Court set to rule on Apple vs Samsung case in a few minutes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Technosteve said:
You seem really invested in something you have no control over.
Click to expand...

I'm invested in making the field I work in not turn into a shitpile because of boneheaded application of patent law. I have control over one thing: My voice, and making sure that my view is heard. You have a problem with that?
 
maharg said:
Huh. I've never come across that. I'm not sure it'd count, though, since Apple certainly did nothing of the sort. I think you'd be hard pressed to make a claim that MacOS in the 80s even remotely resembled anything to do with Smalltalk-80. NeXT/OSX are actually much closer in a lot of ways, but still not really all that similar.
Click to expand...

But that's what IP claims are! If you claim they stole from SmallTalk and what exists on the Mac/Lisa is actually owned by Xerox as Smalltalk, they had a license to SmallTalk.

That's what Xerox v. Apple arguments are--they want to be declared the primary owner of SmallTalk-like systems, so that they can license it to other companies, and other companies wouldn't have to fear that it actually belongs to Apple (and Apple will sue them).

Xerox alleges that Apple has wrongfully claimed originality and ownership of substantial portions of Xerox' Star and Smalltalk and that Xerox has been unable to license Star to other companies (with the exception of Sun Microsystems Inc. and Metaphor Computer Systems, Inc.), since potential licensees are concerned about the possibility of being sued by Apple for copyright infringement.
Click to expand...

Both Xerox and Apple have said that Star is the basis for icons, everything else about the graphical interface and mouse comes from Smalltalk:

From Xerox v. Apple
Smalltalk did not utilize on-screen icons (graphical representations of objects).
...
Star included a mouse-driven computer that was allegedly the first to introduce fanciful visual displays and graphical images to aid user interaction with the computer.
Click to expand...

From Apple engineers:
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/lisainterview
BYTE: Do you have a Xerox Star here that you work with?

Tesler: No, we didn’t have one here. We went to the NCC (National Computer Conference) when the Star was announced and looked at it. And in fact it did have an immediate impact. A few months after looking at it we made some changes to our user interface based on ideas that we got from it. For example, the desktop manager we had before was completely different; it didn’t use icons at all, and we never liked it very much. We decided to change ours to the icon base. That was probably the only thing we got from the Star, I think. Most of our Xerox inspiration was Smalltalk rather than Star.
Click to expand...
 
numble said:
But that's what IP claims are! If you claim they stole from SmallTalk and what exists on the Mac/Lisa is actually owned by Xerox as Smalltalk, they had a license to SmallTalk.

That's what Xerox v. Apple arguments are--they want to be declared the primary owner of SmallTalk-like systems, so that they can license it to other companies, and other companies wouldn't have to fear that it actually belongs to Apple (and Apple will sue them).
Click to expand...

Sure, I just don't know if it really goes to the claim that Apple licensed the concepts they actually used, especially if they didn't fulfil their end. In the end it doesn't really matter. What you pasted is very illuminating, but I still think Apple's position wrt PARC is a little murkier than some people like to paint it. PARC made out like bandits on their Apple stock exchange and that seems to have been largely good enough for them.
 
maharg said:
Sure, I just don't know if it really goes to the claim that Apple licensed the concepts they actually used, especially if they didn't fulfil their end. In the end it doesn't really matter. What you pasted is very illuminating, but I still think Apple's position wrt PARC is a little murkier than some people like to paint it. PARC made out like bandits on their Apple stock exchange and that seems to have been largely good enough for them.
Click to expand...
I don't understand what's so murky about it. Apple said, "Hey, we want to see your stuff and might want to use." Xerox said, "Sure, we don't give a shit, go to town."
 
virtuoso88 said:
The iphone 4 also cost at least 60 dollars more initially too.
Click to expand...
Initially when exactly? When it was first released two years ago? A year ago? That's pretty irrelevant when it comes to today's second hand prices.

Everyone knows the iPhone 5 is coming in a few weeks, making the iPhone 4 effectively two generations old. The fact that the 16gb version still goes for that much is pretty impressive. The SGS2 is a last generation Galaxy device and you only get $90 for it? I'd be pretty pissed.
 
ridley182 said:
Initially when exactly? When it was first released two years ago? A year ago? That's pretty irrelevant when it comes to today's second hand prices.

Everyone knows the iPhone 5 is coming in a few weeks, making the iPhone 4 effectively two generations old. The fact that the 16gb version still goes for that much is pretty impressive. The SGS2 is a last generation Galaxy device and you only get $90 for it? I'd be pretty pissed.
Click to expand...

a month after, 6 months after release? A few months before the S3 came out you could find the S2 for free at lots of carriers. Wouldn't happen with a current gen iphone. Heck the current gen SG3 can be found for $80 to $150 now. You would never find a deal like that on a current gen iPhone. And when the 5 releases, I bet the price of the 4 drops with the floods of 4 and 4s hitting the market.

I'm just saying like all things apple, the resale is higher but you also paid more initially too.


maharg said:
I think I've been pretty clear that I think the system is fundamentally broken.
Click to expand...

While true you don't see any other trying to exploit the broken system as badly as apple either.
 
maharg said:
Sure, I just don't know if it really goes to the claim that Apple licensed the concepts they actually used, especially if they didn't fulfil their end. In the end it doesn't really matter. What you pasted is very illuminating, but I still think Apple's position wrt PARC is a little murkier than some people like to paint it. PARC made out like bandits on their Apple stock exchange and that seems to have been largely good enough for them.
Click to expand...

Its written in legalese, but that basically is their license to Smalltalk. The visit to PARC were them participating "in a project with the Learning Research Group at PARC/Xerox for the purpose of implementing the Smalltalk-80 language and system on a hardware system to be developed by [Apple]."

If they were only allowed to look at a demo, and do stuff by memory, that's not really Xerox fulfilling their end of the bargain either, right? Unless you read between the lines.

http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=On_Xerox,_Apple_and_Progress.txt
Steve did see Smalltalk when he visited PARC. He saw the Smalltalk integrated programming environment, with the mouse selecting text, pop-up menus, windows, and so on. The Lisa group at Apple built a system based on their own ideas combined with what they could remember from the Smalltalk demo, and the Mac folks built yet another system. There is a significant difference between using the Mac and Smalltalk.
Click to expand...
 
ridley182 said:
Initially when exactly? When it was first released two years ago? A year ago? That's pretty irrelevant when it comes to today's second hand prices.

Everyone knows the iPhone 5 is coming in a few weeks, making the iPhone 4 effectively two generations old. The fact that the 16gb version still goes for that much is pretty impressive. The SGS2 is a last generation Galaxy device and you only get $90 for it? I'd be pretty pissed.
Click to expand...

iPhones have really good second hand value, Samsung phones - not so much, which is something I think we can all agree on. But using that to draw the conclusion that the second hand value of Samsung phones have declined even more as a DIRECT result of this trial is really stretching it.

Come to think of it, my boss' iPhone just broke down - must have been some devious retaliation from Samsung, hiring phone assassins to break people's iPhones. It's the only logical conclusion I can see.
 
Angst said:
iPhones have really good second hand value, Samsung phones - not so much, which is something I think we can all agree on. But using that to draw the conclusion that the second hand value of Samsung phones have declined even more as a DIRECT result of this trial is really stretching it.

Come to think of it, my boss' iPhone just broke down - must have been some devious retaliation from Samsung, hiring phone assassins to break people's iPhones. It's the only logical conclusion I can see.
Click to expand...

If features like pinch to zoom, tap to zoom, are removed from the phones, will their value go up or down?
 
numble said:
If features like pinch to zoom, tap to zoom, are removed from the phones, will their value go up or down?
Click to expand...

Do you think Samsung will do an OTA that removes said features from the phones in question? Why would people even install this update?

But as maharg said, the "stretching it" part is assuming that the general public is informed enough to actually understand that this might happen. Most people (generalizations ftw, lol) I know have zero idea about coming updates for their phone and I haven't exactly heard many discussions IRL about the trial.
 
Angst said:
Do you think Samsung will do an OTA that removes said features from the phones in question? Why would people even install this update?

But as maharg said, the "stretching it" part is assuming that the general public is informed enough to actually understand that this might happen. Most people (generalizations ftw, lol) I know have zero idea about coming updates for their phone and I haven't exactly heard many discussions IRL about the trial.
Click to expand...

Samsung will do an update if Apple's injunction application requests it and Judge Koh agrees to apply the injunction.

The people that use Gazelle aren't most people. Gazelle also sees an uptick in iPhone sales in the weeks before Apple's iPhone keynote, even though the date is uncertain and there's nothing but obscure rumor sites that talk about such stuff--little rumors about a keynote cause a wave of sales to Gazelle. Compare that to the Apple v. Samsung verdict being blasted on both general and tech news.

It doesn't matter if they know about coming updates or not. People update their phones, if it will either freeze updates to S2, Galaxy Nexus, etc. or remove the features, the phone is less valuable.

If Samsung won and proved that the iPhone and iPod infringed Samsung's patents on sending a photo in an email and listening to music in the background, do you think iPhones will have the same value?
 
Zeppu said:
Each truck would have to carry 3.5k tons.

Yeah, no.

Edit: Or was the 30 trucks just the first load. Also, they're paying already?



No way I'm believing that.
Click to expand...

Plus.. according to the almighty wikipedia:
The Mint expects demand for nickels in commerce to increase from 840 million needed in Fiscal Year 2011 to 1.08 billion in 2015
Click to expand...
So assuming that quote means that they make 1 billion coins a year (or 840m), it seems unlikely that Samsung managed to get 20 years worth.
Plus this whole story is just stupid.
 
The shittastic thing Apple does is every time they Sherlock some small developer with a new feature. Yet the community seems to just laugh about that just because 1/10 times Apple will hire the developer of the original application.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
UK Supreme Court rules legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex
2
62
4K
jason10mm replied
"The Simpsons 2" is officially in the works and set to release in theaters on July 23, 2027.
News  2
60
438
Codes 208 replied
Tim Apple got stitched up the Courts
39
2K
winjer replied
Leonardo DiCaprio set to star in Michael Mann's Heat 2
2
59
919
DKPOWPOW replied
Paramount is streaming Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (2025) on Youtube (starts in 10 minutes)
14
389
Saber replied
Top Bottom