Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21
Aussie
2163 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 189

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 678473 28-Aug-2012 22:37 Send private message

a hell of a lot of those patents and trademarks could be tracec to "prior art"
"handheld device with rounded corners" any early htc device... apache, vogue...

374 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 4

Subscriber

  Reply # 678474 28-Aug-2012 22:37 Send private message

So you read the patents and you still think Samsung should have paid for each of those patents listed and apple are 100% in the right in suing? You can't see major issues some of us have with being able to patent the above ideas? I give up.

I guess we should all just be thankful apple are innovating with novel ideas such as a window that disappears withour user input after a period of time. Either that or hope the appeal is successful.

499 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 26


  Reply # 678479 28-Aug-2012 22:52 Send private message

I'm reading article over on Techdirt on the jury decision, and it sounds like the jury made some rather questionable mistakes.

Part of the jury instructions state that prior art needs to be considered when asking if Apple's patents are invalid. However, the jury decided to skip looking at prior art altogether, as they thought it was bogging them down and taking too much time. In other words, the jury were awarding on damages on patents that they may have found invalid, assuming they had done what they were supposed to do.

They were also instructed not to award damages for punitive measures, only to compensate for losses caused by infringement. Yet the foreman has specifically said that they wanted to make a statement, so went for high (but not unreasonably high) damages. This, again, goes directly against jury instructions.

In fact, the foreman has said that they did not bother with the instructions at all, and simply went ahead answering the questions. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that you're supposed do to what those instructions tell you...

On a side note, even if they are eventually found to be guilty, Samsung may come out ahead after this battle. There's anecdotal evidence coming in that people the case has been somewhat of a publicity win for Samsung, with Apple effectively saying that Samsung's products are comparable to theirs. Have a read of this account on G+ as an example.

IT Professional
1308 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 34

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 678516 28-Aug-2012 23:43 Send private message

blakamin: a hell of a lot of those patents and trademarks could be tracec to "prior art"
"handheld device with rounded corners" any early htc device... apache, vogue...


Absolutely agree!!

And most of the others are just logical for layout or use - just because Apple were the first to get the idiots at the US Patents Office to accept a patient for the layout on screen should they be rewarded for it, when in all likelihood 3 or 4 other companies were simultaneously working on the same thing???

And if the jury really did skip considering prior art then the entire trial is a farce.

650 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 128

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 678581 29-Aug-2012 09:00 Send private message

keewee01:
blakamin: a hell of a lot of those patents and trademarks could be tracec to "prior art"
"handheld device with rounded corners" any early htc device... apache, vogue...


Absolutely agree!!

And most of the others are just logical for layout or use - just because Apple were the first to get the idiots at the US Patents Office to accept a patient for the layout on screen should they be rewarded for it, when in all likelihood 3 or 4 other companies were simultaneously working on the same thing???

And if the jury really did skip considering prior art then the entire trial is a farce.


+1




Procrastination eventually pays off.

218 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3


  Reply # 678592 29-Aug-2012 09:17 Send private message

nzgeek: I'm reading article over on Techdirt on the jury decision, and it sounds like the jury made some rather questionable mistakes.

Part of the jury instructions state that prior art needs to be considered when asking if Apple's patents are invalid. However, the jury decided to skip looking at prior art altogether, as they thought it was bogging them down and taking too much time. In other words, the jury were awarding on damages on patents that they may have found invalid, assuming they had done what they were supposed to do.

They were also instructed not to award damages for punitive measures, only to compensate for losses caused by infringement. Yet the foreman has specifically said that they wanted to make a statement, so went for high (but not unreasonably high) damages. This, again, goes directly against jury instructions.

In fact, the foreman has said that they did not bother with the instructions at all, and simply went ahead answering the questions. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that you're supposed do to what those instructions tell you...

On a side note, even if they are eventually found to be guilty, Samsung may come out ahead after this battle. There's anecdotal evidence coming in that people the case has been somewhat of a publicity win for Samsung, with Apple effectively saying that Samsung's products are comparable to theirs. Have a read of this account on G+ as an example.


Most of the techirt stuff is just a regurgitation of groklaw's posts which was sited earlier in this thread.  Everyone keeps pointing to that as if it comes from multiple legals sources/reports, but it's actually all the same article/source.  Not that it means that the opinion from Groklaw is wrong (it's fairly solid), it's just that there is a perception that there is wide dispute of the jury, and it is actually one source being repeated over and over again.

I'm very skeptical of these ideas that this is somehow good publicity and marketing for Samsung.  I think people are confusing publicity, advertising, sales (short-term), marketing and brand management. 

All of those terms I just mentioned are discretely different items. Most people think that advertising is marketing/sales and they perceive the value of a brand from their personal consumer experience. That is not the case though.  

I think there is short-term upside to Samsung.  People might panic about losing the option to buy a Samsung phone in fear of ban which will drive short-term sales.  Those that are anti-Apple/pro-Samsung  and were on the fence about making a buying decision may be pushed into action.

However, any marketing and brand management professional would say there are deep and serious concerns for how this affects Samsung's overall long-term brand positioning and image.  When you look at the scope of tens of millions of consumers, many of whom do not have existing brand loyalty to Samsung or Apple, but might well have heard of Samsung's loss for patent infringement pose a very real problem for Samsung's brand image. 



3422 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 339

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 678598 29-Aug-2012 09:20 Send private message


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 183


  Reply # 678617 29-Aug-2012 10:17 Send private message

spacedog:
Most of the techirt stuff is just a regurgitation of groklaw's posts which was sited earlier in this thread.  Everyone keeps pointing to that as if it comes from multiple legals sources/reports, but it's actually all the same article/source.  Not that it means that the opinion from Groklaw is wrong (it's fairly solid), it's just that there is a perception that there is wide dispute of the jury, and it is actually one source being repeated over and over again.


PJ at Groklaw is very well respected; I'd trust her analysis.


@tdgeek:  I disagree with the whole patent system as it stands when applied to software (especially patenting UI "ideas") - Whether it is apple, microsoft, google or samsung. I'm actually very dissappointed that google is now looking at using motorola patents in a similar way.

But I think apple has drawn a lot of ire because they really are front and center at the moment in using patents in a way that many many people disagree with. Because they have decided to go on the offensive with their patents, using them to attack what many regard as their main competitor.

Many people who are much smarter than me, people I really respect, have spent a lot of time thinking about this and come to the conclusion that the patent system as it currently stands is fundementally broken. And the way it is currently being used is just wrong;  A system where patent trolls can not only survive, but actually prosper, surely points to some major flaws in the whole system.

650 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 128

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 678627 29-Aug-2012 10:28 Send private message

kiwitrc: Good article on patent trolls in the online Herald


It is a good article - the only difference between this case and other patent cases is that he did not have the technology to actually put his idea into action.  He waited for technology to catch up with his idea and then licenced it.

A number of the patents in the Apple trial were from the late 90's and early 00's which were sat on until they had the technology to deliver and use the patent.

Perhaps there should be a time limit to turn the patent into something deliverable.

I can fully understand patents where a company spends years and millions of dollars on R&D but not from some fanciful idea.

A black face with silver border - come on, I had a table that looked like that in the 90's.

Prior art on most of the patents in my opinion.  Perhaps we should start a thread for each of the patents discussing whether such a thing existed before the Apple patent.

The Korean (?) court was probably more accurate in determining that they were as bad as each other.

The only winners again are the lawyers.




Procrastination eventually pays off.

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 678629 29-Aug-2012 10:30 Send private message

StarBlazer:
kiwitrc: Good article on patent trolls in the online Herald


It is a good article - the only difference between this case and other patent cases is that he did not have the technology to actually put his idea into action.  He waited for technology to catch up with his idea and then licenced it.

A number of the patents in the Apple trial were from the late 90's and early 00's which were sat on until they had the technology to deliver and use the patent.

Perhaps there should be a time limit to turn the patent into something deliverable.

I can fully understand patents where a company spends years and millions of dollars on R&D but not from some fanciful idea.

A black face with silver border - come on, I had a table that looked like that in the 90's.

Prior art on most of the patents in my opinion.  Perhaps we should start a thread for each of the patents discussing whether such a thing existed before the Apple patent.

The Korean (?) court was probably more accurate in determining that they were as bad as each other.

The only winners again are the lawyers.


Oh yeah.. the lawyers would make heaps out of this.. especially with the appeals coming on..

IT Professional
1308 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 34

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 678646 29-Aug-2012 10:48 Send private message

StarBlazer:
kiwitrc: Good article on patent trolls in the online Herald


It is a good article - the only difference between this case and other patent cases is that he did not have the technology to actually put his idea into action.  He waited for technology to catch up with his idea and then licenced it.

A number of the patents in the Apple trial were from the late 90's and early 00's which were sat on until they had the technology to deliver and use the patent.

Perhaps there should be a time limit to turn the patent into something deliverable.

I can fully understand patents where a company spends years and millions of dollars on R&D but not from some fanciful idea.

A black face with silver border - come on, I had a table that looked like that in the 90's.

Prior art on most of the patents in my opinion.  Perhaps we should start a thread for each of the patents discussing whether such a thing existed before the Apple patent.

The Korean (?) court was probably more accurate in determining that they were as bad as each other.

The only winners again are the lawyers.


Time limits for using an idea in a patent before the patient lapses is a great idea... if you can't innovate and get your own ideas to market in a reasonable time then tough luck!

Trademarks certainly have time limits in the US - you need to be actively using the trademark within a set time after registering it else it is available to others to us.

There was a case a number of years ago in the US along these lines of trademark lapsing due to non-use... if I remember correctly it was for the iPhone trademark which was being used by I think Cisco - long before Apple even thought about it - they went to court over it (not sure who initiated it) and Apple argued that Cisco hadn't really used the name so it should be handed over to them. (this is all off the top of my head... but I'm sure it was Apple and the iPhone name).


374 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 4

Subscriber

  Reply # 678654 29-Aug-2012 10:52 Send private message

+1 to sidefx's post the above.

Given the system is broken, you can understand why apple would choose to go down the path they have. They have become the worlds biggest company on the back of being the first in this market and shaping the market into what we know it as today (if not creating the mass smartphone market for the average consumer).

Other players have now caught up and are overtaking them in the market in which they helped create/shape. They can either come up with a product better than the competition (as they did with the original iphone, 3g, 3gs) or they can try and maintain their position by making it harder for other manufactures.

And given the state of the US economy today, and the fact their economy has become more and more reliant upon IP to generate wealth, I am not holding my breath for the erroneous verdict or the problem itself to be fixed in a hurry. Happy to be proven wrong though.

417 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 97

Subscriber

  Reply # 678730 29-Aug-2012 13:51 Send private message

What I would love to see is Samsung dumping Apple as a customer just as they are gearing up for a new release, sure that would hurt Samsung (8% I hear), but just imagine what it would do to apple. They would be crippled for several months waiting for new chip & screen manufacturers to get up to speed.

Of course then Samsung would have to be as pathetic and small minded as Apple :)

Apple obviously aren't confident enough in the supposed superiority of there products

Just my opinion

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 678735 29-Aug-2012 13:55 Send private message

sittingduckz: What I would love to see is Samsung dumping Apple as a customer just as they are gearing up for a new release, sure that would hurt Samsung (8% I hear), but just imagine what it would do to apple. They would be crippled for several months waiting for new chip & screen manufacturers to get up to speed.

Of course then Samsung would have to be as pathetic and small minded as Apple :)

Apple obviously aren't confident enough in the supposed superiority of there products

Just my opinion


Well I am sure Apple has supply agreements all signed up with Samsung when if delayed they would receive so much compensation for the delay or something of that nature..

1766 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 52

Subscriber

  Reply # 678841 29-Aug-2012 16:38 Send private message

ibuksh:
sittingduckz: What I would love to see is Samsung dumping Apple as a customer just as they are gearing up for a new release, sure that would hurt Samsung (8% I hear), but just imagine what it would do to apple. They would be crippled for several months waiting for new chip & screen manufacturers to get up to speed.

Of course then Samsung would have to be as pathetic and small minded as Apple :)

Apple obviously aren't confident enough in the supposed superiority of there products

Just my opinion


Well I am sure Apple has supply agreements all signed up with Samsung when if delayed they would receive so much compensation for the delay or something of that nature..


Unless it was because of circumstances beyond their control, like having to sell a factory or two to come up with just over a billion $US.  :P




Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




Twitter »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:




News »

Trending now »
Hot discussions in our forums right now:

2 x PS4s to give away. Geekzone members only.
Created by BigPipeNZ, last reply by jurax04 on 29-Jul-2014 23:10 (54 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4


"keyless" keys - questions
Created by joker97, last reply by Gilco2 on 29-Jul-2014 21:11 (26 replies)
Pages... 2


Logitech K400r HTPC Cordless Keyboard Half Price
Created by Dynamic, last reply by Blanch on 28-Jul-2014 22:16 (25 replies)
Pages... 2


VF, why you lie to me?
Created by kenkeniff, last reply by kenkeniff on 29-Jul-2014 14:35 (46 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4


Dick Smith in Continual Sale Mode
Created by Dynamic, last reply by eXDee on 29-Jul-2014 19:23 (65 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Checking UHF aerial is working
Created by OnceBitten, last reply by B1GGLZ on 28-Jul-2014 21:49 (21 replies)
Pages... 2


2010 Honda Jazz, Suzuki Swift - which has higher maintenance cost?
Created by joker97, last reply by alasta on 30-Jul-2014 08:59 (62 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Hierarchy of a mistake: Gerry Brownlee
Created by joker97, last reply by DonGould on 29-Jul-2014 21:57 (93 replies)
Pages... 5 6 7



Geekzone Live »
Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.