Google Comments on the $1 Billion Apple, Samsung Verdict

[JMcEntegart]

Google finally comments on the ruling that will see Apple awarded over a billion dollars in damages.

Google Comments on the $1 Billion Apple, Samsung Verdict : Read more

 

[EDVINASM]

Apple battles with Samsung are laughable. I said it before and will say it again - if we had same patent wars in auto industry we would be still driving good old Ford. Thanks to innovation through competition we have weak players out and strong ones showing up how it's done. If Apple for once tried to be innovative without being a bully we would see some pretty shocking increase in innovations curve.
I know Samsung is a bit of a copycat firm but boy do they bring nice and reliable devices. For that I respect them. Long live Samsung.

 

[evan1715]

...f@#! Apple.

 

[bakagami]

[citation][nom]EDVINASM[/nom]Apple battles with Samsung are laughable. I said it before and will say it again - if we had same patent wars in auto industry we would be still driving good old Ford. Thanks to innovation through competition we have weak players out and strong ones showing up how it's done. If Apple for once tried to be innovative without being a bully we would see some pretty shocking increase in innovations curve.I know Samsung is a bit of a copycat firm but boy do they bring nice and reliable devices. For that I respect them. Long live Samsung.[/citation]
I have to wonder what Samsung would have had to do to avoid Apple litigation, make a round phone with round icons maybe?

 

[Johmama]

You know, this case has made me hate Apple even more.

I already thoroughly dislike Apple because of their dumbed-down devices and ridiculously over-priced and restrictive computers (not to mention their business model). I'll admit, I currently own an iPhone, mainly because it was free. I'm going to get a new phone soon, and the new iPhone is supposedly coming out so I was thinking about getting it, since I'd be paying about the same for anything else and the phone itself does it's job. Well now, I'm going to get an Android phone (probably Samsung, just because). This case disgusts me. This free phone that I have is the onlyApple device I've ever owned, and because of this case, I won't be actually buying an Apple device, ever.

I already hated you before Apple, now you've made me completely despise everything about you.

 

[Kami3k]

Hahaha, I love the stabs both Google and Samsung did towards Apple.

Apple must die for humanity to actual progress in the tech world it seems.

 

[Nossy]

Apple piggy back on everything. mp3s, smartphones, OS, tablets. Anyway, Samsung is not all that great anyway. Honestly I can't believe people pay hundreds of dollar a month just to be able to text, tweet, and facebook when they can barely make rent and live paycheck to paycheck.

 

[tmshdw2]

Some of guys should remove your heads out of the sand and look at the evidence that was used.

The evidence included Goggle communicating with Samsung some time ago asking Samsung to stop copying Apple.

The samsung iii (or whatever) is a near exact oversized copy of the iPhone 3GS.

Dunno what you guys are defending on Samsung's side. Stop being droid heads. This was a correct rulling.

 

[chomlee]

One simple solution to all of this is to be realistic when it comes to software patents. In the IT industry, things are outdated within a year. Therefore, it would make sense that you treat software patents similar to drug patents and only allow them for 5 years. There also needs to be a way of invalidating patents if it can be proven that not enough research was done when the patent was granted. Sorry, but there is not innovation in bounce back and pinch to zoom (that was done in many movies in the 90s way before Apple said came up with it). These things are so arbitrary, they should never be granted.

I used to prepare some patents in the 90s and the things we had to go through to prove it was innovative was rediculus. Now, you just submit it enough times and eventually it will be approved.

 

[halcyon]

This case disgusts me to...its just asinine. There's room for both iOS and Android based phones. I wish the courts had let either of them win, I don't care which, but only awarded them like $10.

 

[tmshdw2]

[citation][nom]tmshdw2[/nom]Some of guys should remove your heads out of the sand and look at the evidence that was used.The evidence included Goggle communicating with Samsung some time ago asking Samsung to stop copying Apple.The samsung iii (or whatever) is a near exact oversized copy of the iPhone 3GS. Dunno what you guys are defending on Samsung's side. Stop being droid heads. This was a correct rulling.[/citation]
Since the thumbs down heads can't stand to read something other than their bigoted limited view thought I would give my addition more life.

 

[tmshdw2]

This case disgusts me to...its just asinine. There's room for both iOS and Android based phones. I wish the courts had let either of them win, I don't care which, but only awarded them like $10.

Yes there is plenty of room. As long as phones aren't like the samsung iii (or whatever) that is an oversized clone of the iPhone 3gs. That what disgusts me. I am no apple zealot but a copy is a copy that droid heads need to see through their one sided/dimensional view.

 

[theabsinthehare]

I'd like to cover my bases first: I'm no Apple fanboy. I dual boot Xubuntu and Win7 and my mobile devices are Android based. I don't hate Apple though. I appreciate them for their innovations.

With that said, here's the thing: Many people claim to hate Apple and all their products. They despise Apple. But then, every time Apple releases something new and successful EVERY OTHER company starts churning out that product with slight changes.

How many successful hard drive based MP3 players existed before the iPod? None. (One terrible one existed, the Archos Jukebox. The interface made it a horror to use)
How many successful multi-touch, keyless smartphones existed before the iPhone? None.
Successful tablet computers before the iPad? None (Because people kept trying to put desktop OS on them)
"App Store" type business models before the App Store? One. Steam. But Steam functions somewhat differently in that it is mostly operating system independent. The new "App Stores" are all for their specific operating system.

Now, of course, Apple didn't straight out invent these things. They saw things that had potential and added the software and some hardware engineering to get rid of the problems that were keeping them from being successful.

But, everyone wants to hate Apple. You 'hate' them, and then you buy hardware that heavily borrowed from their innovations. I have no problems with competition borrowing, but it's this ridiculous mindset of badmouthing Apple product and design and then lusting after something that is almost exactly the same "But it's not Apple!"

What kind of complex do you think you'd have if everyone always shat all over you, despite your innovations, then bought up the next generation of products that were heavily based on those innovations? I'm sure you'd be pissed and you'd go after those companies with a vengeance, public appearance be damned.

 

[halcyon]

Yes there is plenty of room. As long as phones aren't like the samsung iii (or whatever) that is an oversized clone of the iPhone 3gs. That what disgusts me. I am no apple zealot but a copy is a copy that droid heads need to see through their one sided/dimensional view.

Well, a lot of cars look and function alike too...should all the car manufacturers start patenting a steering wheel with a flattened bottom or active Xenon HID headlights?

It just seems lame to me...but in my old age I've lost my sense of humor and patience it seems.

 

[theabsinthehare]

[citation][nom]tmshdw2[/nom]Yes there is plenty of room. As long as phones aren't like the samsung iii (or whatever) that is an oversized clone of the iPhone 3gs. That what disgusts me. I am no apple zealot but a copy is a copy that droid heads need to see through their one sided/dimensional view.[/citation]

This isn't about Android based phones. It's about a company making as close as possible to a copy of a Apple's phone, because it was successful, in order to make their own phone successful.

While some of the tactics were silly, like referencing small software features like "Bounce Back," that's how you win in court. You grasp at any foothold you can and make mountains out of molehills to convince the court.

Is Apple going to go chase after everyone that uses "Bounce Back?" Probably not. But they uses tactics like that here because they were definitely going after a company that was making hardware EXTREMELY similar to theirs.

 

[halcyon]

I'd like to cover my bases first: I'm no Apple fanboy. I dual boot Xubuntu and Win7 and my mobile devices are Android based. I don't hate Apple though. I appreciate them for their innovations.

With that said, here's the thing: Many people claim to hate Apple and all their products. They despise Apple. But then, every time Apple releases something new and successful EVERY OTHER company starts churning out that product with slight changes.

How many successful hard drive based MP3 players existed before the iPod? None. (One terrible one existed, the Archos Jukebox. The interface made it a horror to use)
How many successful multi-touch, keyless smartphones existed before the iPhone? None.
Successful tablet computers before the iPad? None (Because people kept trying to put desktop OS on them)
"App Store" type business models before the App Store? One. Steam. But Steam functions somewhat differently in that it is mostly operating system independent. The new "App Stores" are all for their specific operating system.

Now, of course, Apple didn't straight out invent these things. They saw things that had potential and added the software and some hardware engineering to get rid of the problems that were keeping them from being successful.

But, everyone wants to hate Apple. You 'hate' them, and then you buy hardware that heavily borrowed from their innovations. I have no problems with competition borrowing, but it's this ridiculous mindset of badmouthing Apple product and design and then lusting after something that is almost exactly the same "But it's not Apple!"

What kind of complex do you think you'd have if everyone always shat all over you, despite your innovations, then bought up the next generation of products that were heavily based on those innovations? I'm sure you'd be pissed and you'd go after those companies with a vengeance, public appearance be damned.

Everyone doesn't want to hate or outright hate Apple. ...just a lot of the opinionated teens that follow this site. Most adults don't have time for such nonsense.

 

[Kamab]

[citation][nom]tmshdw2[/nom]Since the thumbs down heads can't stand to read something other than their bigoted limited view thought I would give my addition more life.[/citation]

Just putting aside the fact for a minute that Apple has become dominant through copying other designs AND that patent law is pointless in an industry where devices become outdated after 18 months (

 

[Kamab]

[citation][nom]tmshdw2[/nom]Since the thumbs down heads can't stand to read something other than their bigoted limited view thought I would give my addition more life.[/citation]

(post clipped)

Just putting aside the fact for a minute that Apple has become dominant through copying other designs AND that patent law is pointless in an industry where devices become outdated after 18 months ( less than or equal to a design cycle for a smartphone type product), you really should be hoping apple doesn't win in appeals. The more Apple can sue competitors out of the market:

The more they can charge,
the less they need to innovate (We are already starting to see this with the iPhone 4S. Software "features")
The less options you will innevitebly have.

The galaxy iii looks like an iPhone because there really aren't alot of variations for a device that is 95% LCD/touchscreen. You can change up the bezel, the width of the phone (thinner is better obviously), the number of buttons, and the placement of buttons. None of which really determine the functionality of the phone. If you are trying to tell me that android is like iOSX, I'd be happy to have a discussion with you as to why software patents are detrimental to EVERYONE except for lawyers.

 

[jdwii]

[citation][nom]tmshdw2[/nom]Yes there is plenty of room. As long as phones aren't like the samsung iii (or whatever) that is an oversized clone of the iPhone 3gs. That what disgusts me. I am no apple zealot but a copy is a copy that droid heads need to see through their one sided/dimensional view.[/citation]

How, how in the hell is this anything at all like the Iphone do you say this because of the touch screen? Not to mention the Iphone 3GS is like 1/5 as powerful as the Samsung III.

 

[Guest]

Never buy any product similar to Apple stuff *period*

 

[jdwii]

[citation][nom]Kamab[/nom]Just putting aside the fact for a minute that Apple has become dominant through copying other designs AND that patent law is pointless in an industry where devices become outdated after 18 months ([/citation]

Since the creation of Apple all they tried to do is patent and bring company's to court. Now their just to big and their trying to get Samsung knock down on the smart phone/tablet market so they can get bigger since Samsung is Google's big partner. Like someone else said all patents are doing is delaying future technology or limiting competition and its sad to see that in the united states but its even more sad to see some people agree with it out of court hell i wonder if any of these lawyers can sleep at night now a days.

 

[jerm1027]

I think just the sheer fact that the judge/jury not only didn't outright laugh at Apple, but actually ruled in their favor indicates a much larger problem: our system is broken. Out patent office needs a reform as well as our legal system.

 

[p05esto]

Lame. You shouldn't be able to patent a rectangle phone design or rounded corners, or animations of any kind or half the crap that Apple has patented. Anything this obvious or natural should not be patented. True innovation is not coming up with a rentangle phone and icons that slide or bounce, give me a freaking break. I hope NO Tom's readers buy any Apple products, that's for sure.

 

[ixproval]

Let's look at something here. Apple is notorious for doing the exact same thing as Samsung. Let me explain. Apple as a company is a watcher. They watch trends and listen to outside-the-box thinking and innovation from other companies. Then when the other companies are in the 1st or 2nd generation of the idea - the refinement stage - Apple releases a product honed to near-perfection and tramples the rest of the market. Now arguably, Apple has not experienced the same scale of patent lawsuits that they filed against other corporations. Especially nothing where they lost in a huge way ala Samsung. This is where the patent law argument comes in. Apple basically has done the same thing time and time again that Samsung lost for doing against them. But the problem is, there aren't any patents to stop them. Why? I have no idea. Maybe the companies lacked the vision to see the project through. Maybe they just didn't see competition as an issue and didn't want to waste shareholder dollars. Either way, the weight of this balance is not so much in innovation as it is in patent law. Therein lies my sentiment. I think that if all that is between two companies making a product is the judicial interpretation of law and trial by jury, that's disgusting. In the U.S., there has been so much pot-stirring in regard to monopolies that you'd think these sorts of problems would be cut off at the pass. But Apple is on track to be a major computing device patent holder of monopoly proportions. When Microsoft has to license design patents to Apple to make a competitive tablet device, something is terribly wrong. There needs to be standards for universally-accepted common designs and guidelines on what is truly innovation. I would NOT want the government to do this but rather a consensus of tech companies. It's a tall order, but I think if all parties involved cared about their primary channel of income (customers) it could happen.

 

[tmshdw]

Well, a lot of cars look and function alike too...should all the car manufacturers start patenting a steering wheel with a flattened bottom or active Xenon HID headlights?

It just seems lame to me...but in my old age I've lost my sense of humor and patience it seems.

I think if a car maker puts out a car that looks EXACTLY like another car makers car there would be an issue. Yes all cars have 4 wheels and a steering wheel and a radio, etc. Car makers take pride in the sheetmetal of their cars and make them look distinct even with the common components (again 4 wheels steering wheel, etc). Hundyia is trying to mae their car look like mercedes but not an exact clone. Maybe its the korean mentality.