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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 21
218 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3


  Reply # 677560 27-Aug-2012 12:25 Send private message

ibuksh:
oxnsox: if you read the groklaw article there is a lot of information highlighting inconsistencies thru the jury process of the trial. Most notably, and a fair summary for me, was this, (note is was recorded BEFORE the verdict was announced):


"This case is unmanageable for a jury," Robin Feldman, an intellectual property professor at the University of California Hastings Law School, said before the verdict. "There are more than 100 pages of jury instructions. I don't give that much reading to my law students. They can't possible digest it."

"The trial is evidence of a patent system that is out of control," Feldman said. "No matter what happens in this trial, I think people will need to step back and ask whether we've gone too far in the intellectual property system."


That being the scenario.. the jury took relatively small amount of time to digest the 100 pages and deliberate on the evidence to come up with a verdict..

I was expecting the jury to take atleast a few weeks if not any more


Yeah I was surprised it came in so fast. I think the short deliberation was a result of Samsung's terrible lawyer alienating the judge and jury.

There's a few interviews with the jury out circulating. It sounds like they all had made up their minds by the time closing arguments were done so all there time was focused on filling out their forms/documents. They were also probably jaded by the 100 pages of instructions and so the speed was a little bit of a rebellion on their part.

280 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

Trusted

  Reply # 677570 27-Aug-2012 12:45 Send private message

Hi - further to the posted image of a Samsung F700 touchscreen phone supposedly cming out before the original iPhone... seems that someone has fudged some dates according to this article... compare




Cheers,
Mike

iPhone photo/general blog - here


192 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 14

Subscriber

  Reply # 677575 27-Aug-2012 12:54 Send private message

Kiwipixter:
Giggs: The patent system is broken and has been for a long time. This case only reinforces that. This is only the start, there will appeals probably from both sides and they have lined up cases in 10 other countries so there is a long way to go.

These decisions will not affect NZ directly as we have a separate legal system and there is probably little point bringing a case here as our market is too small. However if for example Samsung is banned from selling certain products then they will hardly supply just us. It is not worth it.


It may be broken but it does serve its purpose in this case.  There are not many other Android phones, and there are are plenty of them, that blatantly designed to look and feel like the iPhone like the Galaxy S range.  Even the single home button, Android was never designed with a single home button interface.


And herein lies the problem.  A Patent is granted for something inventive novel and not obvious.  If Apple have a patent for a single button on a phone I do not see how it meets any of those criteria.  You may as well patent a car door.  By granting a Patent you are giving a person monopoly rights so in this case no one else could put a single button on a phone for 20 odd years.  That is not serving the correct purpose 

If the issue is how a Samsung phone looks like an IPhone then to me that is a copyright/Fair Trading/Passing Off issue (assuming these things exist in the States) i.e. was the Iphone copied, or were consumers mislead into thinking they were getting an Iphone, or were Samsung phones done up in such a way as to make them look like Iphones?  Now Samsung may have an issue here but it should not be a patent issue. 


3455 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 341

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 677581 27-Aug-2012 13:07 Send private message


6974 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 746

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 677584 27-Aug-2012 13:12 Send private message


411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 677589 27-Aug-2012 13:17 Send private message

networkn:
kiwitrc: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10829804&ref=rss


What a one sided article :) 


Thats coz the author is an apple fan.. he says so in the last line of the article

6974 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 746

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 677596 27-Aug-2012 13:21 Send private message

ibuksh:
networkn:
kiwitrc: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10829804&ref=rss


What a one sided article :) 


Thats coz the author is an apple fan.. he says so in the last line of the article


I know, but PLENTY of iPhone fans don't agree with the ruling. 


1746 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 69


  Reply # 677599 27-Aug-2012 13:24 Send private message

networkn:
kiwitrc: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10829804&ref=rss


What a one sided article :) 


About standard fare for the Heralds Technology section.




Nokia N9
Nokia E7
HP Touchpad
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

420 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 99

Subscriber

  Reply # 677610 27-Aug-2012 13:43 Send private message

kiwitrc: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10829804&ref=rss


Mark Webster really needs to grow up!!

It's about as biased as and American court ruling in favour of there favourite American company.

"Luckily Samsung (among others) repackaged them into cheaper devices that were so Apple-like"
20% of an iPhone is Samsung you dick!! Who is doing the repackaging here??

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 677614 27-Aug-2012 13:45 Send private message

sittingduckz:
kiwitrc: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10829804&ref=rss


Mark Webster really needs to grow up!!

It's about as biased as and American court ruling in favour of there favourite American company.

"Luckily Samsung (among others) repackaged them into cheaper devices that were so Apple-like"
20% of an iPhone is Samsung you dick!! Who is doing the repackaging here??


LOL..

Good one..

420 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 99

Subscriber

  Reply # 677620 27-Aug-2012 13:58 Send private message

Apple Lawyers

245 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 677654 27-Aug-2012 15:09 Send private message

Giggs:
Kiwipixter:
Giggs: The patent system is broken and has been for a long time. This case only reinforces that. This is only the start, there will appeals probably from both sides and they have lined up cases in 10 other countries so there is a long way to go.

These decisions will not affect NZ directly as we have a separate legal system and there is probably little point bringing a case here as our market is too small. However if for example Samsung is banned from selling certain products then they will hardly supply just us. It is not worth it.


It may be broken but it does serve its purpose in this case.  There are not many other Android phones, and there are are plenty of them, that blatantly designed to look and feel like the iPhone like the Galaxy S range.  Even the single home button, Android was never designed with a single home button interface.


And herein lies the problem.  A Patent is granted for something inventive novel and not obvious.  If Apple have a patent for a single button on a phone I do not see how it meets any of those criteria.  You may as well patent a car door.  By granting a Patent you are giving a person monopoly rights so in this case no one else could put a single button on a phone for 20 odd years.  That is not serving the correct purpose 

If the issue is how a Samsung phone looks like an IPhone then to me that is a copyright/Fair Trading/Passing Off issue (assuming these things exist in the States) i.e. was the Iphone copied, or were consumers mislead into thinking they were getting an Iphone, or were Samsung phones done up in such a way as to make them look like Iphones?  Now Samsung may have an issue here but it should not be a patent issue. 



Understand your argument on patenting vs copyright/Fair trading practices, but I disagree on inventive vs the obvious when it comes to human-computer interactions.  Give an Android, iPhone, iPad, Windows Phone, a Mac, a Windows or Linux computer to a 10 year old and chances are they will know or learn how to use it without any help.  Give it to their grandparents and you'll be spending a lot of time teaching them how do even the basics like turning it on.  Human-computer interactions are not obvious and companies like Apple spends of lot of time and money developing this and so they should be able to patent/copyright protect it.

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 677675 27-Aug-2012 15:44 Send private message

Kiwipixter:
Giggs:
Kiwipixter:
Giggs: The patent system is broken and has been for a long time. This case only reinforces that. This is only the start, there will appeals probably from both sides and they have lined up cases in 10 other countries so there is a long way to go.

These decisions will not affect NZ directly as we have a separate legal system and there is probably little point bringing a case here as our market is too small. However if for example Samsung is banned from selling certain products then they will hardly supply just us. It is not worth it.


It may be broken but it does serve its purpose in this case.  There are not many other Android phones, and there are are plenty of them, that blatantly designed to look and feel like the iPhone like the Galaxy S range.  Even the single home button, Android was never designed with a single home button interface.


And herein lies the problem.  A Patent is granted for something inventive novel and not obvious.  If Apple have a patent for a single button on a phone I do not see how it meets any of those criteria.  You may as well patent a car door.  By granting a Patent you are giving a person monopoly rights so in this case no one else could put a single button on a phone for 20 odd years.  That is not serving the correct purpose 

If the issue is how a Samsung phone looks like an IPhone then to me that is a copyright/Fair Trading/Passing Off issue (assuming these things exist in the States) i.e. was the Iphone copied, or were consumers mislead into thinking they were getting an Iphone, or were Samsung phones done up in such a way as to make them look like Iphones?  Now Samsung may have an issue here but it should not be a patent issue. 



Understand your argument on patenting vs copyright/Fair trading practices, but I disagree on inventive vs the obvious when it comes to human-computer interactions.  Give an Android, iPhone, iPad, Windows Phone, a Mac, a Windows or Linux computer to a 10 year old and chances are they will know or learn how to use it without any help.  Give it to their grandparents and you'll be spending a lot of time teaching them how do even the basics like turning it on.  Human-computer interactions are not obvious and companies like Apple spends of lot of time and money developing this and so they should be able to patent/copyright protect it.


What should be allowed to be patented and what not is also a big question here.. Thats specifically why its been quoted earlier in this thread "the patent system is out of control"

1747 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 50


  Reply # 677715 27-Aug-2012 16:58 Send private message

Kiwipixter:Understand your argument on patenting vs copyright/Fair trading practices, but I disagree on inventive vs the obvious when it comes to human-computer interactions.  Give an Android, iPhone, iPad, Windows Phone, a Mac, a Windows or Linux computer to a 10 year old and chances are they will know or learn how to use it without any help.  Give it to their grandparents and you'll be spending a lot of time teaching them how do even the basics like turning it on.  Human-computer interactions are not obvious and companies like Apple spends of lot of time and money developing this and so they should be able to patent/copyright protect it.

But at some point you have to step back and say... we're being charged for our own initiative, our intuitiveness. 
If there's a handle on a door I'm going to figure out how to open it, some animals could too. Do you patent the handle(?), the door(?) or the door with the handle? Or can you only patent it if you put the handle in a different place, or hinge the door so it opens in another direction (or from another edge), or perhaps if you paint it a different colour, or change the sign on it!

Point is, once you've made the door; it's a door. Sure patent the concept if that is possible by such conceptual patents should have, at best, limited lifespans.

Or are you suggesting we should start paying a little more (for things) as we get older because things are less intuitive and have to be learned. And we have to pay for that learning.
[Maybe the worlds already like that; Kids under 13 Free. Used to be 15 Wink ]

192 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 14

Subscriber

  Reply # 677722 27-Aug-2012 17:33 Send private message

Kiwipixter: Understand your argument on patenting vs copyright/Fair trading practices, but I disagree on inventive vs the obvious when it comes to human-computer interactions.  Give an Android, iPhone, iPad, Windows Phone, a Mac, a Windows or Linux computer to a 10 year old and chances are they will know or learn how to use it without any help.  Give it to their grandparents and you'll be spending a lot of time teaching them how do even the basics like turning it on.  Human-computer interactions are not obvious and companies like Apple spends of lot of time and money developing this and so they should be able to patent/copyright protect it.


Sorry perhaps I wasn't clear.  To get a patent (in NZ anyway) the invention you are trying to patent has to be new, and have an inventive step i.e. it can't be obvious.  Obviousness means it is something which would have immediately occurred to a person who is knowledgeable about the subject matter.

I don't see how a button on a phone or say curved edges are therefore patentable as they would be obvious to anyone developing a phone therefore they can hardly be considered inventive.  Its not a question of what a consumer perceives.

   

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 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:

Orcon Global Mode launched
Created by freitasm, last reply by FireEngine on 28-Aug-2014 21:26 (106 replies)
Pages... 6 7 8


Debian can't access DNS
Created by dcole13, last reply by gstarkey on 28-Aug-2014 20:46 (28 replies)
Pages... 2


Lightbox quality Awful
Created by ronw, last reply by johntynz on 29-Aug-2014 12:54 (43 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Vodafone TV multicast settings on pfSense?
Created by kenkeniff, last reply by kenkeniff on 27-Aug-2014 10:32 (182 replies)
Pages... 11 12 13


"best" bank in New Zealand
Created by ScuL, last reply by richms on 29-Aug-2014 13:21 (38 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Another Gaming computer help question
Created by Lyderies, last reply by timmmay on 26-Aug-2014 18:06 (38 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Lightbox press event release
Created by freitasm, last reply by Lightbox on 29-Aug-2014 14:43 (555 replies)
Pages... 35 36 37


Why is there no right to compensation for wrongful imprisonment in NZ?
Created by Geektastic, last reply by Geektastic on 26-Aug-2014 14:33 (71 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5



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.