Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

Apple vs Samsung trial


  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#41 OFFLINE   RasputinAXP

RasputinAXP

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,135 posts
Joined: Jan 23, 2008

Posted 25 August 2012 - 08:00 PM

Though I think Disney had a large part in the extentions, particularly the Sonny Bono 1998 act.

But thinking about it more, when he does expire, it would probably be the Steamboat Willie version, not the more recognizable modern look.


Exactly my point. Disney fought and won copyright extension expressly so Mickey Mouse wouldn't pass into public domain. It's insane.

"Belligerent and numerous."

Sometimes I update the Dish Network FAQ

AT200, Hopper & 360 via HDMI to Onkyo 505 to basement 42" Westy, Hopper via Comp-over-Cat5 to living room 42" Vizio with a Roku 3, Joey to Toshiba 32" LCD with a Logitech Revue. You want fries with that? Pull up to the 2nd window.


...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#42 OFFLINE   dsw2112

dsw2112

    Always Searching

  • Registered
  • 1,936 posts
Joined: Jun 12, 2009

Posted 25 August 2012 - 09:50 PM

Interview with a different juror.


http://www.reuters.c...E87O09U20120825


Yep, that was the jury foreman. Some of his quotes from the article:

We didn't want to give carte blanche to a company, by any name, to infringe someone else's intellectual property," Hogan told Reuters a day after the verdict.


We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable.


All of us feel we were fair, that we can stand by our verdict and that we have a clear conscience in that we were totally not biased one way or another," Hogan said.


Since when did jurors find that it was their job to send a message? We had a name for folks like this in the Navy; sea lawyers :lol:
SL3-Slimline to SWM16 - DECA
HR34-700, HR24-500, & HR22-100

#43 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 26 August 2012 - 07:04 AM

hopefully the appelas are in the works already

The appeal will go through the 9th Circuit, which overturns less than 10% of jury verdicts. From there, the numbers get worse.

#44 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 26 August 2012 - 07:07 AM

Since when did jurors find that it was their job to send a message? We had a name for folks like this in the Navy; sea lawyers :lol:

Statements made by jurors after the fact can be used to prove misconduct at appeal.

Inflicting pain, just not unreasonable pain? Sounds strange to this non-lawyer.

#45 OFFLINE   Herdfan

Herdfan

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 5,986 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2006

Posted 26 August 2012 - 07:15 AM

Posted Image


Nah, Samsung didn't copy anything. :rolleyes:


Yeah, I get that. But why is this a Samsung problem and not a Google/Android problem? To me this would be like suing Dell because Windows looks too much like OSX.

My Setup

 

Why can I get to the "Adult's Only" area faster than I can get to the "ToDo" List?  DirecTV, that is messed up!!!


#46 ONLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • DBSTalk Club
  • 12,995 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 26 August 2012 - 07:22 AM

Yeah, I get that. But why is this a Samsung problem and not a Google/Android problem? To me this would be like suing Dell because Windows looks too much like OSX.


Not a good comparison. Dell sells systems that use the UI designed by Microsoft. Samsung Android phones use TouchWiz which was designed by Samsung. Thy don't use the Google Android UI.

#47 OFFLINE   wingrider01

wingrider01

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,764 posts
Joined: Sep 09, 2005

Posted 27 August 2012 - 04:49 AM

The appeal will go through the 9th Circuit, which overturns less than 10% of jury verdicts. From there, the numbers get worse.


this one just might make the 10 percent - given the biased juror interviews that are appearing.

#48 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 27 August 2012 - 07:32 AM

Yeah, I get that. But why is this a Samsung problem and not a Google/Android problem? To me this would be like suing Dell because Windows looks too much like OSX.


Because, aside from the bounce back patent, the claims against Samsung were all Samsung. Google has nothing to do with the design of Samsung devices and has nothing to do with their TouchWiz UI. These were the primary targets in the suit.
Google "demanded" that Samsung make their devices less iPhone like and Samsung did their own thing.

This had very, very little to do with Google or Android.

#49 OFFLINE   dualsub2006

dualsub2006

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 845 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2007

Posted 27 August 2012 - 07:36 AM

this one just might make the 10 percent - given the biased juror interviews that are appearing.


That's possible, but Samsung can't challenge the finding of facts by the jury unless it is a matter of law. I don't understand that entirely, but from what I gather that's going to be a tall mountain to climb over.

A couple of biased comments from jurors might be good enough to get it done, but I don't see it happening.

Samsung had a choice when they decided that they wanted to be the top Android OEM. They made their choice, and it's probably going to cost them a billion US.

#50 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Fortuna! Fameux des Halles

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 12,345 posts
  • LocationWinters, California
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 27 August 2012 - 08:26 AM

Not a good comparison. Dell sells systems that use the UI designed by Microsoft.


Hmmmm. I wonder what influenced Microsoft's gui?
"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#51 OFFLINE   Herdfan

Herdfan

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 5,986 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2006

Posted 27 August 2012 - 08:26 AM

Not a good comparison. Dell sells systems that use the UI designed by Microsoft. Samsung Android phones use TouchWiz which was designed by Samsung. Thy don't use the Google Android UI.


Because, aside from the bounce back patent, the claims against Samsung were all Samsung.


Thanks for the info. Not being an Android user I didn't realize the Samsung interface was markedly different than other Androids.

My Setup

 

Why can I get to the "Adult's Only" area faster than I can get to the "ToDo" List?  DirecTV, that is messed up!!!


#52 OFFLINE   RasputinAXP

RasputinAXP

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,135 posts
Joined: Jan 23, 2008

Posted 27 August 2012 - 09:49 AM

Because, aside from the bounce back patent, the claims against Samsung were all Samsung. Google has nothing to do with the design of Samsung devices and has nothing to do with their TouchWiz UI. These were the primary targets in the suit.
Google "demanded" that Samsung make their devices less iPhone like and Samsung did their own thing.

This had very, very little to do with Google or Android.


Uh...the patents that were upheld included pinch to zoom, double-tap to zoom, and a grid of icons.

This has a lot to do with a lot of things.

"Belligerent and numerous."

Sometimes I update the Dish Network FAQ

AT200, Hopper & 360 via HDMI to Onkyo 505 to basement 42" Westy, Hopper via Comp-over-Cat5 to living room 42" Vizio with a Roku 3, Joey to Toshiba 32" LCD with a Logitech Revue. You want fries with that? Pull up to the 2nd window.


#53 OFFLINE   billsharpe

billsharpe

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,240 posts
  • LocationSouthern California
Joined: Jan 25, 2007

Posted 27 August 2012 - 10:37 AM

Uh...the patents that were upheld included pinch to zoom, double-tap to zoom, and a grid of icons.

This has a lot to do with a lot of things.


Being able to patent "a grid of icons" seems like a big stretch to me. Even the other two items seem like a small stretch.
Bill

Family room: Sony Bravia KDL-40SL130
Living room: Sceptre 32 inch

#54 ONLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • DBSTalk Club
  • 12,995 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 27 August 2012 - 10:51 AM

Hmmmm. I wonder what influenced Microsoft's gui?


And what influenced Apple for the Macintosh GUI? It's rare for there to be a totally new idea.

I doubt a phone could even have a circle of icons, and you rotate them to get the one you want. Too close to the old iPod wheel design.

#55 OFFLINE   paulman182

paulman182

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,836 posts
Joined: Aug 04, 2006

Posted 27 August 2012 - 12:30 PM

I'd sure like to know how this will impact the Android world in general.

If my wife's phone (not a Samsung) has to change very much, she'll kill me.

I guess no one knows for sure just yet.

#56 OFFLINE   wingrider01

wingrider01

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,764 posts
Joined: Sep 09, 2005

Posted 27 August 2012 - 01:05 PM

That's possible, but Samsung can't challenge the finding of facts by the jury unless it is a matter of law. I don't understand that entirely, but from what I gather that's going to be a tall mountain to climb over.

A couple of biased comments from jurors might be good enough to get it done, but I don't see it happening.

Samsung had a choice when they decided that they wanted to be the top Android OEM. They made their choice, and it's probably going to cost them a billion US.


hopefully with the backing of google and the other android phone manufacturers a consortium will be formed to fight the "unbiased findings"

#57 OFFLINE   bobukcat

bobukcat

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,964 posts
Joined: Dec 20, 2005

Posted 27 August 2012 - 03:02 PM

Uh...the patents that were upheld included pinch to zoom, double-tap to zoom, and a grid of icons.

This has a lot to do with a lot of things.


Very true, one thing that really bothers me about all this documentation that was shown to the jury was that it always contains a picture of the Android device's App Drawer or a home screen completely filled with app icons. For those that don't / haven't used Android this is not the default home experience. I think Samsung should have had the opportunity to show devices with Widgets, live wallpapers, etc. - they look a lot different under those (more typical) circumstances.

That said there was obviously some copying of the trade dress going on, especially with the first Galaxy with the single home button. On the other hand the trade dress stuff is way too vague if an Epic 4G (which has a slide-out QWERTY) was found to infringe it.

I also think (from reading the juror interview) that it doesn't sound like they really spent an appropriate amount of time debating the prior art arguments for the Touch Screen, Pinch Zoom, etc. patents. In fact I find it hard to believe they spent enough time on most of the items given how complex this trial was and the relatively short deliberation time.

#58 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 8,821 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 27 August 2012 - 03:37 PM

Interview with a juror. I haven't looked at all the reports during trial, but if there literally were emails within Samsung about what Apple features to copy, there is little room for the jury to think they didn't violate the patents.

http://news.cnet.com...ror-speaks-out/


I don't think this document helped Samsung:

Samsung’s 132-page internal report on why the Galaxy should be more like the iPhone

Thanks for the info. Not being an Android user I didn't realize the Samsung interface was markedly different than other Androids.


When I got a smartphone, I wanted an iPhone 4, but Verizon didn't have it... so I got a Fascinate... one of the reasons is because I had used a Captivate and thought it was nice, and the other reason is because it reminded me very much of the iPhone. While there are similarities between other Android devices and the iPhone, I don't really feel they were attempting to copy the iPhone. I do however feel that Samsung, especially earlier models like the Fascinate/Captivate were intended to copy the look of the iPhone.

Heck... look at some of these icons...

~Alan

#59 OFFLINE   RasputinAXP

RasputinAXP

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,135 posts
Joined: Jan 23, 2008

Posted 27 August 2012 - 05:11 PM

I don't think this document helped Samsung:

Samsung’s 132-page internal report on why the Galaxy should be more like the iPhone



When I got a smartphone, I wanted an iPhone 4, but Verizon didn't have it... so I got a Fascinate... one of the reasons is because I had used a Captivate and thought it was nice, and the other reason is because it reminded me very much of the iPhone. While there are similarities between other Android devices and the iPhone, I don't really feel they were attempting to copy the iPhone. I do however feel that Samsung, especially earlier models like the Fascinate/Captivate were intended to copy the look of the iPhone.

Heck... look at some of these icons...

~Alan


1. That's a strategic dissassembly of the thing, post-Galaxy S. It's a red herring.

2. You got it because it reminded you of the iPhone...and because the iPhone wasn't on Verizon...but did you think you were buying an Apple product and you got fooled? That was the crux of the court fight.

"Belligerent and numerous."

Sometimes I update the Dish Network FAQ

AT200, Hopper & 360 via HDMI to Onkyo 505 to basement 42" Westy, Hopper via Comp-over-Cat5 to living room 42" Vizio with a Roku 3, Joey to Toshiba 32" LCD with a Logitech Revue. You want fries with that? Pull up to the 2nd window.


#60 ONLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • DBSTalk Club
  • 12,995 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 27 August 2012 - 05:24 PM

1. That's a strategic dissassembly of the thing, post-Galaxy S. It's a red herring.

2. You got it because it reminded you of the iPhone...and because the iPhone wasn't on Verizon...but did you think you were buying an Apple product and you got fooled? That was the crux of the court fight.


Is the issue that people actually thought they were getting an iPhone or that they thought they were getting something just like the iPhone? I can see the second one happening. A customer walks in, and a rep says "we don't sell those, but this is just like it." If the rep tells them it does the same thing, or is just like it, that could be an issue. I don't think someone actually gets a box that says Samsung but thinks its an Apple.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...