Apple Judgment Rocks Samsung's Share Price

[frobalt]

This will be a loss for the American economy in general.

After all, would you want to compete against an American company in America if you ran the risk of getting sued by them? No American judge will side with a foreign company.

It's a sad day when Apple are able to compete for dominance in such a cowardly way. The old way would have been to simply make the superior product. Guess Apple knows just how crap theirs are for the price you pay for them.

Not to beat on the subject but the past 10 years major companies have basically bullied their competition with copyright infringement suites to a very comfortable monopoly. Apple is just this year's flavor of the month. As sad as it is, nothing we say or do right now is going to matter because the majority is blissfully ignorant and want to remain that way. As long as they get their goodies, they do not care where or how they get it.

Sorry if I sound too cynical but when you hear people always eagerly want to talk about american idol and funny sitcoms but never look twice on this news it makes you think that people want to be slaves.

I'm not surprised at all that other companies have tried to sue for copyright infringement, nor am I deluding myself that Apple are the first case like this.

It is very high profile, however, and $1billion in damages seems like overkill.

Yes, there will be similarities between samsung phones and iphones, but most of them (such as shape, and look) shouldn't be patentable.

Should samsung be responsible for the software? After all, Android is a google creation, so surely they should be responsible for that part, right? After all, let's face it, people that have purchased these "iPhone copies" have done so because of the Android operating system, and will have chosen Samsung for various other reasons, as Samsung aren't the only phone manufacturers that deploy the Android system.


Captcha: Stella! Stella! - Who the eff is Stella?

 

[Pipotchi]

It's not even the case that Apple was the first to go with a rounded rectangle phone. I remember the LG Prada was like that and that was pre-Iphone. Apple just abused the US patent office to patent all these obvious features. They are all doing it. Siri is just like an earlier Google thing that they have patented and on and on it goes

 

[Pipotchi]

And my 15 year boycott of Apple continues.

the thing is once you got past the original I-pod it isnt even hard to maintain an Apple boycott. Samsung S3 and its tablets are far superior in almost every way. I don't own them either (I still use my old HTC) but it isnt really a loss.

Good for sticking to your guns though

 

[zBuLe]

I am glad that Apple won. Apple found a way to revolutionize the phone market with its iPhone. and instead of being innovative. many have chosen to copy the iPhone. hope this decision encourages more innovation. and actually. apple lost on the "rounded rectangle" thing. they don't own the rounded rectangle. it is 3 utility patents, 4 design patents and registered trade dress that the court upheld. the rounded rectangle fell under unregistered trade dress that was not protectable. bottom line is the patents were valid, and Samsung Willfully infringed on them.

 

[Karloff]

Captcha: Stella! Stella! - Who the eff is Stella?

Streetcar Named Desire

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjU-XGQHUJI

 

[GAunderrated]

I am glad that Apple won. Apple found a way to revolutionize the phone market with its iPhone. and instead of being innovative. many have chosen to copy the iPhone. hope this decision encourages more innovation. and actually. apple lost on the "rounded rectangle" thing. they don't own the rounded rectangle. it is 3 utility patents, 4 design patents and registered trade dress that the court upheld. the rounded rectangle fell under unregistered trade dress that was not protectable. bottom line is the patents were valid, and Samsung Willfully infringed on them.

The irony of this post is very entertaining. .

 

[Hagi]

Have never bought an Apple product and they're making it really, really easy to continue that trend.

Not only do they charge outrageous prices for standard hardware and have absolutely horrid customer service but their business practices are also despicable.

Your average Apple customer makes it even easier, no way I'd want to be mistaken as belonging to that group (And yes, well aware that there's plenty of exceptions).

 

[jbm1986]

It's a rounded rectangle, wtf else shape are they going to use.
I'm sick of apple.

Octagons [small]duh![/small]

It would be nice to see another company shake things up, make something really unique, and dethrone Apple.

 

[Me55enger]

I wonder how things would have gone in a south Korean court?

I believe the South Korean courts ruled in favour of Samsung. But who listens to a Non-American country these days, eh?.

 

[The Goat Tsar]

I'm extremely displeased. I already didn't like Apple, but now my disgust grows. I mean, they're already the most valuable company of all time, but I guess they needed more money.

Spoiler

Well put Bender.

 

[monev44]

And my 15 year boycott of Apple continues.

the thing is once you got past the original I-pod it isnt even hard to maintain an Apple boycott. Samsung S3 and its tablets are far superior in almost every way. I don't own them either (I still use my old HTC) but it isnt really a loss.

Good for sticking to your guns though

Well really I could have picked any number of years. I just picked 15 because while I've never bought an Apple product in my life, it wasn't till maybe 15 years ago I would have had the purchasing power to do so if I wanted, which I had decided I didn't.

So if hipsters like Apple products... and I hated Apple before it was mainstream to hate Apple, does that make me an anti-hipster hipster? Like hipster^(-i)?

 

[frobalt]

And my 15 year boycott of Apple continues.

the thing is once you got past the original I-pod it isnt even hard to maintain an Apple boycott. Samsung S3 and its tablets are far superior in almost every way. I don't own them either (I still use my old HTC) but it isnt really a loss.

Good for sticking to your guns though

Well really I could have picked any number of years. I just picked 15 because while I've never bought an Apple product in my life, it wasn't till maybe 15 years ago I would have had the purchasing power to do so if I wanted, which I had decided I didn't.

So if hipsters like Apple products... and I hated Apple before it was mainstream to hate Apple, does that make me an anti-hipster hipster? Like hipster^(-i)?

Probably just makes you hipster.

Is being an Apple fan even hipster anymore? I'm sure it has enough fans now that it's considered 'cool' by a lot of people. According to this article [http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/12/how-to-use-google-search-more-effectively/] "70% of students use Macs". At the same time, it's also cool to hate apple as well.

I have an iPod touch, but would never buy any other Apple product. As has been said already, their hardware is priced a lot higher than it should be.

I do have to wonder though, how exactly did Apple innovate with it's phone? The thing Apple has been really good at is marketing and selling it's product.

 

[Aeshi]

Probably just makes you hipster.

Is being an Apple fan even hipster anymore? I'm sure it has enough fans now that it's considered 'cool' by a lot of people. According to this article [http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/12/how-to-use-google-search-more-effectively/] "70% of students use Macs". At the same time, it's also cool to hate apple as well.

I have an iPod touch, but would never buy any other Apple product. As has been said already, their hardware is priced a lot higher than it should be.

I do have to wonder though, how exactly did Apple innovate with it's phone? The thing Apple has been really good at is marketing and selling it's product.

As a cool-to-bash company Apple is hipster whenever you need to accuse their user-base of being pretentious/anti-conformists and mainstream whenever you need to accuse them of being mindless sheep.

So basically whatever's most convenient for your rant. Kind of like how Cars and Software are Completely the same for the purposes of pro-used arguments but Completely different for the purposes of anti-DRM ones.

 

[hawk533]

Big companies do this to eachother all the time. I scoffed at the lawsuit myself, but then I saw this particular bit of evidence:

Its hard to really say that samsung ISN'T duplicating the look and feel of the apple products. You can't look at the samsung tablet and say "OOO NEAT DID YOU GET A GALAXY TAB? YEAH?" Its more "hey, new ipad? no? what, samsung?"

Samsung's defense is "you can't protect rectangles with rounded corners," but theres a certain limit before people can start duplicating the look and style of a device which has set the new standard for a technology.

You do realize that you can't actually patent style, right? There's a reason auto companies keep their style data locked down and it's because anyone can copy the look of something legally. You also can't patent clothing designs. This case only broke in Apple's favor because it was a jury of Americans living near Apple headquarters deciding against a Korean based company.

 

[MiskWisk]

Well, I've always on the fence about whether to get an iphone. Thank you Apple for making me dislike you and saving me +£200.

 

[gardian06]

I am glad that Apple won. Apple found a way to revolutionize the phone market with its iPhone. and instead of being innovative. many have chosen to copy the iPhone. hope this decision encourages more innovation.

um wait... the android is innovative compared to the Iphone. Apple has a unified "App Store", and Androids can ignore it.

jail break you I-anything, and Apple voids your warranty on the device, and deletes you ITunes account, root your Android, and only in some models void your warranty on the device.

have instant access to my information on the go... PalmPilot did that before (although at risk of carpel tunnel of the thumbs)

its not so much that Apple revolutionized. its more that Apple shifted its draconian consumer control from the desktop/laptop/mp3 player to the phone. they didn't so much revolutionize as just take something that business people had been using for years, and "market" it to the general consumer. while maintaining their Child with ADHD off medication mentality where they can't stick with a product for more then a year to bring the price down to even reflect the actual cost to produce.

 

[Cryo84R]

I am glad that Apple won. Apple found a way to revolutionize the phone market with its iPhone. and instead of being innovative. many have chosen to copy the iPhone. hope this decision encourages more innovation.

um wait... the android is innovative compared to the Iphone. Apple has a unified "App Store", and Androids can ignore it.

jail break you I-anything, and Apple voids your warranty on the device, and deletes you ITunes account, root your Android, and only in some models void your warranty on the device.

have instant access to my information on the go... PalmPilot did that before (although at risk of carpel tunnel of the thumbs)

its not so much that Apple revolutionized. its more that Apple shifted its draconian consumer control from the desktop/laptop/mp3 player to the phone. they didn't so much revolutionize as just take something that business people had been using for years, and "market" it to the general consumer. while maintaining their Child with ADHD off medication mentality where they can't stick with a product for more then a year to bring the price down to even reflect the actual cost to produce.

There is nothing factual in this post. Anyone can jailbreak your iPhone, Apple won't actively punish you. But in fan land, facts are a casualty. Does anyone actually REMEMBER 2007? There were Terabytes of articles and comments saying that the iPhone would fail because it didn't have a talk and hang up button/high price/one carrier and having a full touchscreen face was seen as a risky proposition. The Prada was announced after the iPhone, but came out before it. It was also not a smartphone. We know from discovery in the trial that iPhone development lasted the better part of 5 years and they went through countless prototypes.

 

[zBuLe]

I am glad that Apple won. Apple found a way to revolutionize the phone market with its iPhone. and instead of being innovative. many have chosen to copy the iPhone. hope this decision encourages more innovation.

um wait... the android is innovative compared to the Iphone. Apple has a unified "App Store", and Androids can ignore it.

jail break you I-anything, and Apple voids your warranty on the device, and deletes you ITunes account, root your Android, and only in some models void your warranty on the device.

have instant access to my information on the go... PalmPilot did that before (although at risk of carpel tunnel of the thumbs)

its not so much that Apple revolutionized. its more that Apple shifted its draconian consumer control from the desktop/laptop/mp3 player to the phone. they didn't so much revolutionize as just take something that business people had been using for years, and "market" it to the general consumer. while maintaining their Child with ADHD off medication mentality where they can't stick with a product for more then a year to bring the price down to even reflect the actual cost to produce.

There is nothing factual in this post. Anyone can jailbreak your iPhone, Apple won't actively punish you. But in fan land, facts are a casualty. Does anyone actually REMEMBER 2007? There were Terabytes of articles and comments saying that the iPhone would fail because it didn't have a talk and hang up button/high price/one carrier and having a full touchscreen face was seen as a risky proposition. The Prada was announced after the iPhone, but came out before it. It was also not a smartphone. We know from discovery in the trial that iPhone development lasted the better part of 5 years and they went through countless prototypes.

the android is innovative, but it builds off the revolution that apple started. nobody wanted to make a full touchscreen face phone at the time, not even android. the iPhone was too risky of a design. no carrier wanted to sell it, which is why the exclusive ATT offer happened, they took little risk if it failed. smartphone where essentially for enterprise and enthusiasts at the time. Apple was able to successfully market a smartphone to consumers. no matter how strong their marketing arm is, the iPhone would not have this amount of success if the product wasn't good. and the app store also is a revolutionary concept too. before, either buying the disk from a store, or going to the website to download the software. any app store that existed before wasn't big enough. the app store concept took off after Apple opened theirs. but the point of this case isn't that Samsung cant copy, but need permission first. Apple offered Samsung to license its patent to Samsung. but they refused to license and used the patents anyway. The Windows Phone uses Some of the patents that were presented on the court, but they have license it from Apple. in addition the Windows Phone, specifically the Lumia line, looks and feels drastically different than the iPhone. the court upheld all of apples patents, therefore Samsung refusing to license and using the patents show willful infringement. I really liked a line from the closing stamen from apple. "Not every phone has to look like an iPhone!" and showed a Lumia and Xperia Arc