infringe on any valid patents?

How many make Leica M mount cameras and lenses? It is allowed because the M mount patents have expired. This is the way the laws are setup and work.
Click to expand...
The design is copyrighted, but for all I know, it may be expired. The Swiss won't let it pass though.

However, the way Apple is chasing Samsung for making a mobile phone with a similar shape to theirs, they should step very carefully, not so much for legal reasons as for their creative reputation. They live from their creative innovations, and when they're caught copying an established design, they reduce the value of their own brand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top