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

Well-known member
I've been following the Apple vs Samsung patent battles and other patent disputes between technology companies for some time now. As a simple tech consumer, with no real knowledge of the legal or technical merits of the claims made by these companies, I'm curious to hear what folks here think.

I know that there are lawyers, software engineers and very tech savy people here, so there must be a wealth of knowledge and opinion at GetDPI re this topic.

I'll share a link to this op-ed piece which appeared in the LA Times today, simply to spark the discussion.

Blame a dysfunctional patent system for Apple vs. Samsung verdict - latimes.com

Gary
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I actually disagree with that analysis in that there are elements of design look and feel that were patented although the product is a composite implementation of hardware and software.
Intellectual property is the foundation of the creative economy, and that includes drugs, designs, photographs, software and so forth. Protection of those assets from theft is necessary and the combination of copyright and patent are the tools used for their protection.
While I agree that there are many many nonsensical software patents that cover the obvious (to a software engineer) and that those patents should never have been granted in the first place, once the courts ruled that software was patentable especially those in-obvious and novel elements, it became the system of choice.
The problem as I see it is the indiscriminate issuance of silly patents over the last 35 years. This is the fault of the patent office when they decided that due to their insufficient expertise in a number of fields, to issue the patents and then let the courts sort it out.
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. The jury award was not out of line due to the volume of sales and potential Apple lost business that resulted from the deliberate act of copying.
-bob
 

ustein

Contributing Editor
Apple may have won the legal battle but this also produces more critics (me included).

>The problem as I see it is the indiscriminate issuance of silly patents over the last 35 years.

Very much so.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
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. The jury award was not out of line due to the volume of sales and potential Apple lost business that resulted from the deliberate act of copying.
-bob

Thats really the bottom line.

I do agree giving out patents for gum chewing technique is pretty silly. But deliberate attempts to copy , poach , steal or whatever you call it is wrong.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
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. The jury award was not out of line due to the volume of sales and potential Apple lost business that resulted from the deliberate act of copying.
-bob

Thats really the bottom line.

I do agree giving out patents for gum chewing technique is pretty silly. But deliberate attempts to copy , poach , steal or whatever you call it is wrong.
+1

The history is quite short to trace the developments for anyone.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
Quoting from the LA Times op-ed:
"In its briefs, Apple describes both of its devices as "a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners, a flat clear face covering the front of the product, a large display screen under the clear surface … and a matrix of colorful square icons with evenly rounded corners," etc., and alleges that Samsung copied these "distinctive" features."

Really? A patent on the "distinctive features" of a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners etc etc? At first glance, this just seems ludicrous to me.

Personally, I wonder how we ever got to a place where a company can patent the "look and feel" of something.

Gary
 

BANKER1

Member
My son would not consider any of his 19 patents (according to a google search) silly. A lot of research, work, prototypes, and testing went into all of those patents. The United States (and, for that matter, the world) benefits from innovation and intellectual progress from forward thinkers and the incremental improvements they produce. And, by the way, a court of law agreed with me.

Greg
 

bensonga

Well-known member
"The San Jose jury seemed blindly to accept Apple's position that customers routinely walked out of electronics stores with Samsung phones, confused into thinking they'd bought iPhones."

Was there evidence to support this claim? It seems pretty far fetched to me.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
I wonder how rounded or squared off the corners on a device have to be to violate a patent. Precise dimensions can be important I suppose. If the icons weren't exactly rounded in the same way, would that matter too? If the underlying code that created the seemingly similar rounded icons was different, would that still violate a patent? All questions for the attorneys, I know.

It appears to me that Apple's business was founded on technology they did not invent and now they have the balls to claim the moral high ground re patents. Amazing.
 

BANKER1

Member
Gary, I don't think your premise is accurate. The jury did not think Samsung customers were confused. They said they would not buy a Samsung phone if they did not have the features protected by the Apple patent. If no one defends their patents, why apply for a patent in the first place. You have the right to say certain patents are silly, but the proper forum for your complaint is the United States Patent Office. Oh, and by the way, good luck with that.

Greg
 

bensonga

Well-known member
That statement in the op-ed may well be incorrect Greg. I suppose that's part of the reason I started this thread, because there is a lot of conflicting information in the news reports I've read about this case. If Apple DID assert what the op-ed writer says, that just seems far fetched to me. I have a lot of 20 something year old nieces and nephews who have bought Android phones and I'm sure NONE of them thought they had actually bought an iPhone. Many of them would have liked to buy an iPhone (it's the cool thing to have), but couldn't afford one. I use many Apple products myself (as well as non-Apple tech products), but I've never been an Apple fanatic. I really just wonder how we've gotten to a place where patents can be granted for something like the shape of a phone etc.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Many of them would have liked to buy an iPhone (it's the cool thing to have), but couldn't afford one.
That is the very essence of this battle. Why should Apple lose because someone else sells gadgets that use infringed technologies?
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
The people who prefer android to ios have always said that apple thinks their customers are too dumb to take control. Now they're saying that they're too dumb to even realise they are buying a samsung. :p
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
No comment on the Samsung case.

But the LA Times article says this:
"... Dazzled by the screen display he saw at PARC, Jobs ordered the designers to put something just like it into the Lisa, and subsequently the Mac. ..."
which leaves out an important bit of information.

Xerox was a major investor in Apple at that time. SJ went to Xerox corporate and was granted permission to bring his engineers into the lab and use elements of the PARC design. Adele Goldberg, manager of this technology at PARC at the time, was furious about it but could not refuse her bosses' directive to allow SJ and his engineers access.

Adele herself told me this in 1987, and it's been documented elsewhere as well. Omissions like this cause me to be very skeptical of the hype and spin on the current case promulgated by so-called news vendors like the LA Times.

Personally, I'd rather not see a contentious debate over a patent lawsuit on this forum. There are lots of smart people here, for sure, but debating opinions based on incomplete and often misleading "information", itself mostly opinion and hype, as presented by articles such as this leads mostly to bad feelings and incorrect conclusions.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I really just wonder how we've gotten to a place where patents can be granted for something like the shape of a phone etc.
I don't make the laws nor am I defending them, but things like button placement can be patented from what I understand. I worked in the camera manufacturing business and there are design features that can be protected. It is a big deal. Industries work in ways that have nothing to do with what might fall under the category of "common sense." But these field are also competitive and there is a lot of money at stake. Competitors look for any kind of advantage.

I really don't like the folks that like to play a big shot and leak images of products. There maybe things in those images that have not been covered by patent, trademark, or copyright protections and the release of the images could have serious repercussions to the company. You can be sure the competition is trawling the internet for these photographs too.

It is a tough world.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
As a photographer in all of us we always will want to protect our copyrights in all that we shoot, that's a given. Now if a jury determines someone poached from someone else than it is a given the right verdict was handed down. I'm not going to debate this case in particular but if the jury found this than I'm fine with the verdict as we would want the same thing. Now on patents I'm sure there are some very valid ones that where lifted to use by Samsung. My point though are some patents seem a little generic in nature to be really a patent in the first place. Let's be honest rounded corners is pretty generic and maybe the press played on that one a little too heavy when I'm sure patents that took a great deal of engineering and work are more of the case at hand here. Problem is the press will play on stuff that is really maybe not the core of the case at hand. I'm a believe 50 percent what the press says and the other 50 as selling newspaper hype.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
I think Samsung will get in hot water for this one too......it still has those rounded corners. ;)

I appreciate all the comments here. As I had anticipated, many of you are far more knowledgeable than me on this topic. I probably should have guessed that certain aspects of patent law would not have any direct connection with a "common sense" point of view, as Sashin observed.

Thanks again everyone for providing me with a broader perspective on this issue.

I do hope the patent police won't be coming to confiscate my Google Nexus 7 someday. If I had to make a choice, I'd keep my iPad2 over the Nexus 7, but it has been really interesting to see the differences between an iOS and Android device, first hand. I like having choices in life.

Gary
 

ustein

Contributing Editor
>I do hope the patent police won't be coming to confiscate my Google Nexus 7 someday. If I had to make a choice, I'd keep my iPad2 over the Nexus 7, but it has been really interesting to see the differences between an iOS and Android device, first hand. I like having choices in life.

I have both too. The Nexus 7 is my portfolio presenter on the road (camera bag). The moment I got the iPad I wanted a 7" one. Apple at that time made jokes about 7" tablets. Hope the they don't violate copyright if they bring the iPad Mini (very unlikely I will get that, the Nexus is very nice for me).
 
Top