Support NeoGAF

[G-Unit]

Well... now they have to maintain it. The iPhone 5 is on the horizon and people will watch what Apple's competition does like a hawk. Samsung tried to make themselves seem as if they were legit competitors and now Apple has proven they just copied their ideas. If anything this is a huge win for Samsung's competition like HTC, LG, and especially Nokia now that the company is officially stamped as a company that make iPhone knockoffs.

Apple lawyers have come out and said that they consider the Nokia Lumia is a device that is original and truly competes.

Big for Nokia IMO

You gotta be fucking kidding me, you really think thats a reason for me to stop buying samsung things?

 

[FStop7]

Scoble actually has a good point about $1bil being a bargain price to become the #2 phone maker.

 

[btkadams]

So the American trial went 100% for the American company go figure. The iphone doesn't violate patents because the other companies who had developed similar things before didn't remember that a company like Apple would come along trying to suck money to every single competitor. Well at least European courts sure are less dumb...

ya, america sux, amirite?

 

[Solid warrior]

Nokia: *laughs*

 

[AgentChris]

i think there was a rumor they were using sharp for their next ipad panels. they should move away from samsung IMO. would be a weird relationship

Agreed.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Juries can make incorrect decisions, especially if they see evidence in a very strange light. That's what appeals are for.

I'm not saying they can't and in this case they didn't. I personally was shocked when I read a jury was hearing this case. I thought infringement cases like this were handled by judges VERY familiar with infringement law.

I'm just saying if the jury favored samsung in this I believe that we'd have those same people applauding the decision without a peep of how "whack" the jury system is.

I understand a jury could say "Hur, I've seen 10,000 iphone commercials since 2007 and it's been burned into my subconscious via consumerism therefore of course samsung copied apple!" but they were given the information, they were given the fact that the judge allowed. There will be an appeal, I'm sure. And most likely a reduction in the fine and that'll be that.

Both Apple and Samsung will continue to make great products and compete with each other.

 

[MThanded]

I'm not particularly mad. I just think he was a bit troll-tastic, the other dude overreacted some and it's escalated to the point where you have two GAFfers being particularly unpleasant. I'd like them both to stop ideally.

He has me on ignore. No worries.

 

[artist]

At the verdict

Cry some moar Samsung

 

[VanMardigan]

I wasn't referring to any particular one; I'm sure some are valid and some aren't. Just that people like to talk about how obvious these touch UI paradigms are when they certainly weren't commonplace before the iPhone.

Whether they were commonplace doesn't matter. Whether they existed is more important. Well, it SHOULD be more important, but apparently not to this jury.

 

[sniffles]

So the American trial went 100% for the American company go figure. The iphone doesn't violate patents because the other companies who had developed similar things before didn't remember that a company like Apple would come along trying to suck money to every single competitor. Well at least European courts sure are less dumb...

Yeah, boy. Those dum 'murricans. Know not nuttin'.

 

[SRG01]

Scoble actually has a good point about $1bil being a bargain price to become the #2 phone maker.

Actually #1 in the world right now.

I'm not saying they can't and in this case they didn't. I personally was shocked when I read a jury was hearing this case. I thought infringement cases like this were handled by judges VERY familiar with infringement law.

I'm just saying if the jury favored samsung in this I believe that we'd have those same people applauding the decision without a peep of how "whack" the jury system is.

I understand a jury could say "Hur, I've seen 10,000 iphone commercials since 2007 and it's been burned into my subconscious via consumerism therefore of course samsung copied apple!" but they were given the information, they were given the fact that the judge allowed. There will be an appeal, I'm sure. And most likely a reduction in the fine and that'll be that.

Both Apple and Samsung will continue to make great products and compete with each other.

That's why I find it weird that this went to jury instead of judge.

 

[DUFFMCWALIN]

You accuse the thread of lacking levelheadedness but advocate for Samsung to literally cut off their nose to spite their face.

Lol comparing what I said to how people are acting in this thread? Don't live up to your tag now.

 

[gcubed]

The real question here is which verdict pushes for patent reform faster. I'm not really sure I can answer that.

when i saw all the infringing verdicts i was kind of hoping for more then 1bln, which would make more people pay attention

 

[Kinitari]

What are the reasons the jury give?

I guess we'll see? I doubt only Gaffers noticed it - but what does that have to do with the legitimacy of the point brought up? Don't do that thing where if anyone speaks up, even reasonably and makes a casual observation you hold them to a legal standard.

Quit that.

 

[Karma]

Can we talk about what this ruling means for Samsung instead of this PM BS? What are the costs associated with removing Samsung devices from shelves and what changes can they possibly make to get their phones on the shelf again?

 

[Quadrangulum]

I'm pleased with this decision. Samsung has begun to turn the corner as of late, at least concerning innovation in certain product lines, but generally it would be correct to characterize their success as one founded on imitation and deceit. Then there's the deep government corruption they're steeped in back home for which they always seem to get a free pass on. I'm happy to see them suffer a bloody nose for once.

 

[Maxrunner]

ya, america sux, amirite?

Yeah it does suck on many things, go figure...specially on common sense...

 

[Nevasleep]

i think there was a rumor they were using sharp for their next ipad panels. they should move away from samsung IMO. would be a weird relationship

Are Samsung the biggest RAM manufactorers too? But I think Apple has stocked up on RAM?

 

[RoadHazard]

ya, america sux, amirite?

When it comes to patent law, it most certainly does.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

You gotta be fucking kidding me, you really think thats a reason for me to stop buying samsung things?

I stopped buying Samsung phones after:

But I completely concede samsung has done a complete 180 on the quality of their devices since then.

 

[LiK]

i'm glad i'm not on the jury. Android fanboys will harrass them

 

[FStop7]

So the American trial went 100% for the American company go figure. The iphone doesn't violate patents because the other companies who had developed similar things before didn't remember that a company like Apple would come along trying to suck money to every single competitor. Well at least European courts sure are less dumb...

We are so close to getting a "shot themselves in the foot" scale meltdown, I mean we're seriously right on the fringe...

 

[MThanded]

i'm glad i'm not on the jury. Android fanboys will harrass them

I'm sure 4chan is already salivating.

 

[Blastoise]

A billion dollars is nothing for Samsung in the long run. The problem is that Apple's patents were not invalidated. Android manufacturers were hoping they would be. This means that Apple now has an advantage when taking on other infringement cases.

Either Android will have to adapt to the new standards/patent terms, or they will have to pay Apple a licensing fee (and only if Apple are willing to license their patents).

 

[KHarvey16]

I guess we'll see? I doubt only Gaffers noticed it - but what does that have to do with the legitimacy of the point brought up? Don't do that thing where if anyone speaks up, even reasonably and makes a casual observation you hold them to a legal standard.

Quit that.

Don't act as though the "ohhhhh the jury is stupid" or "oh can't believe an American jury sided with an American company, geee shucks I didn't see that coming" posts are being motivated by a reasoned analysis of the case.

Quit that.

 

[DieH@rd]

In Q2 2012 Samsung made 5.9 billions in pure profit [41.5b in revenues], so this 1 billion that they need to give apple is nothing. They will continue to make shitloads of money with slightly redesigned phones, and apple will be a little richer.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/26/sa...ss-propels-41-5b-in-revenues-5-9b-in-profits/

 

[mugurumakensei]

How did each Galaxy S2 carrier phone get different amounts of damages? The skins are often decided by the telecom carriers...

 

[Xeke]

I'm not worried for Samsung - 1bil for Samsung isn't a big deal, maybe in appeals they can know that down to 500mil. No, I'm mostly worried about the precedent this sets for Apple, and if they're going to let this carry them to trial against Google.

The issue with that is, I don't know if it could possibly be worth it for them - I don't think they could get damages? But maybe they could pull all Android phones off shelves, which... well, not good.

Microsoft would never let that happen. They make money off of Android right?

 

[Rebel Leader]

Rectangle with round edges


ANOTHER SUIT

 

[freenudemacusers]

Actually #1 in the world right now.

Seems to have worked. A majority of consumers will likely never hear about this, and the galaxy brand shuffles right along.

 

[KHarvey16]

Lol comparing what I said to how people are acting in this thread? Don't live up to your tag now.

Don't say dumb things.

 

[MThanded]

A billion dollars is nothing for Samsung in the long run. The problem is that Apple's patents were not invalidated. Android manufacturers were hoping they would be. This means that Apple now has an advantage when taking on other infringement cases.

Either Android will have to adapt to the new standards/patent terms, or they will have to pay Apple a licensing fee (and only if Apple are willing to license their patents).

They licensed patents to Microsoft for the Surface. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[The Faceless Master]

A billion dollars is nothing for Samsung in the long run. The problem is that Apple's patents were not invalidated. Android manufacturers were hoping they would be. This means that Apple now has an advantage when taking on other infringement cases.

Either Android will have to adapt to the new standards/patent terms, or they will have to pay Apple a licensing fee (and only if Apple are willing to license their patents).

Apple has already said that they won't license most of their patents.

 

[LiK]

I'm sure 4chan is already salivating.

lol, true

 

[KingJ2002]

You gotta be fucking kidding me, you really think thats a reason for me to stop buying samsung things?

I won't... i'll still buy Samsung TV's and whatnot but when it comes to phones... they now have the knockoff stamp on their foreheads.

you may continue to buy them... but some wont.

 

[thezerofire]

that's pretty

 

[gcubed]

A billion dollars is nothing for Samsung in the long run. The problem is that Apple's patents were not invalidated. Android manufacturers were hoping they would be. This means that Apple now has an advantage when taking on other infringement cases.

Either Android will have to adapt to the new standards/patent terms, or they will have to pay Apple a licensing fee (and only if Apple are willing to license their patents).

they'll be invalidated in either appeal or when apple tries to go after someone else, i'd just rather get that shit out of the way today and not in the future. The Nexus S only infringed on the patents that should have been invalidated, so it just proves that android isn't infringing... Samsung is

 

[sniffles]

Sore losers. Like watching your cousin throw the chessboard after losing.

"The rules aren't fair, I tell you!"

 

[SRG01]

Oh, for those not versed in electronics: the reason why a lot of older phones had wide bezels was due to the electronics and connections necessary for the LCD, as well as room for physical buttons.

 

[Error]

So maybe Nintendo got a chance to sue sony and MS for using a controller to play videogames on a tv screen?

If not nintendo invented the videogames then I guess the company that did could sue the shit out of Sony, Ninty and MS


Apple, Love your phone but hate your damn company !

I'm glad there's none of this nonsense in the gaming industry.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

Suddenly Nokia's decision to go Windows doesn't seem so crazy under the protection of that cross license agreement.

This decision basically says all bets are off for all Android OEMs. Who's the next Android OEM that wants to lose a billion dollars?

 

[Kinitari]

Don't act as though the "ohhhhh the jury is stupid" or "oh can't believe an American jury sided with an American company, geee shucks I didn't see that coming" posts are being motivated by a reasoned analysis of the case.

Quit that.

Who said I was? My previous question was specifically regarding the posts that ask how the jury could make the decision they made on specific phones -

You're straw manning, plain and simple.

edit: I think you're misunderstanding my original criticism of your posts - there are a looooot of dumb posts in this thread. But as a generally well educated and intelligent member, I usually expect you to 'rise above' so to speak and address the things that deserve to be addressed.

Maybe I was wrong to assume that of you *shrug*

 

[VanMardigan]

More like:

 

[Maxrunner]

We are so close to getting a "shot themselves in the foot" scale meltdown, I mean we're seriously right on the fringe...

why???because you love your Iphone?

 

[K.Sabot]

The real losers in this are the consumers who have to wait on Apple for product iteration in the future.

 

[iamblades]

I wasn't referring to any particular one; I'm sure some are valid and some aren't. Just that people like to talk about how obvious these touch UI paradigms are when they certainly weren't commonplace before the iPhone.

Whether they were commonplace is irrelevant. Lots of things are invented long before the technology to make in commercially viable exists. Doesn't mean you can claim after the fact that you invented it when the underlying technology improves enough that you can put it into a product. Even if you are the first to do so.

What matters is whether an engineer designing a touchscreen GUI for a new more accurate capacitive touchscreen that was invented would think it was an obvious solution to a problem..

I think the answer to that, given how long ago they were demonstrated, is absolutely yes.

 

[EvilDick34]

The only good thing now is that an ACTUAL judge can rule on this awful decision by a jury of people who rushed through everything so they could get a head start on their BBQ party.

 

[NathanMcMahon]

I had no idea my iPhone was a status symbol.

 

[EightBitNate]

Rectangle with round edges


ANOTHER SUIT

Can we stop with this shit? It's been proven in a court of law they're not crazy.

 

[CrunchinJelly]

The real losers in this are the consumers who have to wait on Apple for product iteration in the future.

Well it's not like innovation was coming out of Samsung any time soon.