Support NeoGAF

[gcubed]

Can you (or snyone else) expand on this please?

Developed in 2001 from the Mitsubishi Electronic Research Laboratory (MERL), the device is still available in the lounge for anybody to use. Samsung showed the court a DiamondTouch feature called Fractal Zoom, which allowed users to zoom in and out of photos using multiple finger gestures.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwRjb4fNWAI&feature=player_embedded

 

[Maxrunner]

Well, Apple might just get Samsung phones banned in the US, as a start...

.. and an end. Europe is way more advanced in thess matters..

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Apple don't have to and have said they won't license it.

Link?

Evidence presented in court said otherwise...

Thank you zombie, i already pointed that out but they just want to shit on anything that isn't pro-apple.

While you two are patting each other's backs, would you care to enlighten us howa company enforcing non-standards-essential patents is engaging in anti-competitive behavior?

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

Regarding the pinch to zoom and multi-touch patents that Apple has, Microsoft purchased Perceptive Pixel recently because they created and demoed multi-touch at TED before the iPhone existed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac0E6deG4AU

.. and an end. Europe is way more advanced in thess matters..

LOL what? Every country is different. Everyone in the industry goes to Germany because it is so easy to get products banned there. Mannheim court is basically a rocket docket to get anything you want found guilty of infringement.

 

[Maxrunner]

This. I have a samsung tv I love. I had a Samsung phone I loathed.

Galaxy Nexus is great.

 

[EvilDick34]

.. and an end. Europe is way more advanced in thess matters..

The samsung appeal will get this ruling overturned, count on it. This jury basically just slept through this trial and then when it came time to decide it, they just checked their brains at the door.

 

[MThanded]

The samsung appeal will get this ruling overturned, count on it. This jury basically just slept through this trial and then when it came time to decide it, they just checked their brains at the door.

What is going on here? EvilDick34 can't read my posts. I commend his trolling effort though.

 

[Sir Abacus]

What is going on here?

Read his tag. He's been doing this the entire thread.

 

[gcubed]

Read his tag. He's been doing this the entire thread.

oh MTHanded knows... he knows

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Developed in 2001 from the Mitsubishi Electronic Research Laboratory (MERL), the device is still available in the lounge for anybody to use. Samsung showed the court a DiamondTouch feature called Fractal Zoom, which allowed users to zoom in and out of photos using multiple finger gestures.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwRjb4fNWAI&feature=player_embedded

Ok, but didn't the jury rule out that the patent is valid?

I don't know much about legal issues do I'm a little lost.

 

[MThanded]

Read his tag. He's been doing this the entire thread.

I figured he would stop since the thread had cool down. I know first hand though. We had a run-in.

 

[Emily Chu]

Well, Apple might just get Samsung phones banned in the US, as a start...

banned from being sold or being supported by carriers with celluar data ?

I refuse to downgrade to a 3.5" iphone....

if that is the case...

 

[Tabris]

LOL what? Every country is different. Everyone in the industry goes to Germany because it is so easy to get products banned there. Mannheim court is basically a rocket docket to get anything you want found guilty of infringement.

Europe has a trade commission as part of it's Union that usually has superseding powers on decisions like this.

 

[sniffles]

Galaxy Nexus is great.

So are skittles, if we're being banal.

 

[gcubed]

Ok, but didn't the jury rule out that the patent is valid?

I don't know much about legal issues do I'm a little lost.

yes, they did, and there should have been no way they did. Bounce back was flaky as features of that device did similar things but not exactly the same. Pinch to zoom patent should get overturned.

 

[Zeth]

Developed in 2001 from the Mitsubishi Electronic Research Laboratory (MERL), the device is still available in the lounge for anybody to use. Samsung showed the court a DiamondTouch feature called Fractal Zoom, which allowed users to zoom in and out of photos using multiple finger gestures.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwRjb4fNWAI&feature=player_embedded

The Apple patent claim requires a display, the projector on that thing doesn't fit, if you're being technical.

Edit: nevermind, wrong one I think.

 

[Niks]

 

[funkystudent]

Hopefully this result is the kick people need to band together and force chance in the US patent system.

 

[gcubed]

The Apple patent claim requires a display, the projector on that thing doesn't fit, if you're being technical.

yeah, thats not how it works though.

 

[Metroid Hunter]

“@AP: Apple is demanding that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market: http://t.co/Yr0H1jAR -MS” 

Holy fuck.

 

[EvilDick34]

Hopefully this result is the kick people need to band together and force chance in the US patent system.

The sane people in this thread hope to god this is the catalyst for change but unfortunately it is a long shot at best.

 

[Metroid Hunter]

Tell me what industry they have a monopoly over.

Tablet.

 

[Maxrunner]

Holy fuck.

Disgusting....

 

[Tabris]

For all those calling for patents to be abolished.

Explain to me, as a software or electronics company, how do you ensure that the investment you make into R&D doesn't benefit your competition? R&D investment is what drives innovation and being able to protect your innovation so you have a competitive advantage is what drives R&D investment.

 

[Yoshiya]

Holy fuck.

They can demand all they like, that's not going to happen anytime soon. I just hope this verdict prompts better design differentiation across the industry - the SIII is headed in the right direction, something certainly preferable to embarrassingly derivative earlier designs.

 

[freenudemacusers]

Holy fuck.

Balls out

 

[Pristine_Condition]

All I know after watching this Live VergeCast is that Elvis Costello should sue Joshua Topolsky for Trade Dress violations.

 

[MThanded]

Holy fuck.

Disgusting....

As part of its lawsuit, Apple also demanded that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market. A judge was expected to make that ruling at a later time.

So this is not new at all. That was in the original lawsuit.

 

[Sir Abacus]

yeah, thats not how it works though.

Yes. It is. Patents are absolutely about the letter of the patent not the spirit of it.

 

[shinobi602]

“@AP: Apple is demanding that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market: http://t.co/Yr0H1jAR -MS” 

FUCK THAT SHIT. Want to buy an S3 in a few months

 

[iamblades]

For all those calling for patents to be abolished.

Explain to me, as a software or electronics company, how do you ensure that the investment you make into R&D doesn't benefit your competition? R&D investment is what drives innovation and being able to protect your innovation so you have a competitive advantage is what drives R&D investment.

Software patents.

Software R&D is so cheap and moves so quickly that patents do not work at all for software.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

yes, they did, and there should have been no way they did. Bounce back was flaky as features of that device did similar things but not exactly the same. Pinch to zoom patent should get overturned.

Aha, but it has to be at the appeal, right?

If the patent stands at appeal, then is it solid or can it be overturned if, let's say, apple sues google?

 

[impirius]

Robert Scoble's take:

I think this is actually a sizable win for Samsung

Why? It only cost $1 billion to become the #2 most profitable mobile company. Remember how much Microsoft paid for Skype? $8 billion. So, for 1/8th of a Skype Samsung took RIM's place and kicked HTC's behind.

Not too bad. Unless the judge rules Samsung can't sell its products. Even then I bet Samsung arrives at a nice licensing deal with Apple.

Plus, Apple has opened up its kimono and not too voluntarily at that. Finally, Apple got Google/Motorola to sue it too. So this might end up being a financial wash for Apple in the end.

But on the other hand Apple won the PR as the innovator and Samsung will always be seen as the copier. This gives Apple the ability to bring new, innovative products to the market and have people at least show up to its press events. Samsung's events never get the "Apple buzz" and this verdict won't help Samsung move up in the world's eyes as an innovator.

That said, I bet that RIM wishes it had copied the iPhone a lot sooner than it did. So does Nokia, I bet. Samsung is a much healthier company than any of those BECAUSE it copied the iPhone.

 

[ghst]

Hopefully this result is the kick people need to band together and force chance in the US patent system.

i can assure you, the people who could have the potential to force change are very, very happy with this ruling.

Not too bad. Unless the judge rules Samsung can't sell its products. Even then I bet Samsung arrives at a nice licensing deal with Apple.

yeah, they're practically dating.

 

[Jintor]

For all those calling for patents to be abolished.

Explain to me, as a software or electronics company, how do you ensure that the investment you make into R&D doesn't benefit your competition? R&D investment is what drives innovation and being able to protect your innovation so you have a competitive advantage is what drives R&D investment.

I don't think it needs to be abolished as such, just rejiggered. Probably just reduce the exclusivity timeframe if possible.

/edit Referring to software patents, apologies for not clarifying.

 

[shinobi602]

Robert Scoble's take:

Hmm haven't looked at it that way...

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

Oh really so Google wont get yhe patent because Apple just put them on the latest ios? Npt following...

No no, whether they get it or not isn't the question, it's if they can win a court case regarding Apples use of a granted patent.

The same reason Apple didn't settle with Motorola, one side probably wanted an absolutely ridiculous amount of money.

I wonder how much MS paid for the patents. But it's also trade dress too.

 

[Tabris]

Software patents.

Software R&D is so cheap and moves so quickly that patents do not work at all for software.

Software R&D is so cheap? Really? I assume you don't work at a company that does software development. Software R&D and "ground up" development / innovation can be extremely expensive. The main reason it's so expensive is, unlike hardware R&D which the engineers can go on to the next project as soon as they complete R&D on the previous project, software development requires investment into maintenance cycle after R&D, so it always requires diverted resources or additional staffing for the next R&D project as the previous developers are at least in part invested into the maintenance cycle.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Robert Scoble's take:

That take is sorta interesting. But since the jury found them willful, Apple could demand triple damages, theoretically. So this could, again, theoretically, reach over $3 Billion for Samsung. And that just gets them to this point. Samsung still has other products, future products to worry about licenses for or features removed, and other lawsuits to worry about.

And comparing it to Skype is silly. I don't think anyone thinks Skype was a good business deal.

 

[gcubed]

Yes. It is. Patents are absolutely about the letter of the patent not the spirit of it.

i am under the impression that you can't take the same thing done on a touch sensitive surface, slap "screen" on it, and patent it again.

 

[Technosteve]

I won based on rubber band patent right? did they win based on trade dress too?

 

[Cheebo]

Tablet.

Monopoly is like 95% of the market. They have something in the high 60's low 70's.

 

[rezuth]

Awesome, think it was quite clear Samsung wanted to copy Apple.

 

[freenudemacusers]

Software patents.

Software R&D is so cheap and moves so quickly that patents do not work at all for software.

Yikes, I don't think that meshes with reality at all.

 

[gcubed]

I won based on rubber band patent right? did they win based on trade dress too?

most

 

[Metroid Hunter]

Monopoly is like 95% of the market. They have something in the high 60's low 70's.

Can I see a source please?

All I've seen is Apple having 16 M sales per quarter while Samsung had like 40k.

 

[Technosteve]

batman year 1?

 

[Tabris]

I won based on rubber band patent right? did they win based on trade dress too?

"bounce-back", "pinch and zoom" and trade dress (I think last one is the big one).

The main issue was Apple proved that Samsung knew they were copying instead of just unknowingly. Unknowingly would have gotten them "You need to pay to license these patents", knowingly got them damages.

 

[gcubed]

Can I see a source please?

All I've seen is Apple having 16 M sales per quarter while Samsung had like 40k.

there are more tablets out there then samsung

 

[Yoshiya]

I won based on rubber band patent right? did they win based on trade dress too?

All the design patents and trade dress was upheld on all but the iPad. All infringement was found to be wilful, I think, but I think that has already been incorporated into the $1 billion sum.