Apple awarded $1.05b settlement with Samsung

Started Aug 25, 2012 | Discussions thread
57even Forum Pro • Posts: 12,021
Re: Apples legal action was thrown out of court in the UK

The "intellectual property" under discussion would not have been applicable to file for patent in most jurisdictions. That's my point.

It would be like Renior "patenting" impressionism.

You are totally missing the point.

jfelbab wrote:

In the U.S. a patent gives the holder an "Exclusive" right, protected by the Laws of the United States, to produce and profit from conceptual ideas (intellectual property). Patent law is different from country to country.

Apple licenses dozens of patented ideas from other patent holders for use in their products. Why? Because others own them. Samsung could have done this, dealing with products and systems that Apple patented, and they chose not to.

I believe as a result of this case more companies will be paying Apple for licenses to use Apple patents. Samsung, it seems, will review which is more profitable, licensing or theft.

It can take take several years and enormous amounts of money to bring creative ideas to market, and if others are allowed to copy it, then those companies who innovated will stop doing so, harming consumers in the long run. In the case of the iPhone, these ideas began back in 2004-2005 and were introduced in 2007. Take a look back at what masqueraded for smartphones in the 2004-2007 era.

Samsung clearly used the iPhone as the template for the remake of their smart phone. They borrowed (otherwise known as theft) Apple’s ideas. This has been clearly documented in the evidence as presented to the jurors.

If you think it is good for the consumer and good for Samsung to steal, I’d suggest you are wrong. Corporations invest a great deal of money in R&D to develop and bring to market innovative products. If you were a stockholder you would want a return on that investment. When someone steals your ideas without licensing it you lose and we all as consumers lose.

Copying someones patents is infringement. In this case it was deemed “willful” by the jury as Google had documented a warning to Samsung that it was infringing on Apples patents and advised them to change their designs. For whatever reason, Samsung chose to ignore that warning. They chose to NOT innovate but instead to knowingly copy Apple’s intellectual property.

It's simply boggles the mind that some here think Samsung did no wrong. The jury obviously disagrees. This jury, BTW consisted of several technical people and engineers.

I won’t argue the mess that are our US patent laws but they are our patent laws non-the-less and choosing to ignore them comes with a price.

For those who are thinking the US Supreme court (SCOTUS) will be next I’d remind you that they haven’t addressed this type of patent case since 1871 and I don’t think they will intervene in this case either. Even if such a case could be ultimately brought to the SCOTUS, the devices in question would no longer be in use. I am confident the SCOTUS will defer to the US Federal appellate court in this instance.

This is an old but quite revealing video.

2007 introduction of the iPhone by Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uW-E496FXg

-- hide signature --

Jim
'There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.'
-- Ansel Adams

 57even's gear list:57even's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
tko
T3
T3
T3
ck3
tko
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow