Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 26.08.2012, 20:11
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,740
Groaned at 72 Times in 51 Posts
Thanked 3,973 Times in 2,142 Posts
rainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
voiding the warranty while doing so.
I may be wrong, but if the repair is done by a certified technician, it may not void the warranty.
After all, there are still non-Apple stores selling and supporting Apple stuff (like DataQuest and Heiniger, which existed well before the first Apple store opened in Switzerland).

One just has to get the employees certified - which, I assume, will cost a bundle but might pay off quite quickly, if you have a certain volume of Macs to support.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 26.08.2012, 21:05
Tuborg's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vaud
Posts: 512
Groaned at 32 Times in 18 Posts
Thanked 683 Times in 265 Posts
Tuborg has a reputation beyond reputeTuborg has a reputation beyond reputeTuborg has a reputation beyond reputeTuborg has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
voiding the warranty while doing so.
Not really. If the mac was under warranty then, of course, that could happen. Like most computers, Macs tend to go wrong once the warranty has lapsed. In which case, it is not an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 26.08.2012, 21:44
dmay's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Stetten, Aargau
Posts: 236
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 436 Times in 122 Posts
dmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

The trial was actually pretty straightforward:

Apple: Here is our creative process, and a mountain of prototypes we built, individual new ideas we came up with and all the places we drew inspiration from.

Samsung: We copied Apple. Whatcha gonna do about it?

What was especially damning was the mountain of internal Samsung documentation showing that were trying to slavishly match every tiny trait of the iPhone software within their own phones. In other words, it was plainly obvious that Samsung was trying to copy the iPhone (and later, iPad) as directly as possible. The thing that was even more difficult to ignore was their TouchWiz interface which took Android and bent it very directly to look and feel like iOS.

I'm not trying to say there are no problems with patent and trade dress law, but if making knockoffs ever WILL be illegal, this is such a case.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank dmay for this useful post:
  #24  
Old 27.08.2012, 01:43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CH
Posts: 452
Groaned at 9 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 648 Times in 282 Posts
Laertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
What was especially damning was the mountain of internal Samsung documentation showing that were trying to slavishly match every tiny trait of the iPhone software within their own phones. In other words, it was plainly obvious that Samsung was trying to copy the iPhone (and later, iPad) as directly as possible. The thing that was even more difficult to ignore was their TouchWiz interface which took Android and bent it very directly to look and feel like iOS.
Speaking of a mountain is maybe a bit of an exaggeration.

There is however a second possible way of looking at these documents. The iPhone was the market leader both with smartphones and tablets. It is only natural for its competitors to measure their own devices against the market leader and use the market leader as a guideline in developing their own devices. This does not show that they were coping the iPhone, but only that they tried to make better devices then apple (which arguably they did.)

If they same principles you apply in your post had been applied a hundred years ago, Henry Ford would never have been allowed to build a car, as he was obviously coping the design of earlier cars: it had four wheels, was powered by a motor, had a gear box, was steered by a steering wheel. But of course he could find a workaround for all of this, couldn't he?
Probably it would have taken a lot longer till someone would have begun to make affordable cars, but certainly it would have made the car industry much more innovative.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 27.08.2012, 10:07
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Greater Zürich Area
Posts: 996
Groaned at 130 Times in 81 Posts
Thanked 812 Times in 433 Posts
EPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
A federal jury in California on Friday recommended that Apple be awarded more than $1 billion in damages after finding Samsung was guilty of "willful" violations of a number of Apple's patents in the creation of its own mobile products.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/24/te...html?hpt=hp_t1
What a surprise: a court in California awards a California-based company $1 billion in damages by a Korean competitor. What a shock!!!

I know very well how the US patent system works, and US software patents are the worst. Thanks god, in Europe patents are NOT granted for software as such.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank EPMike for this useful post:
  #26  
Old 27.08.2012, 10:18
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Greater Zürich Area
Posts: 996
Groaned at 130 Times in 81 Posts
Thanked 812 Times in 433 Posts
EPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
Apple even offered their patents to Samsung, post-factum, at a discount (ever heard of somebody getting caught for driving a car without a drving-license and subsequently being offered to make-up for it by taking the driving test etc. at a discount?).
They just said "No, thanks" and thought they could get away with it.


You don't know too much about patent licensing, do you?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 27.08.2012, 10:47
dmay's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Stetten, Aargau
Posts: 236
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 436 Times in 122 Posts
dmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
Speaking of a mountain is maybe a bit of an exaggeration.

There is however a second possible way of looking at these documents. The iPhone was the market leader both with smartphones and tablets. It is only natural for its competitors to measure their own devices against the market leader and use the market leader as a guideline in developing their own devices. This does not show that they were coping the iPhone, but only that they tried to make better devices then apple (which arguably they did.)

If they same principles you apply in your post had been applied a hundred years ago, Henry Ford would never have been allowed to build a car, as he was obviously coping the design of earlier cars: it had four wheels, was powered by a motor, had a gear box, was steered by a steering wheel. But of course he could find a workaround for all of this, couldn't he?
Probably it would have taken a lot longer till someone would have begun to make affordable cars, but certainly it would have made the car industry much more innovative.
When I speak of the "mountain" I refer mainly to four main concepts:

- the executive "crisis of design" email which said the difference between Apple and Samsung was "heaven and earth"
- the complete makeove in samsung's product line before and after the introduction of the iPhone.
- the 100+ page internal Samsung presentation where they go point-by-minuscule-point, feature-by-feature about every way the iPhone differs from their product and conclude on each one "make ours like the iPhone." (http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/08/apple-...t-copy-iphone/)
- the fact that even their accessories and packaging changed in the post-iPhone world to match Apple's approach.

You car metaphor is really imprecise to the point of being unhelpful. A better analogy would focus on a pre-existing market of products, and one comes out radically better than all pre-existing products, and suddenly one of the manufacturers makes as direct a copy as they can manage in every aspect. Unfortunately there are few good examples from industry where this happened (part of why the iPhone has made SO much money, it's a rare case). Seriously, go back and watch the original iPhone presentation by Steve Jobs again, because it's worth seeing how much the iPhone did that previous smartphones didn't do, and what the state of the industry was prior to the iPhone.

But the key point in this is that Samsung directly copied the features, and bent Android and their hardware to be as much like the iPhone as possible (to where google was warning them that they were taking it too far, and apple also warned them). Samsung's goal was not to match the iPhone's quality, it was to match the iPhone. Period. It was as direct and obvious a copy as possible, and, their internal documents show this.

At the end of the day, there has to be some line where, if I come up with a nice product, a company can't simply zero the daylight between my excellent product which I spent years developing, and their very good product, that they spent months copying. If there is such a line, Samsung crossed it.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 27.08.2012, 11:04
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,740
Groaned at 72 Times in 51 Posts
Thanked 3,973 Times in 2,142 Posts
rainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post


You don't know too much about patent licensing, do you?

No, do you?

It's a complicated subject. But AFAIK, the patent system works in such a way that to obtain a patent, you have to open-up your inventions and thereby gain "protection" by the patent system (for a limited time).
Other companies who want to use the technology are supposed to license your technology.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 27.08.2012, 11:19
Pegaso's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Baden
Posts: 169
Groaned at 5 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 216 Times in 98 Posts
Pegaso has an excellent reputationPegaso has an excellent reputationPegaso has an excellent reputationPegaso has an excellent reputation
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Actually, if your nice product doesn't have anything new/original/non-trivial that can be patented, then yes, anybody can copy it and sell their own version. Why shouldn't they? If nothing in your product is worth a patent why should you be granted a monopoly on it, independently on your effort? Then it's up to whoever is buying to decide which is the best for what they need.

But the question today resides on what to award a patent. In my opinion things like software, design, process, should not be "patent-able".

I have no doubt that Samsung took the Apple products as a goal-to-be-achieved since people were buying and praising them. What I don't agree is with the stuff that is currently being patented. Even the cross-licensing schemes seem sometimes more like a cartel to prevent others to enter the market...

Quote:
View Post
When I speak of the "mountain" I refer mainly to four main concepts:

- the executive "crisis of design" email which said the difference between Apple and Samsung was "heaven and earth"
- the complete makeove in samsung's product line before and after the introduction of the iPhone.
- the 100+ page internal Samsung presentation where they go point-by-minuscule-point, feature-by-feature about every way the iPhone differs from their product and conclude on each one "make ours like the iPhone." (http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/08/apple-...t-copy-iphone/)
- the fact that even their accessories and packaging changed in the post-iPhone world to match Apple's approach.

You car metaphor is really imprecise to the point of being unhelpful. A better analogy would focus on a pre-existing market of products, and one comes out radically better than all pre-existing products, and suddenly one of the manufacturers makes as direct a copy as they can manage in every aspect. Unfortunately there are few good examples from industry where this happened (part of why the iPhone has made SO much money, it's a rare case). Seriously, go back and watch the original iPhone presentation by Steve Jobs again, because it's worth seeing how much the iPhone did that previous smartphones didn't do, and what the state of the industry was prior to the iPhone.

But the key point in this is that Samsung directly copied the features, and bent Android and their hardware to be as much like the iPhone as possible (to where google was warning them that they were taking it too far, and apple also warned them). Samsung's goal was not to match the iPhone's quality, it was to match the iPhone. Period. It was as direct and obvious a copy as possible, and, their internal documents show this.

At the end of the day, there has to be some line where, if I come up with a nice product, a company can't simply zero the daylight between my excellent product which I spent years developing, and their very good product, that they spent months copying. If there is such a line, Samsung crossed it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 27.08.2012, 11:32
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Greater Zürich Area
Posts: 996
Groaned at 130 Times in 81 Posts
Thanked 812 Times in 433 Posts
EPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond reputeEPMike has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
No, do you?
Yes........
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 27.08.2012, 11:35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Near vevey
Posts: 414
Groaned at 33 Times in 13 Posts
Thanked 256 Times in 139 Posts
onei has annoyed a few people around hereonei has annoyed a few people around here
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
What a surprise: a court in California awards a California-based company $1 billion in damages by a Korean competitor. What a shock!!!

I know very well how the US patent system works, and US software patents are the worst. Thanks god, in Europe patents are NOT granted for software as such.
Things may well change in Europe, nothing has been 100% finalised yet, like the US which patent system is a complete shambles, the Europeans do not discourage you too much for attempting to patent software, hinting that things could all soon change... (like hell freezing over).

We have recently put in two, what are essentially software patents, by introducing a tiny bit of hardware or by thinking like Apple using 'A finger' etc...

Both these patents were ways to access touch screens, innovation can still be found even when things look completely tied up...

Copyright is not strong enough to really protect software, with our latest project we want to try and set a precedent by stating it as 'a dynamic piece of artwork' displayed on a 'canvas' page, all 'art parts' being unique strokes that make up the whole, each part therefore protected...

An artist uses paint by taking standard colours and uses his skill to mix the colours he desires then applies them to his canvas which then makes each work unique and each part unique, a programmer does the same, we have even considered putting the (c) after every line of code.

This is untried and untested but worth ago
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 27.08.2012, 11:48
3Wishes's Avatar
Moderately Amused
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bern area
Posts: 11,354
Groaned at 90 Times in 86 Posts
Thanked 19,675 Times in 8,704 Posts
3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
Seriously, are you brain dead? Is that the best you can do?
I appreciate there are differing opinions on this (and other) threads. Fine, make it a lively debate. But can we please keep the discussion civil? Thanks.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank 3Wishes for this useful post:
  #33  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:03
Treverus's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Work in ZH, live in SZ
Posts: 12,239
Groaned at 351 Times in 284 Posts
Thanked 23,463 Times in 8,477 Posts
Treverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
The trial was actually pretty straightforward:

Apple: Here is our creative process, and a mountain of prototypes we built, individual new ideas we came up with and all the places we drew inspiration from.

Samsung: We copied Apple. Whatcha gonna do about it?

What was especially damning was the mountain of internal Samsung documentation showing that were trying to slavishly match every tiny trait of the iPhone software within their own phones. In other words, it was plainly obvious that Samsung was trying to copy the iPhone (and later, iPad) as directly as possible. The thing that was even more difficult to ignore was their TouchWiz interface which took Android and bent it very directly to look and feel like iOS.

I'm not trying to say there are no problems with patent and trade dress law, but if making knockoffs ever WILL be illegal, this is such a case.
Well, what if nobody had ever copied Mr. Benz' Motorwagen? Very few things in this world are really true game changing innovations... Samsung did build smartphones that did indeed copy the form factor of the iPhone. So what? That's what pretty much all companies do: When Nokias got popular did all other manufaturers dump the external antennas. When the Moto Razr was a hit did they all produce extra thin handsets and so on.

The question is where the line is drawn exactly. And the way I understood it did Apple win the right to be the only one to have rectangular phones with rounded corners. And that is in my view nothing short of idiotic. Apple did not invent rounded corners, even if they were the first to have prototypes with them in smartphones. Their first iMac as well as the early iPods looks very much like 70s Braun designs as well...

That said do I fully believe that Android has copied entire functions - so why excatly does Apple go after Samsung and not Google? If Windows 8 infringed their Mac OS would they also sue Microsoft and not Dell...?

Last edited by Treverus; 27.08.2012 at 12:13.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CH
Posts: 452
Groaned at 9 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 648 Times in 282 Posts
Laertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
An artist uses paint by taking standard colours and uses his skill to mix the colours he desires then applies them to his canvas which then makes each work unique and each part unique, a programmer does the same, we have even considered putting the (c) after every line of code.

This is untried and untested but worth ago
If you imitate the style of another painter and even paint similar motives, this will maybe considered to be unoriginal, but it certainly is no crime (I'm not speaking of directly comping the paintings of another artist here).

Regarding software I think that if someone else uses the exact same implementation as you, there should be some sort of protection (which to a certain extend is already given by copyright). If someone else however writes his own code, which behaves similar as yours but is implemented differently (expect for trivial things) there should IMHO be no protection.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Near vevey
Posts: 414
Groaned at 33 Times in 13 Posts
Thanked 256 Times in 139 Posts
onei has annoyed a few people around hereonei has annoyed a few people around here
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
If you imitate the style of another painter and even paint similar motives, this will maybe considered to be unoriginal, but it certainly is no crime (I'm not speaking of directly comping the paintings of another artist here).

Regarding software I think that if someone else uses the exact same implementation as you, there should be some sort of protection (which to a certain extend is already given by copyright). If someone else however writes his own code, which behaves similar as yours but is implemented differently (expect for trivial things) there should IMHO be no protection.
That is the problem !

Somebody writing a non exact piece of code that copies your innovation by carrying out the same task...

Very, very frustrating, now that software has become so very important in our lives I do think the protection issue should be completely revised, many may argue.....NO many, many DO argue that protection restricts innovation...

What is the incentive to spend time and money in research and development for a Samsung or other thief to just come along and steal it...

This issue keeps me awake at nights
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CH
Posts: 452
Groaned at 9 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 648 Times in 282 Posts
Laertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond reputeLaertes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
When I speak of the "mountain" I refer mainly to four main concepts:

- the executive "crisis of design" email which said the difference between Apple and Samsung was "heaven and earth"
- the complete makeove in samsung's product line before and after the introduction of the iPhone.
- the 100+ page internal Samsung presentation where they go point-by-minuscule-point, feature-by-feature about every way the iPhone differs from their product and conclude on each one "make ours like the iPhone." (http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/08/apple-...t-copy-iphone/)
- the fact that even their accessories and packaging changed in the post-iPhone world to match Apple's approach.

You car metaphor is really imprecise to the point of being unhelpful. A better analogy would focus on a pre-existing market of products, and one comes out radically better than all pre-existing products, and suddenly one of the manufacturers makes as direct a copy as they can manage in every aspect. Unfortunately there are few good examples from industry where this happened (part of why the iPhone has made SO much money, it's a rare case). Seriously, go back and watch the original iPhone presentation by Steve Jobs again, because it's worth seeing how much the iPhone did that previous smartphones didn't do, and what the state of the industry was prior to the iPhone.

But the key point in this is that Samsung directly copied the features, and bent Android and their hardware to be as much like the iPhone as possible (to where google was warning them that they were taking it too far, and apple also warned them). Samsung's goal was not to match the iPhone's quality, it was to match the iPhone. Period. It was as direct and obvious a copy as possible, and, their internal documents show this.

At the end of the day, there has to be some line where, if I come up with a nice product, a company can't simply zero the daylight between my excellent product which I spent years developing, and their very good product, that they spent months copying. If there is such a line, Samsung crossed it.
Preexisting model:



Radically better model:



Copy:



It is obvious that he must have copied as the cars he built before look totally different:
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:29
dmay's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Stetten, Aargau
Posts: 236
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 436 Times in 122 Posts
dmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
Actually, if your nice product doesn't have anything new/original/non-trivial that can be patented, then yes, anybody can copy it and sell their own version. Why shouldn't they? If nothing in your product is worth a patent why should you be granted a monopoly on it, independently on your effort? Then it's up to whoever is buying to decide which is the best for what they need..
You're going a really long way saying there was nothing non-trivial about the iPhone when it came out. The all-touchscreen design was new (yes, I know about the LG Prada - it was still new for a smartphone). Using this required other innovations like the use of proximity sensors to deactivate the screenshot held to you face, slide-to-unlock, the way keys are shown when pressed, and rubber band scrolling. The desktop-class web browser was new. The phone functions were radically better. The pinch-to-zoom was new (for a consumer product). The map function was new. The email function was much better than any other (for instance, it was the first that could display graphics and attachments inline). The integration of contacts was new.

I was serious when I said you should re-watch the iPhone presentation. We really forget how far it was from its contemporaries.

If you don't think the iPhone had anything non-trivial, then how do you explain it's meteoric rise? Why did smartphones suddenly hall become sleek black slates with metal highlights? Literally, why did the market get turned on its head? Remember when the question was if Apple would ever unseat RIM from the business world?

A lot of stuff seems obvious now. But no one was doing it before, and suddenly everyone is doing it after. And, if market share is any indication, google's android has surpassed iOS in a lot of areas (particularly value), and that's good for everyone, and google has every right to that. But Google can also show a development process where they created Android, and while iOS is certainly an influence, they can "show their own work." Samsung can't. That's the central problem.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank dmay for this useful post:
  #38  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:29
Caviarchips's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Basel Stadt
Posts: 3,979
Groaned at 99 Times in 77 Posts
Thanked 6,677 Times in 2,388 Posts
Caviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Anybody think that its a good time to buy Samsung shares after their slight tumble.....good fundamental business that looks a little undervalued now?
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Caviarchips for this useful post:
  #39  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:33
dmay's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Stetten, Aargau
Posts: 236
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 436 Times in 122 Posts
dmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post

The question is where the line is drawn exactly. And the way I understood it did Apple win the right to be the only one to have rectangular phones with rounded corners. And that is in my view nothing short of idiotic. Apple did not invent rounded corners, even if they were the first to have prototypes with them in smartphones. Their first iMac as well as the early iPods looks very much like 70s Braun designs as well...
this is where you are wrong. Apple did not win on the right to rounded rectangles. The mention of rounded rectangles was cited as one of the points that Samsung copied. Had rounded rectangles been the SOLE issue, then it would have been laughed out of court. But making the same shape, color, layout, function, method of operation, and packaging ALL TOGETHER was too much too ignore, especially when Samsung's own internal records show they were simply copying the iPhone.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 27.08.2012, 12:34
dmay's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Stetten, Aargau
Posts: 236
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 436 Times in 122 Posts
dmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond reputedmay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Jury: Samsung should pay Apple more than $1 billion

Quote:
View Post
Anybody think that its a good time to buy Samsung shares after their slight tumble.....good fundamental business that looks a little undervalued now?
I do. But then, if I was a good stock investor, would be kicking around doing this engineering/management work?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank dmay for this useful post:
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
More than 15'000 pregnancies every hour: population 7 billion Sbrinz International affairs/politics 25 28.10.2011 11:30
[BBC News] Alcohol more harmful than Heroin! Should it be made illegal? The_Love_Doctor International affairs/politics 81 18.08.2011 18:00
Really fat people on planes.... Should they pay more? Natasha General off-topic 290 15.02.2010 20:05


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0