Samumsung loses lawsuit owes apple over a billion

Discussion in 'Video Games and Technology' started by Tekkaman Blade, Aug 25, 2012.

  1. Tekkaman Blade

    Tekkaman Blade Professor of Animation

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Posts:
    23,702
    News Credits:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    412
    Location:
    Georgia
    Likes:
    +1,235
  2. smkspy

    smkspy is one nice fucking kitty

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Posts:
    20,785
    Trophy Points:
    357
    Likes:
    +373
    Hopefully this gets overturned in appeals. Fucking Apple strikes again.
     
  3. magmatron

    magmatron Hyper Sentinel Force!

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Posts:
    3,367
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Likes:
    +6
    This is beyond stupid.
     
  4. rxlthunder

    rxlthunder Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2011
    Posts:
    7,446
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +8
    What's sad about this is that in the next 10 years or so, many phones will look something like that. Too bad they couldn't settle it out of court.
     
  5. grimlock1972

    grimlock1972 "No Mas" My Wallet

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Posts:
    18,855
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    297
    Likes:
    +662
    I am not gonna get excited over this one way or another until the appeals process has run its course.
     
  6. chaddi_90

    chaddi_90 Prime

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Posts:
    1,114
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +1
    Apple can't stand the competition so they sue them.:p 
     
  7. SearchmanDS

    SearchmanDS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Posts:
    3,078
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Likes:
    +1
    Ebay:
    It's shit like this that makes me perfectly happy with my flip phone.
     
  8. TrueNomadSkies

    TrueNomadSkies Airachnid's ratservant

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Posts:
    15,861
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    226
    Likes:
    +9
    Pretty much this^, except for me its a $0 Blackberry.
     
  9. TheIncredibleHulk

    TheIncredibleHulk Find Gary Busey!

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Posts:
    8,345
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +123
    Fuck everything about Apple
     
  10. bignick1693

    bignick1693 Maximal

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    9,191
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +193
    Why? Yes I know there a lot of apple haters but this is about stealing ideas not what people think oh greedy apple being greedy again. If someone stole my idea I would be p.o. too.
     
  11. nobleboivin

    nobleboivin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Posts:
    10,317
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    297
    Likes:
    +463
    I always find it funny when bussines fight and sue eachother over crap
     
  12. CyclonuS_ZerO

    CyclonuS_ZerO Uni-con

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Posts:
    4,180
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +314
    This is outrageous! So I guess Apple is now gonna go after *insert random computer manufacturer* for making computers? Retarded
     
  13. Rexidus

    Rexidus Autobot TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Posts:
    14,293
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +112
    Except Apple didn't invent the concept of the Ipad. Microsoft hat tablet PC's long before.

    And hell we could even say Star Trek invented them. They even called them tablets.
     
  14. TFXProtector

    TFXProtector Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Posts:
    8,542
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Likes:
    +1,272
    Samsung had proof that Apple and other smartphone makers initially stole their ideas from Sony, meaning no one's completely original in this business.

    Apple's idea is form over function, whereas Android and Samsung focus on form AND function. Granted, iOS is easier for people just pick up and run with, while Android can be a bitch to learn, but Android is leaps and bounds above Apple anything.

    Even Steve Wozniack said gave Android and Google props. (Google owns Android.)

    An Android device is really a basic computer with a touchscreen. It's Linux at it's core. Apple's more of a device for accessing the internet and screwing around on it. So even if there's more functionality and power in Android and it's phones, we may not get to see what capabilities they could have because Apple won this bullshit lawsuit.

    But, one of the last things Steve Jobs said before he died was that he would take everything he had to crush Google, and this is the first step. He might just win.
     
  15. Treadshot A1

    Treadshot A1 Or just 'A1' for short...

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Posts:
    7,593
    Trophy Points:
    212
    Likes:
    +66
    My knowledge of the US Law is that there is a clause (in Arceus knows what law, I don't have the time to read every page of US Law ever) that states that when things become the "industry standard", they have to be "allowed to be used under fair and reasonable terms".

    Everyone knows that the rounded rectangle with a touch screen is the industry standard. Microsoft started it, Apple popularised it, Android made it usable and useful. No one really owns that intellectual property, since no one can claim to have both invented it and made it useful (the closest is Microsoft, for being the first to use it).

    Apple also shot themselves in the foot with the design of the iPhone. They don't use a proper circular form on their design, they used a blendcurve (quite literally a blend of many curves). For people who create iPhone accessories, someone found that the blendcurve Apple uses is closely approximated by an 8.1mm radius circle, with an error of less than 0.1mm at any point along the curve. In other words, Apple doesn't use a circle (which is a very specific and patentable geometric shape), they use one of literally an infinite amount of curves. To patent such a curve, you either have to be able to state the formula of your curve (in the case of a blend curve, probably a piecewise function of x^2 and y^2) or in some way make it crystal clear what your curve is. Without doing that, you are trying to claim the entirety of all curves within 0.1mm of an 8.1mm circle belongs to you (which is not patentable, as you are literally patenting an infinite amount of geometric shapes). Apple obviously doesn't want to reveal their exact curve, as then this would allow any company to use a curve that's slightly different and be able to legally defend it. It's like Coca-Cola, which was never patented because they didn't want to reveal their recipe. As a consequence, Pepsi exists and there's nothing Coca-Cola can do about it. Apple, by using a blendcurve instead of a regular geometric shape, has made their own legal defense that much weaker.

    To add to Apple's list of problems, rounded corners were not invented by them. This was a form of technology invented for the ergonomic use of tools preceding even the first steam engine. Centuries ago, tools were already rounded to allow ease of use. Common examples being the handle of hammers, handles of guns (especially in the position of the trigger and even basic screwdrivers. So not only are they trying to legally defend a curve they haven't even revealed to the public (which is in itself a stupid action, as you can't claim ownership of something that you haven't yet defined), they are trying to claim ownership of an idea which has existed literally for centuries.

    They are also trying to sue Samsung over an intgrated search bar in their devices, which Apple claims to be the owner of the IP for. Apparently no one at Apple considered the fact that they were not the first to integrate search bars. Microsoft did it in Windows and IE, Mozilla has a search function in Firefox, Chrome has it. So do even the most basic browsers, like Opera. A search function is also used even within the Linux environment, if you just go into the Terminal on those machines, which lets you navigate to anywhere (type in cd ~../path where "path" is whatever the path to your file is). To integrate a search into your device or computer's environment is nothing new, it was originally something developers used to allow easier debugging. Then it was released to the public as a convenient feature. Then Google came up with the idea of organising the web using a Search function. To add to Apple's woes, Android is made by Google, a company which made its money by pioneering the search bar. To include a search bar in Android was a given from the start. This wasnt some idea by a Google employee on too much caffeine, this js the backbone of the Google company, and every one of their products is going to have a search bar. Its google, thats what they do, they make search bars useful. Apple trying to claim that they invented the idea of integrating a search bar is not at all historically accurate; many companies did it before them, and Google pioneered the idea way back before Apple's iDevices came out.

    Apple's claims over their "bounce back" feature, which causes the screen to bounce when you scroll past the bottom of a page, is actually not even an idea of anyone's. It's actually a mechanical fault, one which humanity hasn't yet figured out how to remove (and given the natural inefficiencies of the laws of physics in this world, we likely never will). Any form of mechanical scrolling equipment (wheels, for example) will have a slight "bounce" when they encounter resistance. This is better known as recoil in drills and rotary tools, or kickback when the spinning thing in question is a kinetic flywheel/whip. Old catapults were known for their kickback after the projectile launched, as the catapult arm came to a stop very suddenly, which caused kickback and ultimately caused many catapults to shatter catastrophically. "Bounce back" was not an idea invented by anyone, it was a mechanical fault which Apple has decided they would replicate. Frankly, considering how annoying it is, I don't know why they thought that was a good idea to begin with. To now say that they own the rights to this "bounce back" idea is like trying to claim ownership over implementing gravity in a platforming game; it's a natural phenomenon, which no one ever invented. Newton can't claim ownership of gravity; Apple can't claim ownership of "bounce back" technology.

    So, why then did the courts rule in favour of Apple? Well, while I'm sure this will be taken as a conspiracy theory by Apple fanboys, it's a basic economic principle.

    When a company holds the majority of the market share in your country's economy, you don't sink them.

    Apple currently holds a huge market share in the American Smartphone industry. They are an American Company, which means that there's obviously a sense of pride involved. Add to that, Samsung is a Korean company. Of course, an American court would have no problem taking 1 billion dollars from the Korean Economy and putting it into their own. If this was between two American companies, then the amount of money wouldn't be anywhere near as high, as frankly there'd be nothing to gain from it economically.

    Now of course, American courts are not corrupt (at least I hope they're not). They are just being very smart with their ruling. They know that Apple needs to be kept happy, as they contribute a lot to the American economy, especially in exports of their iDevices. They know that Samsung will fight tooth and nail to defend themselves. So imagine the possible court rulings and their repercussions:

    1) they find Samsung innocent. This annoys Apple, who then take their products in a new direction, one which is risky for the American economy (as it means the large iDevice market is taking an unnecessary turn) as no one knows if it's for better or for worse. Given the 6th Gen Nano, Apple has shown that they do indeed make really stupid products every once in a while (even Apple fanboys and fan girls admit the 6th Gen Nano was a "WTF?!" moment for Apple), and if they courts annoy them, then this could very well result in Apple deciding to take a more hard line approach to beating competitors, which leads to riskier products. Bottom line: it's a risk for the economy.

    2) Apple is right, Samsung owes Apple a million dollars. They know Samsung would be pissed off, but there's a good chance that they wouldn't bother fighting over a million dollars (which is a pittance to each company). It'd cost about that much in legal fees. So then the courts have to somehow justify Apple as being correct. Given that their claims about search integration and bounce back and rounded rectangles are all easily revoked or quashed by basic computer history, it's would be very difficult to justify. The courts would be hard pressed to verify and justify their ruling. Not good for the integrity of the legal system.

    3) Apple is right, Samsung's owes them a billion dollars. There is no way in hell Samsung would just pay them a billion dollars, everyone knows that. They'd appeal because the money involved is a stupid amount. The courts can use this to their advantage. By making the sum of money absolutely insanely huge, they are guaranteeing that Samsung will fight, this rendering possibility #2 entirely moot. Then, they just let the Appeal succeed, and they've managed to both appear as though they supported Apple (keeping that company happy and continuing on its iDevice production schedule) and actually implemented the law (which lets Samsung clear their name) and all while averting any threat to the American Economy.

    So why is Samsung's counterclaim against Apple, that Apple stole things from them, being rejected by the Courts? Simple. The Courts don't want to piss off Apple. That's why they put such a huge number out to begin with (1 billion dollars), to make sure Samsung would fight, so they could let the appeal succeed and keep everyone relatively happy and the economy going. They can't afford to then let Samsung take action against Apple, as that would basically destroy all the work the Courts put in to keeping everyone as happy as they could.

    All in all, I'd say the courts are doing a very good job at keeping everyone playing along. They're keeping the American Smartphone Economy safe (by keeping Apple happily going along their iDevice manufacturing way), they've kept the law enforceable and avoided setting crazy precedents (by eventually letting the Appeal succeed) and they've kept the courts' integrity by enforcing the law (which allows Samsung to continue releasing it's products).

    Clever, American courts. Very clever. Apple, you should learn a thing or two from them, and stop shooting yourself in the foot. Try patenting an actually defined curve. Try using a feature which isn't a mechanical flaw that's been around for centuries. Try being happy that you set the industry standard (which has kept Nintendo profitable for decades now).

    At this point, I am absolutely confident the appeal will succeed. It's a given, it has been the track record for Apple lawsuits, and it makes sense according to American Law.

    And then Apple will try to sue Microsoft again when the Surface launches. We just need to remember to bring enough popcorn and Coca-Cola/Pepsi. Maybe even a Samsung 3D TV to watch it on.
     
  16. Gordon_4

    Gordon_4 The Big Engine

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Posts:
    12,687
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    307
    Likes:
    +775
    You know, as an owner and consumer of an Apple iPhone and iPad, I am absolutely appalled at this outcome. Did it mention anywhere that Apple appears to have nicked the Android notification drop down bar fucking wholesale? The grounds on which the ruling was delivered (this bounce back thing) appear to me as both a law lay-person and only a ground level tech head to be fucking absurd.
     
  17. RKillian

    RKillian http://www.rktoyandhobby.com

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Posts:
    5,062
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Likes:
    +881
    So we have a free market system, except where it would hurt somebody with money and influence.
     
  18. Treadshot A1

    Treadshot A1 Or just 'A1' for short...

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Posts:
    7,593
    Trophy Points:
    212
    Likes:
    +66
    Well, to be very realistic about it, yes. In a more idealistic viewpoint, we could have a free market where everything is balanced and no one has any advantage over another and everyone has their own equally profitable niche. Unfortunately, this is Apple we're talking about. Ideals get chucked out the window; the real scenario is that Apple does contribute to the economy of America a lot. And its not a good economic idea to sink one of your national companies that's leading one of the latest technological markets. Of course, ideally the courts would rule Apple as being sue-aholic whining 5 year olds (as their long history of court cases which occur immediately after a competitor's product release testifies to), but the chances of America sinking their own company to proclaim the innocence of a Korean competitor? Not likely.

    That's not to say the courts are corrupt, they're just very very clever in how they do things. While I don't like to take either a realist or idealist viewpoint (I prefer somewhere in the middle), in this case i'd say its far more likely that Apple's economic influence is aiding them in the first stages, before their own actions will sink them in the appeal stages.
     
  19. smkspy

    smkspy is one nice fucking kitty

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Posts:
    20,785
    Trophy Points:
    357
    Likes:
    +373
    “Our lawsuit is saying, ‘Google, you fucking ripped off the iPhone, wholesale ripped us off.’ Grand theft. I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go to thermonuclear war on this. They are scared to death, because they know they are guilty. Outside of Search, Google’s products — Android, Google Docs — are shit.”

    -Steve Jobs, a bitter billionaire to the end.
     
  20. WTDylio

    WTDylio Where is Jessica Hyde?

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Posts:
    3,277
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +6
    Holy crap did he actually say that? Wow.
     

Share This Page