Courtroom tension boils in Apple-Samsung showdown

Technology Aug. 11, 2012 - 06:00AM JST ( 8 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

8 Comments

0

basroilAug. 11, 2012 - 09:34AM JST

The mountain of documents filed in the case—over 1,600 docket entries and counting—are anything but trivial, though. Detail about licensing negotiations between Apple and the South Korean company, early design ideas for the iPad, and even profit margins for the iPhone and iPad have been revealed. (On every $499 iPad, between $115 and $160 flowed into Apple’s cash pile through the end of March 2012.)

If Apple keeps making admissions like that, investors will flee quickly. People expected about $170-200 in cost for the $500 version, so suddenly that cost went up to almost $400?

Both companies opted to put their battle in the hands of a nine-member jury, overseen by Koh. For Samsung, the challenge is to get jurors past any intuitive emotional response—it’s a copy!—and focus on the specific legal requirements of each patent.

In other words, to get them to accept the idea that copying, by itself, is not illegal.

How did this garbage ever get past an editor? Samsung is not trying to prove copying is legal, rather that the patents apple received were invalid to begin with, and there is a much wider line between copying something and merely following good engineering practice and improving your own product using knowledge gained by how competitors solved problems. They never claim they copied, they claim that they improved customer experiences by improving problems they found with their own system that competitors didn't have.
0

LostinNagoyaAug. 11, 2012 - 10:00AM JST

They claim that they improved customer experiences by improving problems they found with their own system that competitors didn't have.

Did you type this crying and sobbing and with cute eyes?
0

basroilAug. 11, 2012 - 12:32PM JST

LostinNagoyaAug. 11, 2012 - 10:00AM JST

If you've ever done engineering work you would know just how thin a line it looks like between building on the work of others and reaching a parallel conclusion and copying it outright, but how different the processes are in practice. Why do you think that all the ultrabook computers and tablets look the same? I can tell you it's not for ascetic reasons.
0

Badge213Aug. 11, 2012 - 01:31PM JST

Apple's case is quite weak. Apple didn't invent the rectangle, nor did they invent the "look and feel" of a smart-phone or tablet.
0

basroilAug. 11, 2012 - 01:49PM JST

Badge213Aug. 11, 2012 - 01:31PM JST

Apple's case is quite weak. Apple didn't invent the rectangle, nor did they invent the "look and feel" of a smart-phone or tablet.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/102595858/Apple-s-August-2010-presentation-to-Samsung-on-iPhone-patents

They sure claim they did! Check Exhibit 52.49 (page 48 of 90), where they claim to own the rectangle (which was originally developed by Lucas Film twenty years before). They also claim to own copy/paste, application priority (which Windows 1.0 had when released in 1985), and the calendar (which Windows 1.0 used), yet either those patents are invalid because they were sought after it was already industry standard or have already passed the statute of limitations (hence Apple is only suing Samsung because they managed to get in just in time).

Apple is likely to get shot down again, unless Koh becomes even more Apple biased. I think people forget Apple vs Microsoft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applev.Microsoft) where judges on many levels decided that "look and feel" are not protected.
0

avengerAug. 11, 2012 - 02:14PM JST

Its an attempt to slow Samsung down which is working
0

TakahiroDomingoAug. 11, 2012 - 04:24PM JST

apple was the first to be successful in profiting from smartphones, but the ideas were around way before apple. now apple wants all the profit forever and ever and ever on an item that they did not invent from square zero. this is greed to the max, so sick. perhaps samsung are copycats, but just a little bit more than apple. all samsung did was ride the wave of people crazy about smartphones, and wanting an alternative to apple.
0

warnerbroAug. 12, 2012 - 12:06AM JST

"I can tell you it's not for ascetic reasons."

Perhaps you mean "aesthetic reasons"?