×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Loses German Court Bid To Ban Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1N, Nexus Phone

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the and-the-hits-keep-coming dept.

Patents 193

chrb writes "Apple has failed to get a patent ban on Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1N and the Nexus phone in Germany. Presiding Judge Andreas Mueller stated, 'Samsung has shown that it is more likely than not that the patent will be revoked because of a technology that was already on the market before the intellectual property had been filed for protection.' The patent in question covered list scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display. This news follows the recent Appeals court ruling that upheld the original Galaxy Tab 10.1 ban."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

193 comments

Apple (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913155)

Apple patents technology that they didn't invent and tries to stop samsung nexus and fails

Re:Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913269)

Samsung carbon copies Apple, GrouptThink bitches about Apple defending their market-defining-design, in the next thread there's bitching about Apple copying Xerox. Haterade addicts fail.

Re:Apple (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913295)

It is widely known that Apple stole the design of the iPhone from LG [wikipedia.org].

Re:Apple (0, Troll)

geogob (569250) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913345)

You mean, it is widely assumed that Apple stole the design of the iPhone from LG.

To my knowledge, the claims have never been proven in a court of law or otherwise. Although the similarities between the devices are obvious, it is still just an assumption. For all we know, both Apple and LG could have gotten their inspiration from the same source.

And apple's claims haven't either (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913367)

So it's merely claimed that Samsung took the idea from Apple.

Re:Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913467)

Riiight and the sun isn't bright because it was never proven in a court of law.

Re:Apple (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913527)

With that comment you just defeated your own argument, "You mean, it is widely assumed that Apple stole the design of the iPhone from LG." As you state, while it hasn't been proven in a court of law, something obvious to anyone seeing it is fairly certain nonetheless.

Apple and Samsung both are making a mess in the marketplace by trying to sue one another out of competition. That's unfair and not right. The only people who suffer are those of us looking to purchase products as all these legal fees go back into the bottom line price.

Rather than arguing how poor and defenseless Apple is going to protect themselves, maybe you could look at this objectively a moment and see that both businesses are in the wrong and the people who are suffering is everyone BUT Samsung and Apple, both of which have fairly healthy bottom lines. They're both bad actors and neither one of them has enough proof to do anything but keep making non-news stories like these. Maybe they should try innovating and making new products...

Re:Apple (1)

Calos (2281322) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913637)

The only people who suffer are those of us looking to purchase products as all these legal fees go back into the bottom line price.

Have any evidence to back that up? Have Samsung and Apple been increasing their prices?

Apple could maybe get away with it. Samsung, probably not, as people could just substitute into similar Android phones of other brands. But I personally haven't seen a price shift.

Re:Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913989)

My guess is that Samsung is too big a company for that increase to be instantaneous. And Apple probably have generous margins on their phones, so they don't really need to increase the price. But his point is valid nonetheless, the money has to come from somewhere, either if it's from their margins, increased prices or employee salary.

Re:Apple (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913529)

In this case it seems very implausible that Apple copied the design, given that the LG Prada was announced the 12 of December 2006 and the iPhone was announced and demonstrated to the public on January the 9th 2007. So for them to have copied the design, Apple would have had to redesign the phone in less than a month.

It is far more likely that they are similar looking because there are only so many ways to design a touch screen phone in a "minimalistic" way, which clearly both LG/Prada and Apple were going for.

The Similarities between the LG Prada and the iPhone should, however, be used as evidence against Apple when they claim others have copied their design. If it is possible for two phones to be as similar as those two phones by coincidence, then Apple should have no case against the Samsung Galaxy.

Re:Apple (5, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913675)

I have to go with this position (above) simply because to be minimal, there are few ways to accomplish that for any given purpose. But you know, the same goes for Samsung's Tabs... minimal, and not too many ways to be minimal without looking like other minimal devices of the same type.

But you know, with all that said, the fact that the word SAMSUNG is in bold, right there on the front leave little question as to whether or not it can be mistaken for an Apple device. This is just ridiculous.

I'm going to need to patent the shape of a ball and then sue every maker of balls for design infringement.

Re:Apple (-1, Flamebait)

IrrepressibleMonkey (1045046) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913761)

But you know, with all that said, the fact that the word SAMSUNG is in bold, right there on the front leave little question as to whether or not it can be mistaken for an Apple device.

I'm unsure as to whether you're being deliberately obtuse. Your argument appears to be that Samsung could clone every detail of an Apple device, but as long as they put the word SAMSUNG in bold on the front of the device..? Seriously?

Re:Apple (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913889)

Yeah, but they didn't. And Apple sued anyway.

Presumably just to be assholes - why compete on features/price when you've got money to burn on lawyers?

Re:Apple (2)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913763)

I'm going to need to patent the shape of a ball

I've already got the square ball, the pinball, the beach ball, the bowling ball and the brand name "Baal".

Oh, and I'm currently in court trying to enforce my patent on the pair of balls that you hang on the back bumper of a pickup truck. When I was 3 I had a pair of those hanging on the back of my Big Wheel. That's how badass I was.

Re:Apple (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913883)

According to LG, the design was first presented in September 2006 actually.

Re:Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913975)

The iPhone and the LG Prada phones bore only a superficial resemblance, in the same way that many modern flatscreen TVs, by virtue of form following function, have common appearance. There is certainly a resemblance though and that cannot be denied.

The similarities between the Galaxy and the iPhone are somewhat more obvious. The rim visible from the front, the button down the bottom, the appearance of the user interface, the side and back views, and gestures - with all of these things combined it's asinine to argue that Samsung had any intentions other than churning out an iPhone knock-off. Compare the iPhone 3GS to the Samsung Galaxy S. All companies take inspiration from other sources - this is normal. What's less honest is blatantly copying in the hopes of confusing consumers by latching on to the success of a rival. iPhone needs competition, not "me too" clones.

Re:Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913997)

The LG Prada was unveiled in September of 2006. That would have been enough time for Apple to physically redesign the iPhone for a January showing and they had another 6 months to work on it before anybody outside of Apple could get their hands on one.

LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, “We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.”

Re:Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38914267)

Erm, the first chance Apple had to observe the LG Prada was in September 2006, not December.

Re:Apple (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913987)

Well it sure as hell seems to be widely *assumed* that samsung "stole" the design from apple. Yet, guess what? Neither of these are the answer - neither apple stealing nor samsung, and are just idiotic mindspew.

The reality is that independent invention, where a bunch of people come up with the same glaringly obvious shit at the same time (let's add internet access to...a device! for example), is a reality, a giant benefit to society, and law worldwide simply do not handle this properly.

It's not a question of "who made it/who copied who" it's a question of "if everyone came up with it, why should *anyone* be able to claim ownership?" That's the real problem.

Re:Apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38914263)

wowwww!!!!!!!! I found a wonderful place for seeking casual lovers and one night stand thing it is #### casual'mingle. 'co 'm ####What r u waiting for? sign up free and get hooked up right now!!!!

Father Steve will hear of this, Germans!!! (1, Troll)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914415)

He will return one day! And when he does, you'll have to answer for this sin!!!

who loses? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913159)

It's not Apple. It's not Samsung.
Their customers however...

who wins? (5, Insightful)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913193)

It's not Apple. It's not Samsung.
The lawyers however...

Re:who wins? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913327)

Samsung has gained a lot, the constrant press releases about the trials, made their stuff pretty popular...

Re:who wins? (2)

toutankh (1544253) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913387)

I honestly and in all subjectivity doubt it. Here in Australia where the Galaxy tablet was banned I see iPads every day out in the street, in the bus, etc. I saw only one Galaxy tab in 8 months however.

Re:who wins? (5, Insightful)

Calos (2281322) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913517)

Hard to benefit from the publicity when the product receiving publicity is, well, banned.

How do the bans work, anyway? Just sale in the country, or is it illegal to buy overseas and ship one in?

Re:who wins? (2)

toutankh (1544253) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913369)

I rather have the impression that everybody loses except for the lawyers. Remove the lawyers and everybody else is happier: no big corporation trolls any other and have to pay/waste time for it, users get their products without the stupid bans, and products are cheaper because companies have less expenses.

Re:who wins? (4, Insightful)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913469)

In some sense both Apple and Samsung win. Small startup companies coming into this area now have to explain how they would take on either of these companies in an IP lawsuit and / or get licenses which will be so expensive their products become uncompetitive. The entire group of major technology patent holders is a cartel working together to steal from consumers by increasing prices and reducing the ability of the market to change faster than they are able to keep up with. With patent lawsuits like this running around they can afford to reduce R&D and just make money together with more limited competition.

Sure, Apple and Microsoft are deeply evil, but Samsung is a at least bit evil too, and Google is building up a huge load of patents whilst failing to give a clear statement and guarantee to protect free software companies, so even they are having evil effects. This is a bit like American Politics. Just because one side is bad, doesn't mean the other side isn't bad too. You don't become fair and balanced by asking a wolf and a hyena whether the sheep wants to be eaten.

Re:who wins? (4, Funny)

TheDarkMaster (1292526) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913645)

What companies like Apple spends on lawyers I spent on armaments. Since then I now own an aircraft carrier (full complement of aircraft and fully manned) and I can invade a small country, and of course give the appropriate treatment for lawyers :)

Re:who wins? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913739)

Short term, yes, they win. But long term, they're hurting the patent industry. Eventually their very public bickering will change that compltely. When that happens, they'll have to innovate or evaporate.

The only problem with this statement is the "eventually" bit. It implies that goverments watch out for the interests of the population. It won't happen locally, but something like the EU can do it.

Re:who wins? (1)

bigbangnet (1108411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913949)

In some sense both Apple and Samsung win. Small startup companies coming into this area now have to explain how they would take on either of these companies in an IP lawsuit and / or get licenses which will be so expensive their products become uncompetitive. The entire group of major technology patent holders is a cartel working together to steal from consumers by increasing prices and reducing the ability of the market to change faster than they are able to keep up with. With patent lawsuits like this running around they can afford to reduce R&D and just make money together with more limited competition.

Sure, Apple and Microsoft are deeply evil, but Samsung is a at least bit evil too, and Google is building up a huge load of patents whilst failing to give a clear statement and guarantee to protect free software companies, so even they are having evil effects. This is a bit like American Politics. Just because one side is bad, doesn't mean the other side isn't bad too. You don't become fair and balanced by asking a wolf and a hyena whether the sheep wants to be eaten.

I wanted to type that, thank you for saying that before I did. All of what you said is true...so awfully true.

Re:who wins? (3, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914017)

Since when did google ever have to give a statement to what they're doing outside of what they already did?

They said "we will not sue people with our patents". And have they ever sued with their patents, offensively?

no.

Apple sure as hell has. Samsung sure as hell has fought back. Barnes and Noble fought back.

Google isn't like American Politics, that's exactly why every "evil" company in the US hates them and has tried to shut them down continually, via corruption/bribery/lobbying/outright lies.

So yes, they made a statement, and you're a fucking troll.

Re:who wins? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38914429)

Fox Books moves in around the corner.
Meg Ryan: "This is actually a GOOD thing..."
Jean Sapleton rolls eyes.

Re:who wins? (1, Insightful)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913493)

I rather have the impression that everybody loses except for the lawyers. Remove the lawyers and everybody else is happier: no big corporation trolls any other and have to pay/waste time for it, users get their products without the stupid bans, and products are cheaper because companies have less expenses.

That's not a correct interpretation of the situation, actually.

Fact is that Samsung created a tablet that looks very similar to an iPad, and that similarity was intentional. Other tablets do _not_ look that similar. And it is obvious that Apple doesn't like it. Whether Apple has a case legally or not doesn't matter that much; the message sent is "if you try to sell devices that we think are copying our devices then you'll end up in court, and we make it as inconvenient as possible for you". There are plenty of other devices where Apple could have sued over the same patents, but they don't because the _reason_ for suing is not the patents, but the similarity of the product design.

The proper solution would be for Samsung to not copy the iPad design, but to tell their designers (and from my experience, they had some pretty decent designers create their TVs and laser printers) to create a design that is actually _better_ than the iPad. Try to be a bit competitive for a change instead of copying.

Re:who wins? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913571)

There are plenty of other devices where Apple could have sued over the same patents, but they don't ...

... Except for Motorola. And HTC. And ...

to create a design that is actually _better_ than the iPad

You mean, add unnecessary elements to a touchscreen device? Like Apple's advisor recommended "Make it not flat, or not rectangular, or not clutter-free front surface".

This minimal design is where tablets were headed for a long time. Even Samsung's Q1EX tablet was already basically this, with corrections for thickness limited by technology at that time.

Re:who wins? (5, Interesting)

BlackCreek (1004083) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913607)

> Fact is that Samsung created a tablet that looks very similar to an iPad, and that similarity was intentional. Other tablets do _not_ look that similar.

A rectangular screen with a black border around it. Do you actually believe Apple invented the design of "screen with a black border around it"? How many digital photo displays are "screens with a black border around it"? Oh, perhaps you meant "a rectangular screen with a black border around it and a single round button"?

FYI, All older Samsung TVs (I own one) were "rectangular screens with a black border around it with a single round button in the middle". Or you are going to say that as the tablets have a touch screen, any other design without a touch screen won't apply?

Do you also believe that mobile video calling was invented by Apple when they released the "iphone with a video camera in the front"?

Re:who wins? (4, Informative)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913821)

.

Fact is that Samsung created a tablet that looks very similar to an iPad, and that similarity was intentional. Other tablets do _not_ look that similar. And it is obvious that Apple doesn't like it. Whether Apple has a case legally or not doesn't matter that much; the message sent is "if you try to sell devices that we think are copying our devices then you'll end up in court, and we make it as inconvenient as possible for you". There are plenty of other devices where Apple could have sued over the same patents, but they don't because the _reason_ for suing is not the patents, but the similarity of the product design.

As far as "Other tablets do _not_ look that similar" goes Apple would beg to differ. [theinquirer.net]
Yes apple is anti-competitive in the fact that they will drag you into court over trivial similarities. They took the very common flat slate concept [dailymail.co.uk] and filed a patent on it. One thing they are very good at is using the ideas and concepts of others [memory-alpha.org] and claiming them as their own while convincing the faithful that it was all their idea. Prior art [blogspot.com] be damned. Keep swallowing the talking points of Apple's PR dept. though don't let the facts get in the way.

Re:who wins? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913885)

"Fact is that Samsung created a tablet that looks very similar to an iPad, and that similarity was intentional. Other tablets do _not_ look that similar."

Samsung used one of their existing design languages evident in previous products that pre-date the iphone, and applied it to a tablet form factor. Just because Apple was first to market in a form factor that is an obvious evolution due to technology improvements, doesn't make them innovative.

Re:who wins? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913753)

As long as they cross license their pathetically banal patents and keep 90% of the market in the hands of a handful of corporations, they both win.

It may be ok to defensively patent stuff, but this has gone too far.

I can't tell the difference between the iPad+Tab (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913165)

I am also a retard and visually impaired

Troll away (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913177)

Most consumers don't really give a damn about these petty fights: we just buy things that better fit our pockets not perfect/secure solutions. If I really need to buy something banned I will (and sometimes at a better price too :P).

Motorola bans Apple from selling Ipads and Iphones (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913187)

Motorola bans Apple from seling Ipads and Iphones and Germany :D

Sorry, german only: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Motorola-erwirkt-Vertriebsverbot-fuer-iPhones-und-iPad-1427712.html

Re:Motorola bans Apple from selling Ipads and Ipho (1)

geogob (569250) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913381)

This case is a farce. The claim is related to a patent on multiple pager (yes, those things that display a phone number) synchronization over wireless networks. Motorola claims that iCloud on cellphone network infringes this patent. It illustrates so well the fabulous world of patent infringement court cases.

Re:Motorola bans Apple from selling Ipads and Ipho (3, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913557)

Yes, it's almost as stupid as patenting a rectangle with rounded corners and getting something banned over it!

Re:Motorola bans Apple from selling Ipads and Ipho (1, Insightful)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913729)

Yes, it's almost as stupid as patenting a rectangle with rounded corners and getting something banned over it!

So you didn't read Apple's patent claims, just what was said on Slashdot. Congratulations.

Re:Motorola bans Apple from selling Ipads and Ipho (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38914209)

Yes, it's almost as stupid as patenting a rectangle with rounded corners and getting something banned over it!

So you didn't read Apple's patent claims, just what was said on Slashdot. Congratulations.

With that in mind, what do you think of the case of the original iPhone looking very much like the LG Prada, which was clearly the first design taking phones in the "iPhone design direction"? LG wasn't so litigious as Apple, so it haven't been tried in courts around the world, but the "rip-off" is at least on similar level as Samsung and iPads. Should iPhone have been banned?

Good to hear (5, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913189)

It's good to hear the courts are not letting Apple leverage a patent that's expected to be invalidated in order to damage a competitor's business. Samsung did, after all, modify the "N" design to get around Apple's patents that applied to the 10.1, so they did their due diligence.

Any surprises here? (4, Interesting)

goose-incarnated (1145029) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913205)

Just like in the SCO vs World case, we all know what the eventual outcome will be - it will just take time, thats all, before Apples worthless patents to be deemed as such in all courts. Patenting Black-Rectangular-with-rounded-Corners-computing-Device was never going to turn out well.

Re:Any surprises here? (4, Insightful)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913281)

This isn't a "Black-Rectangular-with-rounded-Corners-computing-Device" patent suit it's a "Hey-look-touchscreens-can-also-do-this" patent suit.

Re:Any surprises here? (0, Troll)

pond0123 (784875) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913287)

This tired old rounded corners whine again?

It's about much, much more than that: http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-1-Hardware-Design.html [peanutbuttereggdirt.com]

Re:Any surprises here? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913353)

give me a fucking break. my bicycle is black and grey with silver edges and rounded corners. From that list it's in violation too.

the 4x4 grid of icons with another row of 4 at the bottom is a bit of a rip off, but a novel invention worthy of a patent? you've got to be smoking so much crack I'm not sure how you're still alive. ... I sure hope you're just trolling and not completely bat shit kool-aid insane

Re:Any surprises here? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913933)

the 4x4 grid of icons with another row of 4 at the bottom is a bit of a rip off, but a novel invention worthy of a patent?

That wasn't even Samsung, it was "Android".

Re:Any surprises here? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913385)

It's about much, much more than that

LOL, right, it's also about "The color(s) gray, silver and black is/are claimed as a feature of the mark" and "Color gray appears as a rectangle at the front center of the device [the screen]". So much more specific decorative design elements!

Kinda looks like you don't even read what you link to.

Second page especially shows the absurdity of "copied wholesale" claims, those are god damn icons of god damn generic ideas, and not even very alike at that. The only icon with similar _feel_ is call icon, but then it's most generic of them, not that many ways to do 'green and raised handset for "accept", red and hung up handset for "reject"'.

Re:Any surprises here? (5, Insightful)

Rosy At Random (820255) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913395)

Well, I looked at that and hoped to find much, much more. Alas, I found much, much more of the same.

Most of the stuff they patented should be flat-out unpatentable. There were a few instances, such as in choice of icon colours, were I felt Samsung seemed to be needlessly imitating Apple's, but on the whole Apple seem to be trying to patent every nook and cranny they put on the damned iPhone. Some of these things are almost dictated by design constraints and natural analogues from prior OS, and some things are just part of a natural design trend towards minimalism.

I just wish everyone would stop trying to sue each other. It's god-damned ridiculous,

Re:Any surprises here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913893)

The view is the natural design trend is a result of people getting paid to continue the R&D via the mechanism of the patent system.

Not that I don't have issues with the argument or don't agree it's gotten god-damned ridiculous, just that's the real-world money&legislature&courtrooms viewpoint you've got to address.

Re:Any surprises here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913397)

From your link:

Apple iPhone
Shown at Macworld Jan 2007
Release June 2007

Samsung F700
Shown and released Feb 2007

*The F700 was released about a month after the iPhone

They aren't even consistent with their misinformation and lies. Utter fail.

Re:Any surprises here? (1)

dave1791 (315728) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913421)

Goodness gracious! I'll grant the hardware similarities, but that link is comparing an old feature phone's OS UI with a not-heavily skinned Android phone. Those icons and that layout are stock Gingerbread. Aside from that and the use of gestures, the usage paradigms for iOS and Android (at least as of 4.0) are quite different and "how things flow" is also quite different.

Samsung's best defense here is probably a quick rollout of a 4.0 update.

Re:Any surprises here? (4, Informative)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913965)

It's about much, much more than that:

Oh, bullshit. Talk abotu cherry picking... for every feature that's listed as 'similar' there I could list another one that isn't.

Apple:
Home button is round
Doesn't have camera on front
Doesn't have 'back' and 'menu' buttons

Samsung:
Home button is rectangular
Has camera on front (top right)
Has 'back' and 'menu' buttons

etc.

The profile is even better - it's nothing like an iPhone from the side. But you missed that.

Re:Any surprises here? (5, Informative)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914173)

This tired old rounded corners whine again?

It's about much, much more than that: http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-1-Hardware-Design.html [peanutbuttereggdirt.com]

It's an interesting link; I've seen similar before but not thought about it much. When you look at it it really looks like Samsung is copying Apple. Very interesting is the change in the unboxing experience [peanutbuttereggdirt.com]. It looks completely convincing.

Then you remember your first Nokia N95; a product released before the iPhone was available. Look at the Nokia unboxing experience [allaboutsymbian.com] which happens to be captured on the internet. Suddenly the audacity of Apple in claiming this as their own takes your breath.

Nothing under the sun is original; this is outrageous.

Re:Any surprises here? (0)

pond0123 (784875) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914509)

I'm not saying I agree with Apple, just that I'm tired of the inane tirades. Samsung are apparently saints, with no prior history of ripping off other people's products at all and want to hand out rainbows and unicorns to everyone. Apple are clearly evil money grabbing tyrants who eat babies. It's just ridiculous. Both are enormous capitalist corporate entities with shareholders and a legal imperative to make as much money as possible in any way they can get away with. Neither are saints.

Anyway, this isn't about one company making a product with the basic form. Or same basic colour. Or having icons that just happen to use the same colours and styles. Or having very similar packaging. It is, amongst other things, a trade dress suit concerning a company that simultaneously introduced products that did all of those things at once and did so after a very similar looking product line became a success.

People sometimes say "but how different could it look?" - which just goes to show how deeply Apple have become embedded in the public psyche! We apparently can't even imagine how a tablet or smartphone might differ. How sad. I like the link I posted because it shows some examples of just precisely how they could differ! For that matter, so does Windows Phone 7 - a genuinely different take on a smartphone GUI.

Personally I much prefer innovation to imitation.

Apple might be wrong to pursue the action on several levels (for one thing, it seems to have raised the public profile of the products from Samsung and may have done Samsung more good than harm!). But the court agreed with them and that wasn't a bunch of armchair lawyers on an internet forum, that was a collection of professional lawyers (on both sides) and a courtroom of other skilled professionals who came to the conclusion that Apple had a case, so they blocked the 10.1. But not the 10.1N, because it was judged that this product differed sufficiently.

Morally right? Very questionable. Legally right? A judgement was made and upheld on subsequent appeal.

Moral rights versus legal rights are very different questions. Sadly much of the coverage of the Apple/Samsung spat on SlashDot seems to conflate the two issues. Evil Apple, suing Samsung? Legally, the court thought it was Samsung who were in the wrong.

Re:Any surprises here? (4, Interesting)

siddesu (698447) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913331)

No surprise at all. But this is the goal of Apple in the first place. The smartphones and the tablets are like perishable goods -- the pace of new product development is fierce, so delaying a product by a few months has a huge impact on the bottom line. And that is what Apple is shooting for with patents that are at most borderline bogus.

This and a ruthless, magical marketing gives them a not insignificant edge, the quality of their products notwithstanding.

As an nexus owner... (5, Insightful)

BlackCreek (1004083) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913235)

As the owner of a Galaxy Nexus bought from Amazon.DE and as a person that makes a living writing software, I am delighted to hear that Apple (or any other company) will have to make their 'buck' by making awesome products, and will not be allowed to curb competition because some idiot allowed them to patent 'list scrolling', or "whatever-shit-we-did-before BUT NOW ON A TOUCH-SCREEN MOBILE PHONE".

Re:As an nexus owner... (2)

dave1791 (315728) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913429)

There should be a moratorium on gesture patents. Right now, we're in a state where we can't say that any new developments would be non-obvious to an expert. You could make a list of a million gesture controls over a couple of beers.

Defensive publication (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913715)

You could make a list of a million gesture controls over a couple of beers.

Then make such a list, post it to the Internet, and get it into Wayback. This is the start of defensive publication.

The only advantage iPhone users have over Android (4, Insightful)

phonewebcam (446772) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913283)

Is that they get to see what's coming in their handsets a year from now by looking at the current top end Android models on sale. I hear NFC is undergoing the usual transformation from "iPhone users don't need that" to "our amazing innovation" in the next model, the same way multitasking, speech recognition, widgets and usable notifications did.

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (2, Funny)

dave1791 (315728) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913357)

Wait! iOS 5 has usable notifications? You could have fooled me!

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913411)

This is one of those "What have the Romans ever done for us questions" Well there's iBooks of course. And iTunes. And a much better ecosystem generally.
Ok but apart from that
Well there's regular OS updates. And no malware.
Ok, but apart from that
No fragmentation
Ok but..
Siri

Basically the choice is an emotional one, not a logical one. It comes down to whether you value hardware features/tinkering or content/UI/general slickness more. Me, those days I *much* prefer the latter, but then I'm quite old by geek standards. 20 years ago I'd probably have preferred a phone I could tinker with more for one that just does what I want. But hen I ran feeBSD as my desktop OS for a while, and I wouldn't do that now either...

Android is a copycat OS. To pretend otherwise is stupid. Equally, whilst I can see why Apple might be pissed that one of their main clients has ripped off their designs and sold them as their own, I don't think a patent war really helps anyone. Time to settle on sums of money and move on, I reckon.

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (4, Funny)

slydder (549704) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913451)

omg. you live with them don't you? they got you as you were going through the terminal after your flight landed. What's your name I'll try and contact your parents for you so they can come rescue you.

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913489)

Umm apple is samsung's client. Apple buys stuff from Samsung not the other way around.

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913541)

Siri

Basically the choice is an emotional one, not a logical one.

Apparently. People seem to love the easy way and don't think about why it is made that way. I myself know how it could be done before the everything in my browser/cloud started. And I really don't like where it is heading. What is the difference of Siri and a keylogger? Can you be sure the data doesnt leak?

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913659)

Well there's iBooks of course.

Google Books.

And iTunes.

Google Music.

And a much better ecosystem generally.

Getting an app rejected because it competes or might compete with a future Apple app is awesome.

Well there's regular OS updates.

Just like Android.

And no malware.

And no choice.

No fragmentation

And no customization.

Siri

Aran
Eva
Evi
Iris
Omega
Risi
Skyvi
Speaktoit Assistant
Vlingo

It comes down to whether you value hardware features/tinkering or content/UI/general slickness more.

Android offers all of that.

Android is a copycat OS. To pretend otherwise is stupid.

Except the Android OS predates iOS.

How many older phones are on 2.3, let alone 4.0? (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913781)

Well there's regular OS updates.

Just like Android.

One- and two-year-old phones are far likely to get an operating system update if they're "iPhone" or "Nexus" brand. Any other brand of Android phone is at the mercy of the often reluctant manufacturer. The iPhone 3GS was introduced in the second quarter of 2009 but still runs the latest iOS. How many phones from that era run Android 2.3 "Gingerbread", let alone Android 4.0 "Ice Cream Sandwich"? See previous Slashdot stories about abandonment [slashdot.org] and excuses [slashdot.org].

Except the Android OS predates iOS.

In what sense? The first Android phone to be sold was HTC Dream [wikipedia.org], in the fourth quarter of 2008. The first iPhone to ship with the App Store was the iPhone 3G, introduced four months earlier.

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (2)

danbob999 (2490674) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914229)

iTunes alone is a sufficient reason for not using the iPhone. I prefer a phone that I can plug in any PC and copy files too. No software or drivers to install.

Re:The only advantage iPhone users have over Andro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913575)

"Is that they get to see what's coming in their handsets a year from now by looking at the current top end Android models on sale"

Not true. iPhone users always get software updates for three years after the phone was released, regardless of carrier. iOS is also still slicker than Android, and the ecosystem is more coherent.

iPhone sales banned in germany because of Motorola (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913393)

In other news, apple was banned from selling the all iphones except
the 4s because of Motorolas lawsuit.
in the german apple online shop, the iPhone 4s is the only availible iPhone.

store.apple.com/de

http://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FMotorola-erwirkt-Vertriebsverbot-fuer-iPhones-und-iPad-1427712.html&act=url

google translation of german it news

Wow.. (5, Interesting)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913407)

Apple is now a Patent Troll... have they so given up on innovation that they can on live on shady backroom deals and the charity of a judge?

Re:Wow.. (1, Funny)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913415)

It's going to be a major problem for Samsung if Apple stops innovating. I mean, Samsung might actually have to do some R&D!

Ba-dum- (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913453)

Tsssh.

*applause and cheers from hardcore Apple fanboys' seats, awkward silence from the rest of audience*

You totally should go touring with this stand-up act.

FYI, Samsung's R&D funding is somewhere in $7e9-9e9 range, while Apple's is in $1.5e9-3e9. Surely all those are going into advanced copy paper research.

Re:Wow.. (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913641)

Sure. Apple invented the retina display! Samsung's AMOLED is just a cheap knock-off! Seriously, you're a despicable fraud.

Re:Wow.. (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914281)

Whoooooooooooooosh!

Sorry, I almost got sucked into the low pressure void there.

I guess I'll have to go back to putting giant "disclaimer: this is joke, cupcake" on my obviously satirical posts.

Seriously, you just have no sense of humour.

DISCLAIMER: I think Apple's patent lawsuits against Samsung are silly.

Re:Wow.. (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914603)

You think I didn't see it was a joke just because you failed to make it funny? You think you're a satirist just because you make a joke about Apple's competition? You fail to see that you're still nothing but a shill, despite paying lip service to what anyone with half an eye can see is plain obvious?

Battle of Waterloo: Won on Playing Fields of Eton (4, Insightful)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913587)

Technology Battles Today: Won in the Courts . . . not in the labs.

The first step in creating a fantastic, new tech gadget . . . is making sure all the legal issues are worked out, even before you start developing and idea. If some court is going to block you down the road, there is no point in investing in a new project.

Ladies and Gentlemen, lawyers are now the first troops at the front of technology development!

German courts have made more important news today (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38913667)

How is this news? That is nothing, similar decisions have been happening every week since Apple started it's crusade against the Android.
On the other hand, Motorola, today, actually managed to ban all 3G powered, iCloud enabled iDevices, also in Germany.
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2012/02/motorola-wins-german-injunction-against.html

Seriously, I never thought I would see a court with balls big enough to say to Apple: "No, You didn't invent crap. Now GTFO".

Re:German courts have made more important news tod (1)

Mark19960 (539856) | more than 2 years ago | (#38914619)

Every time someone links to Florian god kills a kitten.
Please spare us.....

fscking software patents... (1)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913745)

they're still dancing about trying to invalidate individual ones for things like obviousness and prior art instead of going to kill them all as they are merely mathematics and can all be reduced to mathematical expressions which aren't patentable...

crafty move (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#38913907)

I keep wondering what apple's drive is for stifling competition through use of litigation mired. Perhaps if they can control the mobile and tablet platforms there will be no way for any other entity to offer alternatives. Imagine the leverage you would have if you decide certain services *coughgooglecough* just don't quite work right on the platform you control. You can call the shots then.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...