Apple vs Samsung let the fun begin.

[megaresp]

And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas. Steve Jobs 1994

Well sure, but you're overlooking 2 key legal points here...

1. When Apple copies you it's a compliment.
2. When you copy Apple it's patent infringement.

This well-established time-honored principle is best expressed by the leading legal mind of the 20th century - Perry Mason: Eorum furtum delenimentum sed tua furta scelus.

 

[This is The End]

Well sure, but you're overlooking 2 key legal points here...

1. When Apple copies you it's a compliment.
2. When you copy Apple it's patent infringement.

This well-established time-honored principle is best expressed by the leading legal mind of the 20th century - Perry Mason: Eorum furtum delenimentum sed tua furta scelus.[/I]

Not to get too off topic and philosophical but that reminds me of a post in Politics:

Here is the world as the "liberal" media sees it:

2% win on popular vote for Obama = such a close victory that we can't be sure as to what Americans really want.

2% win by a Republican President = A mandate by all americans to do whatever the GOP wants.

That's literaly how the Republicans have acted in the past after similar margins of victory. When in reality it should be the same no matter what.


Apple PC fans VS Microsoft PC fans
Apple phone fans VS Samsung phone fans
Republicans VS Democrats
Red Sox fans VS Yankees fans


They all have these same blinders on.


If I don't go out of my way to put everything in the best possible light for Apple then an Apple fan is going to think I am against Apple, instead of just trying to be fair.

 

[chulbert]

I just knew that was going to be one of the only things you could come up with in response to that!!

"And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." is not just something said off-the-cuff at one point.

It is a summary of their very philosophy, a summary of how they operated for any number of years!!

You can't just get away with that one by saying they had a change of heart!!

I assume you believe when a mass murderer has a change of heart we should just let them out of prison??

ETA: Of course I'm not saying that 2 wrongs make a right, or that "what is good for the goose is good for the gander". I am merely pointing out the shear audacity of the hypocrisy.

So your answer is what? Have you or haven't you changed your position on something from 20 years ago?

 

[GraculusTheGreenBird]

So your answer is what? Have you or haven't you changed your position on something from 20 years ago?

It wasn't addressed to me, but I will happily admit to changing my position on many things since 20 years ago.

However, in the context of this discussion surely the question should be whether Apple, the company, have changed their position since 20 years ago?

And those links from earlier show that apparently they haven't. They are still happy to copy and steal from others.

 

[Hungry81]

Apple steal at least as much as any company, and their adds are so full of BS and woo, and have been since the mac vs pc days. (Example: ht tp://w ww.youtube.com/watch?v=V4IRsCjMqdI ) It suprises me that people cant see through it.

 

[This is The End]

Hello Hungry81, welcome to the JREF.

Here's your YT link:




Sadly, "shoveling it", for lack of a better term, is what almost all salesmen do. From a car or furniture salesman, all the way up to the campaigns created by the big corporations.

Though I do agree, that Apple is quite proficient at it.

 

[Dcdrac]

I have apple pcs and non apple pcs, a couple of apple phones and a couple of non apple phones.

They all work well enough for my needs, neither is better than the other in real terms, except the non apple products were cheaper, people pay for a brand regardless of product performance.

 

[Hungry81]

Hello Hungry81, welcome to the JREF.

Here's your YT link:




Sadly, "shoveling it", for lack of a better term, is what almost all salesmen do. From a car or furniture salesman, all the way up to the campaigns created by the big corporations.

Though I do agree, that Apple is quite proficient at it.

Thanks. I agree other companies do it as well, But to me it seems Apple get away with it with a greater frequency than many other companies, and not many people seem willing to call them out on it. The competition apple provides is good. I do however disagree with their philosophy and approach and just wish they would cut some of the crap. But as long as it works I guess they will keep doing it.

 

[This is The End]

Thanks.

You're welcome.

I agree other companies do it as well, But to me it seems Apple get away with it with a greater frequency than many other companies

Perhaps because they are good at it! That would explain the profits and the number of people they fool.

and not many people seem willing to call them out on it.

I try.

The competition apple provides is good.

Agreed.

I do however disagree with their philosophy and approach and just wish they would cut some of the crap.

Yep, it reflects badly on the consumer as well that they get away with it.

But as long as it works I guess they will keep doing it.

As long as it works, and then probably for a few years after it stops working as well.

 

[This is The End]

This might be interesting if Samsung is granted full access to that case file:


Samsung Seeks Copy of Apple’s HTC Settlement Over Patents

Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) asked a court to force Apple Inc. (AAPL) to turn over a copy of its settlement with HTC Corp. (2498), arguing it is “highly relevant” to Apple’s request for an order blocking sales of Samsung smartphones.

It’s “almost certain” that Apple’s settlement with HTC covers some of the patents at issue in its dispute with Samsung, according to a filing today by the Suwon, South Korea-based company in federal court in San Jose, California. The agreement may undermine Apple’s claim that Samsung’s patent infringement can’t be resolved with license payments, according to the filing.

“Apple’s apparent willingness to license these patents supports Samsung’s argument that Apple cannot show irreparable harm because monetary damages are adequate,” Samsung said in the filing.

That (the lack of adequate monetary damages) will strike at the very core of the one victory Apple had in the US.

Apple won a $1.05 billion patent-infringement verdict in August in a jury trial against against Samsung in San Jose. U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh scheduled a December hearing to consider Apple’s request for a permanent U.S. sales ban on eight Samsung smartphone models and the Tab 10.1 tablet computer. She will also consider Samsung’s bid to get the verdict thrown out based on claims of juror misconduct.

Well they got it. They will have access to the cheat sheet.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-5...ng-gets-to-view-apple-htc-settlement-details/

Samsung's lawyers were given the go-ahead to view confidential details of the agreement that made peace between Apple and HTC earlier this month, following an impromptu hearing ordered by Magistrate Judge Singh Grewal this morning.

 

[This is The End]

OK so that is like 2907823 for Samsung. Still 1 point for Apple.

Obviously Samsung isn't going to quit while they are ahead. They seem offended.

Samsung claims iPad Mini, latest iPod violate its patents

The Samsung complaint, which we've embedded below, alleges that Apple's latest products infringe the same patent as previous versions of its devices. Samsung essentially claims that "all Apple products including a built-in speaker and an external audio output port" infringe this particular patent, and thus argues that the newest Apple products should be included in the case.

I wonder if the self appointed experts will clue us in about how "all Apple products including a built-in speaker and an external audio output port" isn't really what the patent is about (we're too dumb to know that patents have more details that we see in an article summary). And about how, when you read the details, it really isn't as silly and obvious as it sounds.

Or maybe they just do that for Apple.


The judge will almost certainly grant this request as they did a week ago when the iPhone 5 was added:

Samsung previously moved to expand the case to include the iPhone 5, which Apple released after the initial suit was filed. The court agreed on Nov. 15.

Two weeks from today there is potential for a big win for either side:

Apple and Samsung are due back in court on Dec. 6 for follow-up action on their earlier trial. Some of the issues at stake in that hearing include Apple's request to ban U.S. sales of at least eight Samsung devices and Samsung's motion to toss out the jury verdict entirely.

 

[WildCat]

In related news my Galaxy S3 was just upgraded to Jelly Bean.

 

[OCaptain]

Well sure, but you're overlooking 2 key legal points here...

1. When Apple copies you it's a compliment.
2. When you copy Apple it's patent infringement.

This well-established time-honored principle is best expressed by the leading legal mind of the 20th century - Perry Mason: Eorum furtum delenimentum sed tua furta scelus.

The difference is that, for the most part, Apple is smart enough not to copy things that have been protected by trademarks or copyrights.

Samsung got into trouble because they were very blatant about copying the iPhone (which was patented out the wazoo), and left a papertrail to implicate themselves.

 

[OCaptain]

Hello Hungry81, welcome to the JREF.

Here's your YT link:




Sadly, "shoveling it", for lack of a better term, is what almost all salesmen do. From a car or furniture salesman, all the way up to the campaigns created by the big corporations.

Though I do agree, that Apple is quite proficient at it.

And intelligent people can see that it's an ad, making a clever juxtaposition.

It's not evil!?!

 

[This is The End]

The difference is that, for the most part, Apple is smart enough not to copy things that have been protected by trademarks or copyrights.

Samsung got into trouble because they were very blatant about copying the iPhone (which was patented out the wazoo), and left a papertrail to implicate themselves.

Did you miss the several links in this thread where Apple lost??

All you saw was the one victory? The one Samsung has a good chance of getting overturned on the 5th?

I'd say they have been about equal in copying things that were protected by the horribly broken patent system.

 

[Furi]

It appears to be the animated "page turn" ?
(as shown in this ad -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhC40QCZML0)

What are some examples of this in prior art ?

Damn, I wrote an animated page turn navigation system on my Amiga when I did a framework for some Fighting fantasy style games I wonder if...

(I was thinking of doing another one for droid as a sort of hello world program when Jackson released his own version the other week (wahh))

I think I night have to go to a parchment scroll effect instead, as a lowly min wage very part time freeware developer, I don't want to get spanked by Big Fruity.

(incidentally that YT link has been removed for multiple copyright infringements )

 

[TheL8Elvis]

In related news my Galaxy S3 was just upgraded to Jelly Bean.

Wow, Jelly bean has only been out since JULY.

 

[Horatius]

Samsung claims iPad Mini, latest iPod violate its patents





I wonder if the self appointed experts will clue us in about how "all Apple products including a built-in speaker and an external audio output port" isn't really what the patent is about (we're too dumb to know that patents have more details that we see in an article summary). And about how, when you read the details, it really isn't as silly and obvious as it sounds.

Well, I'm not "Self-appointed", I'm actually appointed by the Canadian Commissioner of Patents, and I of course wouldn't ever suggest you're too dumb to know that patents have more details that we see in an article summary, but you might consider, once again, actually reading the patent claims.

US Patent number: 7672470

Claims

1. A volume control method for an A/V device having a speaker for reproducing an audio signal, an audio output port for externally outputting the audio signal, and a display unit for reproducing images, the method comprising:

detecting whether an external audio reproduction unit is plugged in the audio output port;

displaying on the display unit a volume control menu window; and

increasing or decreasing a volume level provided in the volume control menu window by using volume control buttons of a remote controller,

wherein the displaying the volume control menu window and the increasing or decreasing the volume level are based on a result of the detecting whether an external audio reproduction unit is plugged in the audio output port; and
wherein the volume level corresponds to the signal level of the audio signal output to the audio output port.

7. An audio/visual (A/V) device which processes an audio signal for an external audio reproduction unit, the A/V device comprising:

a speaker operable to output the audio signal;

an audio output port, which is connectable to an external audio reproduction unit and operable to output the audio signal to the external audio reproduction unit;

an audio signal processing unit operable to process the audio signal and output the processed audio signal to one of the speaker and the audio output port;

a display screen operable to display one of a first On-screen Display (OSD) window, which indicates that the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port, and a second OSD window, which indicates that the external audio reproduction unit is not connected to the audio output port; and
a control unit which is operable to receive an input command and which controls the audio signal processing unit and the display screen,
wherein if the control unit receives the input command and the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port, the control unit controls the display screen to automatically display the first OSD window, and
wherein if the control unit receives the input command and the external audio reproduction unit is not connected to the audio output port, the control unit controls the display screen to automatically display the second OSD window.

12. A method for controlling an audio/visual (A/V) device having an audio output port, speaker and a display screen, wherein the A/V device processes an audio signal for an external audio reproduction unit, the method comprising:

determining whether the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port of the A/V device;

receiving a input command;

if the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port of the A/V device, automatically displaying on the display screen a first OSD window indicating that the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port; and

if the external audio reproduction unit is not connected to the audio output port, automatically displaying on the display screen a second OSD window indicating that the external audio reproduction unit is not connected to the audio output port.

I'll leave it as an exercise for the readers to determine if this is "really isn't as silly and obvious as it sounds".

 

[Christian Klippel]

I'll leave it as an exercise for the readers to determine if this is "really isn't as silly and obvious as it sounds".

Soundcards can detect whether something is plugged in to the output jack for many years now. Not only that, they can also detect if there are speakers/headphones or a line-input of an amplifier is connected. They use that to turn on an internal amplifier that is needed for headphones/speakers.

The mixer on the computer happily detects that. Remote-control add-ons are available since many years as well. In short, just take a look at media-center PC's, for example. Heck, one can even argue that a keyboard is already some kind of remote-control: you can adjust the volume by using keyboard shortcuts, as opposed to fiddle around with the mouse.

So yes, again this is something that is not only bloody obvious, it's also (again) something that has been done for ages.

Greetings,

Chris

 

[Horatius]

So yes, again this is something that is not only bloody obvious, it's also (again) something that has been done for ages.

Greetings,

Chris

Fair enough, but the point is, it's not just "including a built-in speaker and an external audio output port".


As I've said before, if you want to bust a patent, you need to look at what the patent actually says. Something that the anti-patent crowd here consistently fails to do, as has been shown on several occasions.


ETA: Just went off to review the case history of this patent at the USPTO. The reasons for allowance were directed to these elements:

if the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port of the A/V device, automatically displaying on the display screen a first OSD window indicating that the external audio reproduction unit is connected to the audio output port; and

if the external audio reproduction unit is not connected to the audio output port, automatically displaying on the display screen a second OSD window indicating that the external audio reproduction unit is not connected to the audio output port.

In fact, the examiner did apply prior art substantially similar to what Chris discussed above, but these features were missing.