Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital)
All Things Digital reports
that Apple has filed suit against Samsung, alleging patent and trademark
violations. "'It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products
look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the
user interface and even the packaging,' an Apple representative told
Mobilized. 'This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect
Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.'"
(Log in to post comments)
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 18, 2011 21:24 UTC (Mon) by leoc (subscriber, #39773) [Link] Can Samsung play this in court?
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 18, 2011 22:35 UTC (Mon) by Tara_Li (subscriber, #26706) [Link]
I'd think so. And honestly, it's not like there's *THAT* much unique in the design of the iPad. It's rectangular (wow, like that's a surprise) with rounded corners (and who *hasn't* poked themselves with sharp corners), black (as is about 95% of consumer electronics these days), and it has similar icons on buttons on the edge (like the O with a bar through it for power that's been standardized for 20 years now since IBM started using it? Or the little house shape that's been standard for HOME for a dozen years now on browsers?)
It's a *TABLET*. There's really not much you can do in that form factor.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 1:02 UTC (Tue) by leoc (subscriber, #39773) [Link] Check out this Sharp Zaurus CL-S3100 from around 2005. When the keyboard is folded up, the black and silver bezel as well as the icon layout are extremely similar to what Apple shipped as the "iPhone" years later.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 2:11 UTC (Tue) by Hausvib6 (guest, #70606) [Link]
I think Apple wants to get into settlements, some to be expected:
* lower price for parts produced by Samsung * not producing Android devices * not producing parts for Android devices (unlikely, since it'll be difficult to enforce) * not producing Meego devices * not producing Windows Phone 7 devices * just don't compete with Apple
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 11:44 UTC (Tue) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Yes, Apple would probably prefer to have Samsung as their parts supplier, not a competitor, and given the role of Samsung technology in various Apple products, this could well be some kind of "negotiating" tactic to pull Samsung back into line. Maybe Apple isn't able to get its hands on enough components, or maybe Samsung has told Apple to join the queue like everyone else, or to pay the going rate for components. Maybe Apple believes it can switch suppliers and deliver future products using another semiconductor supplier and is now just trying to spoil things for Samsung. Maybe Apple knows that by the time the iPad 3 is out, Samsung and others will have delivered two or three product iterations.
Either way, it's just another example of how patents act against competition and reward monopoly-seeking aggressors.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 22, 2011 17:37 UTC (Fri) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]
Do we really need examples to point out that: a monopoly-device rewards "monopoly-seeking aggressors"?
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 28, 2011 11:59 UTC (Thu) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Yes, because people regard patents not as monopoly devices but as "rewards for hard thinking". So recently, my attention was drawn towards an article in a British newspaper about how if only Plessey had patented semiconductors "things would be different", suggesting that they would be better for Britain and that a bunch of people would have had their just rewards instead of some American people making all the money.
But there's never any real mention of the downsides: that people end up paying someone else for work they've already done themselves, and that someone is now gatekeeper to something that clearly many people can figure out themselves. The narrative almost always takes a simplistic form similar to describing some mountain climbing or exploration achievement - the Americans got there first (they filed for a patent) but there's always another mountain to summit (we'll make our money somewhere else) - rather than acknowledging the injustices obvious to anyone familiar with the system.
Don't underestimate how people need to be continuously educated and reminded about such matters.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 18, 2011 22:49 UTC (Mon) by pranith (subscriber, #53092) [Link]
If plain looks are the point of the suit, then all laptop makers should prepare for something similar. I can't really tell one laptop from the other without looking at their logos.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 1:35 UTC (Tue) by gdt (subscriber, #6284) [Link] The iPad looks a lot like the tablet used by the character Nyota Uhura in Star Trek. So I very much doubt Apple's claims about the novelty of their invention or the distinctiveness of their trade dress, considering that the invention was being used as a prop on a TV show before most of Apple's staff were born.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 6:30 UTC (Tue) by ikm (subscriber, #493) [Link]
> when companies steal our ideas.
I've always thought that ideas were never patentable by themselves.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 20, 2011 0:01 UTC (Wed) by dps (subscriber, #5725) [Link]
I hate to disappoint but in most countries ideas *are* what patents protect (but the ideas allegedly must be novel, non-obvious to an expert in the field, etc). I can't see the form factor of any i* device meeting the novelty or non-obviousness tests but proving that involves paying $$$$$ to lawyers.
You can't protect ideas with copyright or design rights.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 20, 2011 18:55 UTC (Wed) by jreiser (subscriber, #11027) [Link] A patent protects the application of one or more ideas to a specific device, process, or method; and requires reduction to practice. An idea by itself is not patentable (in theory.)
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 20, 2011 20:19 UTC (Wed) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link]
Not all ideas are considered patentable, but everything which is patentable is, in fact, an idea--nothing more. The recognition that a general concept can be applied to a specific device, process, or method is itself an idea. The way in which this recognition can be reduced to practice is, again, an idea. Only the *actual* reduction to practice--the act of creating a device, or the device itself, or the act of implementing a process or method--is more than just an idea, but if patents were limited to covering a specific reduction of the general concept to practice, and not the idea of *how* a general concept can be reduced to practice, infringement would be impossible.
Instead, patents are deemed infringed by *any* instance in which an idea is reduced to actual practice in a certain way, which means that patents monopolize control not over actual reduction of an idea to practice, but rather the *idea* of *how* a general concept can be reduced to practice, as this is the only element original patent and any instances of infringement have in common.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 21, 2011 6:49 UTC (Thu) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]
This thinking is EXACTLY the problem with the patent office. It's also quite a pervasive attitude in the US. The Patent office is supposed to be about patenting novel inventions. This means specific implementations of revolutionary ideas. The problem is that the patent office is handing out patents on general ideas. In fact software and business method patents are nothing more than patents on ideas with no specificity on how it's applied. A true software patent would be a patent on a specific implementation including code, not the idea behind it. Avoiding the patent would be as simple as finding an alternate way to code it.
For example, a patent on windshield wipers that adjust to amount of rain automatically would be valid on a specific implementation of that idea (including the details on the exact device and how it's built) where manufacturers were free to find other implementations of the same idea using a different process or arrangement of the same parts.
The problem we face with the patent office right now is that they are handing out patents on ideas with absolutely no specificity to implementation. Were they still requiring specificity I would argue there would be few if any software patents and those that did exist would be truly novel. Patents like almost everyone of Apples GUI patents should be struck down as they are patents on general concepts. I've yet to see a patent exerted against Android which included any specific implementation details. They are all patents on general concepts. As valid as business method patents (which IMO should be automatically illegal).
The hope is that one of the patent cases in line for the Supreme court will find end with the Supreme Court exerting that the patent must be on a specific implementation. Were that to happen nearly every software patent would be invalidated.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 6:52 UTC (Tue) by petegn (guest, #847) [Link]
Is it not time something a little more agressive was done to cool Apple's apparent claim to be the only people in the world that are allowed to make hand held devices , I am in favor of very large fines to shut them up maybe even get their legal team in a lot of hot water a few times .
After all they have got to be almost the biggest bunch of thieves going
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 7:01 UTC (Tue) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018) [Link]
Maybe this can explain why Apple can now file suit against its application processor supplier:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/04/18/mass_produc...
Maybe just a little too soon though. What if Samsung decided to reduce the A4 prod to help increase the market share of its own (Android-based) models like the Nexus S (the one with the Iphone-like interface BTW)?
Weird times in a weird world.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 20, 2011 2:13 UTC (Wed) by Hausvib6 (guest, #70606) [Link]
Now Apple need to find a new supplier for the Retina display if Apple want to make Samsung a rival.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 9:06 UTC (Tue) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048) [Link] I have posted a quick analysis and a list of the intellectual property rights Apple asserts. This is the 41st Android-related patent infringement suit by my count.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 12:06 UTC (Tue) by tuxmania (guest, #70024) [Link]
Yes, and oddly enough, filed by the same entities that had their bottom handed to them by Android. My take on this is that both Microsoft and Apple are scared white by Google and Android and acknowledge they cant compete at all on their products merits. The quality of the patents in question seriously underlines the desperation of the two companies.
This has nothing at all to do with defending their patents and all to do with throwing as many sticks and obstacles as possible in Googles path.
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 19:35 UTC (Tue) by oak (subscriber, #2786) [Link]
You mean they're afraid Google destroys their high-value market by helping other companies to saturate the market with lower priced / lower margin alternatives?
Google just wants more people to be able to use net and Google services (and use Android store), their profit doesn't come from the HW sales / OS licensing like is the case with Apple / MicroSoft...
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 21, 2011 9:14 UTC (Thu) by forlwn (guest, #63934) [Link]
"I have posted a quick analysis and a list of the intellectual property rights Apple asserts."
Stick that list at your home's urinal, making it a place you'll feel happy to spend the most time in there.
Any moderators around? Posted Apr 21, 2011 12:10 UTC (Thu) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048) [Link]
The parent comment to this one doesn't do anything to affect my reputation, nor do I feel offended compared to many other things I hear all the time, but the question is what standard of discussion LWN seeks to maintain.
Any sold around? Posted Apr 23, 2011 5:15 UTC (Sat) by forlwn (guest, #63934) [Link]
You should have seen long ago that you're persona non grata here, without the need to receive said comment. You're very well aware about the distaste and disgust you cause to everyone here and you still shamelessly insist to show. This is your fault, not moderators fault.
Any sold around? Posted Apr 23, 2011 5:33 UTC (Sat) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048) [Link]
Even if one assumed for the sake of the argument that what you just said is (though it is actually not) true, it wouldn't justify the use of language that reflects negatively on the site as a whole.
Any sold around? Posted Apr 23, 2011 8:58 UTC (Sat) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link]
> You're very well aware about the distaste and disgust you cause to everyone here
"everyone" ??? You've performed a census have you? Pleases don't assume that those who remain silent agree with you.
Personally - I find this sort of comment by far the most distasteful that I read on lwn.net.
Any sold around? Posted Apr 23, 2011 15:13 UTC (Sat) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
While I disagree with a lot of what Florian says, it's a great deal more insightful than most of the criticism he receives.
Any sold around? Posted Apr 23, 2011 16:31 UTC (Sat) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] Please, this kind of comment doesn't help anybody. If you (for a large value of "you" beyond the poster I am responding to) don't like Florian's stuff, please feel free to ignore him or to use the filtering mechanism we put in place. Failing that, if you don't like his facts or his conclusions, by all means argue rationally against them. But can we avoid the ad hominem attacks, please?
Any sold around? Posted Apr 23, 2011 22:26 UTC (Sat) by forlwn (guest, #63934) [Link]
I would participate at a respectful and open discussion with someone like Gates or S.Jobs. I know their "colors" and what the conversation would be about. A chameleon dissimulated among peers he chooses to join in the virtual world, only to cowardly celebrate among them any draw back they could happen to have, is a blessing to the great LWn forum rules. Pardon to all, as I failed to respect them.
Really? Posted Apr 21, 2011 11:28 UTC (Thu) by blujay (guest, #39961) [Link]
"It looks like Steve Jobs would even be prepared to sue a member of his family should any of his kins decide to build Android-based devices."
I am completely against Apple regarding this--they're acting purely out of greed and evil--but I can't take you or your blog seriously when you say things like that. You seem to be positioning your blog as some form of journalistic analysis, but such silly, made-up ad hominem attacks are the antithesis of journalism.
Really? Posted Apr 21, 2011 12:08 UTC (Thu) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048) [Link]
Whatever it is, I'm not dogmatic about it. CNN.com turned that quote nto a "Steve Jobs would sue his sister" headline, and they're not dogmatic about it either, it seems.
Really? Posted Apr 21, 2011 14:01 UTC (Thu) by blujay (guest, #39961) [Link]
I hope you aren't aspiring to CNN's standards of journalistic integrity. :)
Apple files patent suit against Samsung (All Things Digital) Posted Apr 19, 2011 16:59 UTC (Tue) by b7j0c (subscriber, #27559) [Link]
i'd like to sue samsung for being the worst phone provider in human history
i don't care if it came out of the rumor mill or not, it really does seem like they're trying to get me to buy a new phone instead of getting an OS upgrade out to me
How exactly does it make them "worst phone provider"? Posted Apr 20, 2011 8:31 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] This was normal modus of operandi for most (all?) phone suppliers for years. I think that most android phones don't ever receive an update (especially Chinese models). So... why exactly do you see standard phone provider behavior as a sign of "worst phone provider in human history"?
How exactly does it make them "worst phone provider"? Posted Apr 20, 2011 18:13 UTC (Wed) by b7j0c (subscriber, #27559) [Link]
because it isn't "standard behavior" in smartphones anymore, nice try with the strawman though
now whats the number? something like *90+%* of iphone users are on the latest version of iOS?
i'm a lifelong apple hater, but even i have to admit, they are destroying the android vendors with update consistency
Wow! Posted Apr 20, 2011 20:22 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] because it isn't "standard behavior" in smartphones anymore Since when? Most phone vendors are still doing this. Heck, most PC vendors are doing this too. Even when they promise to update you PC for free (when new version of Windows is few months out) it's not always easy cash on this promise - and in most cases there are no such promises at all. nice try with the strawman though Talk about denial... now whats the number? something like *90+%* of iphone users are on the latest version of iOS? So what? This is typical modus of operandi for Apple: they tend to push their users to use "latest and greatest" OS on desktops too. This is not how other PC and phone manufacturers operate. In case of PC they just refuse to support you if you'll change pre-installed OS, in case of the phone they do the same - there are just no standard way to upgrade an OS without support from manufacturer. It's both easier for Apple and more needed: since they only present one new model per year they need to keep their offer interesting the rest of the time too - so they need these updates. And since they offer just one model per year it's easier for them to support upgrades, too. But habits of one single firm does not change the "standard behavior", sorry. If you want regular and stable updates - feel free to buy iPhone. But remember: i'm a lifelong apple hater, but even i have to admit, they are destroying the android vendors with update consistency And now we have the opposite strawman. Sorry, but Samsung is still #1 in US - and growing. In other countries Android does fine, too. I know, sometimes it feels unfair that people who don't like to offer you things you expect are doing just fine... but life is unfair. It's not a reason to throw unjustified accusations around.
Wow! Posted Apr 20, 2011 21:15 UTC (Wed) by b7j0c (subscriber, #27559) [Link]
???
> Most phone vendors are still doing this
apple isn't. and that is what android is competing with.
but when i describe how apple actually gets new code out to its devices in a timely fashion....your response?
> Sorry, but Samsung is still #1 in US - and growing
huh? when did i start talking about marketshare?
oh wait, i missed the part earlier where you concede my point:
> If you want regular and stable updates - feel free to buy iPhone
this is exactly what most android owners will do with their next purchase, particularly now that verizon users have a choice
who DOESN'T want regular and stable updates??????
i've been rooting for android since day one, but its clear that google and the OEMs have seriously botched it. i know i'm right and you're wrong because google's new policy of bitchslapping the OEMs is EXACTLY in response to the issues i am addressing
Delusion, delusions... Posted Apr 21, 2011 7:06 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] > Most phone vendors are still doing this So what? The worst way to compete is to emulate all steps of your opponent: you will always behind. You pick good moves and ignore bad ones. And you named Samsung "the worst phone provider in human history"... but now it looks like the only one who's doing any better is Apple. This is kind of inconsistency: either it means there are only two providers (but then one of them will always be "worst" so I don't see a material for lawsuit) or you meant something else totally. > Sorry, but Samsung is still #1 in US - and growing When you said because it isn't "standard behavior" in smartphones anymore. Standard behavior is what majority does. For example standard behavior on desktop is what Windows does. Standard behavior in mobile phones is what Samsung, LG and Motorola are doing. And so on. This is not "behavior you like", sorry. > If you want regular and stable updates - feel free to buy iPhone Yup. And then in some alternate universe where this will actually happen standard behavior will be different. In our universe the standard behavior will be the same and it'll be determined by Samsung, LG and Motorola in the near future. i've been rooting for android since day one, but its clear that google and the OEMs have seriously botched it. Oh, sure, there are no question. The question is different: have they botched it enough to drive people away? So far the evidence does not support such accusations. Sales of iPhone V are lackluster and while it have reached the status of the most desirable Verison single phone model it can not even outsell Android now when there are supposedly huge pent-up iPhone demand. i know i'm right and you're wrong because google's new policy of bitchslapping the OEMs is EXACTLY in response to the issues i am addressing Huh? Are you sure? I know Google tries to reduce changes OEMs are introducing in their models but nowhere I've seen a requirement to update older models with new versions of firmware. Heck, Google itself stopped providing updates for ADP1 long time ago.
|
|||||||||||||
