37 
We’ve been watching Apple and Samsung hammer each other for what feels like eons over who ripped off whom. And now the jury is in (shockingly soon): Samsung just lost almost everything.
The case, which has centred over a panoply of patents relating to both hardware and software design, should settle one major argument once and for all: did Samsung rip off Apple’s design when it started churning out touch devices of its own? Does Apple own the right to tech features that’ve become completely ubiquitous, like icon grids and black rectangles? The repercussions here are mammoth—this decision could literally and profoundly change the way our gadgets look for years and years to come.
Apple has contended that the entire mobile industry had nothing but messes of buttons and switches before Steve Jobs descended with the iPhone—after which point a unadorned glass face with rounded, bouncy icons became the de facto standard for pretty much every phone and tablet, for the rest of time. Samsung says they came up with this stuff on its own before the iPhone ever dropped. Apple, of course, claims the opposite.
Keep in mind that probably everything below will be appealed, so this is by no means over. As much as we wish it were.
Update: According to The Verge, reporting from the courtroom, an enormous swath of Samsung’s devices have been found to illegally rip off Apple’s software interface ideas (namely bounce-back scrolling and gestures):
Continuum, Droid Charge, Exhibit 4G, Galasy Ace, Prevail, S 4G, S II, Galaxy Tab, The Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Mesmerie, Nexus S 4G, Replenish and Vibrant
Captivate, continuum, droid charge, fascinate, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S II, i9100, Galaxy s 2 Tmobile, Tab, Tab 10.1, Gem, Indulge, Infuse, Nexus S 4G
The list goes on. Virtually every Samsung device in question has been found to infringe on Apple patents. Very, very few exceptions. This is a landslide for Apple so far.
Update 2: Another giant blow to Samsung—the following devices have been found to infringe upon Apple’s “front trade dress”—meaning the way it looks:
Fascinate, Galaxy S, S 4G, S 2 ATT, S2 i9100, S2 Tmobile, S 2 Epic 4G touch, Skyrocket, Showcase, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, and Vibrant.
Update 3: The Galaxy Tab gets off clean for design! Major points for Samsung.
Update 4: Samsung willingly infringed upon multiple Apple patents, the jury says. That’s very bad. Intentional intellectual property theft. Big loss for Sammy.
Update 5: Another trouncing for Samsung: the company didn’t prove that a single one of Apple’s contested patents is invalid. This will have big consequences when it comes time to hand out punishment.
Update 6: Samsung hit with over $1 BILLION in damages, paid to Apple. Hoo boy! That’s enough to buy an Instagram, with cash left over. $1,051,855,000, to be exact.
Update 7: Jury says Apple violated zero Samsung patents, and owes Apple nothing so far. Welp. Remember that part in Starship Troopers, when all of the bugs kill all the humans? This is like that, and Samsung is the humans. The question now: where will Apple’s legal team be dining tonight? A giant lake filled with molten gold?
Update 8: Samsung’s statement, according to CNET:
“Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.”
Update 9: Samsung scored a 0.24% discount on the bill they owe Apple because of a jury screw up. The bill is now… wait for it, wait for it: $1,049,343,540.
Update 10: Apple and Samsung get a schedule for post-trial filings, with a hearing set for September 20th.
Apple didn’t win literally every single possible victory, but almost all of them. Here they are, in the blue jersey. The gentleman in white makes Android phones.
But like we said, this isn’t over. The extent to which this will change the look and feel of every non-Apple tablet and phone hasn’t been decided yet, nor are we sure just how badly this gut-punch from Apple will bruise Samsung specifically. But if you need it boiled down: horrible day for Samsung, great day for Apple.
Samsung vs. Apple: The (South Korean) Verdict Is In
Predict the Future With the Apple Vs. Samsung Verdict-O-Matic
What Do You Think About the Apple vs. Samsung Verdict?
This verdict won’t have a significant impact on Samsung, but it will on US Consumers. US consumers now face lateness and non-releases in future because of certain trivial choices being restricted in design, which is pretty sad. The patent system really needs an overhaul, as having patents on basic shapes and gestures is weird, unfair and anticompetitive.
What Samsung did was to try and clone Apple products, it not about copying just the shape with rounded corners, Its about copying everything good about Apple products and applying them to samsungs own… People need to wake up.
Apple only took what’s already existed and made it work better. Apple didn’t deserve the win. People who aren’t fanboys can usually see this.
Considering i’m typing using a HTC One X, i Don’t think the fanboy label is correct. I Luke Apple and will continue to buy Apple as well as any other device I may like including Samsung products. Some people just have a dislike for Apple, period and want to see it’s downfall. In this debate I back Apple all the way as Samsung actions were blatantly wrong, To think…. Samsung even documented all the things good about Apple products and bad abouts its own and how it would make everything Apple like, what more evidence does one require?
God damn it, I keep liking comments instead of clicking reply… Anyway I thought you were a self proclaimed apple fanboy? It wasn’t meant to be an insult, just to say that you’re probably more biased. If apple didn’t price their products ridiculously high, then I’d consider them myself. But come on $1 billion? How is that fair when other courts dismissed it and the one in Korea charged only $22k. I’m not saying apple copied a single product. But they’ve used a similar design and been using elements that have already existed and shouldn’t be able to sue others for that. As for the ‘proof’, Apple probably have a book about what’s good about samsung too. I really have no idea why it’s such a big deal, every single competitor keeps an eye on their own competitor and want’s to make their stuff better, it’s common sense. Apple are a bunch of patent troll bullies, and legally, I hate them, otherwise they’ve made some good products even if some are stupidly overpriced. And tbh, you thought even the box was a point to complain that they copied, it’s a box which clearly states it’s a samsung product.
And which product did Apple copy? No phone like the iPhone existed before Its release..
http://www.wearelovelycreative.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/dieter-Ram.jpg
http://succeed2k.com/pics/f700-iphone.jpg
I’m not saying Apple didn’t deserve this win, afterall it is true that Samsung blatantly copied Apple when it came to the GS1, despite being told numerously to change they continued to goad Apple, but thinking about this realistically, all the is a formality to both companies. To Samsung this is like a bit of cream over their annual 200 billion dollars they take in.
Like I’ve said above in my original post, this is a sad day for US customers, and a real setback. Everyone else around the world (especially us Brits) will be completely unaffected by this with future handsets, but now this has set a precedent to follow against many other companies looking to release handsets in the US. Notice how in the breakdown, Samsung pays zero for any international handsets.
Samsung were silly to push this as far as they did without taking Googles advice to change, and now it is possible that in the US, companies like HTC, LG, and Samsung will no longer be able to use ‘pinch-to-zoom’ or have fancy bounce effects without significant changes to their UI, or throwing money for licensing like Microsoft is doing. On the flip side, maybe this will force many to enforce stock UI’s from Android which will put the onus on Google.
My point is that the patent system needs to be clearer as some ‘technology inventions’ being patented are too vague to be fair, and worse still can already have been in existence for a significant period of time and STILL be patented by others. This highlights that the system has been subject to too much abuse already. How can the patent office not be embarrassed every time a patent is invalidated? This happens all too often.
Well it probably wont change a single thing, for US phones Samsung will just install a crippled form of firmware, everywhere else it will be the fully functioning version.
All this will do is force people in the US to install firmwares from Europe or a modded version, which is widely available on android development websites.
I still hate apple and everything they stand for, as they are bullies and patent trolls, I hope Samsung kicks there ass in round 2.
That seems to be a little bit different to the South Korean verdict from yesterday. I wonder if there will be a price increase in samsung components to cover the cost of this fine?
I doubt it – Apple is Samsung’s biggest customer (I think) so if they took the prices up, Apple would just look elsewhere. It would probably do Samsung more damage than good.
I Don’t think samsung ever really stood much of a chance in an American court against an American company. American design vs “cheap foreign knock offs”. It was only ever going to go Apples way.
All of the other cases that have been tried have at least validated some of Samsung’s claims. This one just chucked them out. And a 9 person jury? Is that really it for a case this size? Did they check for bias at all? Probably not. No wonder the rest of the world takes the piss out of the American legal system.
It blows my mind how some people still blindly support Samsung in this trial — while the patent infringement and the legal question at hand is undetermined, the design ethos was undoubtedly breached. A few things to consider:
The document, outlining flaws -The internal memo about a crisis of design -The simirities between icons -The similarities between dock connectors, chargers, and all accessories -The similarities of the phone design and GUI layout
In some cases the Samsung devices look exactly like the iPhone in many, many aspects.
With that said, design ethos is not legally damning, and what’s at stake here is patent infringement. If anything, prior art will make or break this case. Apple has already showed that Samsung had the intent to copy near everything.
You know what Taf, you said it all along, you was RIGHT again, in life cheaters never prosper, ask Lance Armstrong. Samsung should never sacked Its product desginers and tried to take a shortcut to success..
Your aware Samsung had a digital photo frame that looks exactly like the ipad, long before the ipad existed…
And you are aware that Samsung documented everything good about the iPhone and how they would apply to own products…?
And why did Samsung make a Photo Frame that looks like an iPad before the iPad came about? Thats just stupid, missed opportunity, they should have applied the Design to a tablet First.. tut tut.
Then again nobody wanted to know about tablets before the iPad..
Blindly following Samsung really, I think most android users could say the same about apple fan-boys. Anyway from what I have read around the web, I think there is more people against apple than there is against Samsung.
Well these people can’t be big in number if Apple products continue to sell as well as ever, Apple is the worlds biggest company afterall..
Actually at the moment Shell are seen as the worlds biggest company…
as a result of investor trading, not as a mark of revenue or output. big difference
That’s how this all looks to me too. South Korea court found Apple and Samsung copied each other. A UK court threw the case out. Yet strangely an “unbiased” US court found massively in favour of Apple and awarded them a landslide victory.
I completely agree with Samsung on this one. You simply shouldn’t be able to patent “rectangles with rounded corners”. These court cases are being contested on a far too detailed level. I mean, basically Apple have been rewarded the victory for solely inventing the computer icon, which is ridiculous.
I’m glad these patents don’t apply to web design. Being a web and UI/UX designer I’d hate to have to reinvent Internet standards from scratch every time I designed a new interface.
I owned a few HTC touchscreen Windows phones before Apple even entered the phone market. Are Apple ripping off HTC for bringing out a similar sized phone device which also has a touchscreen? Apparently not, but Apple are willing to be litigious enough to drag Samsung through the courts on minor interface technicalities.
What Samsung did was to try and clone Apple products, it not about copying just the shape with rounded corners, Its about copying everything good about Apple products and applying them to samsungs own… People need to wake up.
LOL nahhhh u need to wake up!! And as soon as you can
Errr…. Hello! Wide awake Herr. Its the Samsung lot that need to wake up and get with reality, you copy, you cough up.
As soon as you can prove that there is not one item, aspect of design, or technology feature on Apple products that has not been either copied, borrowed, or simply stolen I will agree with you. In the meantime many of us will think otherwise. Nothing to do with being a fanboy either way, it is just the way of the world. It does not matter if Apple only has one item/feature borrowed and developed on a device in my book – they would be guilty as other companies that also do it several times on one device. And lets face it, all the companies have employees to tear down competitors devices in the guise of development.
I don’t need to prove anything, leave that to the lawyers, I think Apple has the best…
Good lawyers does not necessarily make them right…..
Before you prove anything, please…please tell us, how much Apple really pays you?
This is patent infringement gone mad. With no competition, innovation will slow and apple will become complacent. If being the most successful company of all time wasn’t enough already? The company looks to be going for monopoly of the market (possibly taking over the world) brace yourself tech fans for less choice and higher prices!
I can honestly say i have never had such a strong feeling of disgust, irritation or plain hatred for any company as i do for Apple….i cant argue that their products are bad because they are clearly good but the company itself is the biggest bully with the biggest stick on the planet with a patent and judicial system almost made for them.
I have just thrown my wifes ipod in the bin and will buy her something else today, i will not have another apple product in my house.
You are stupid for doing that lol. I am glad they taught Copysung that you can’t fucking copy anything you like and sell it for cheap!
For all I can say, you seem to be brainwashed!
Ah an Apple fan boy… You must have been one of the jurors?
I am sorry but calling Apple Fan boy as soon as he has an opinion different to yours is getting old, in my case, Do I like apple ? Yes. Should they have been awarded so much? No.
To the original commenter that was A. a dicky move towards your wife, it is her property not yours B. as has been already said if you are getting rid of your wifes property you could at least given it away, recycled or donated it.
“We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas” – Steve Jobs, Truimph of the Nerds, 1996.
Ideas, not the execution.
It’s not bullying to protect your registered patents. Do you think any other company in the world, in Apple’s position, would give Samsung a pass?
Think about it this way – the success of the iPhone allowed Samsung to become more successful as it harmed traditional phone phone manufacturers such as Nokia, Blackberry and Sony Ericsson. Apple changed the market and Samsung were able to capitalise on that change. Just look at their market share since 2007.
In order to capitalise on their change they needed to release new products. They can either spend years on research like Nokia and Blackberry did – and miss the boat – or they can try to imitate Apple’s success. hardware which they know to be a success.
Both strategies have risks, research means you might be too late entering the market, imitation means you open yourself up to the risk of a patent lawsuit. On balance it looks like Samsung chose the correct path. They’re the only mobile manufacturer, other than Apple, making a profit; $12bn a year.
This judgment is the natural result that flows from the decision they’ve made. On balance Samsung should still be thanking Apple for disrupting the market in a way that allowed new entrants to the Smartphone game and changed the way customers viewed their devices.
Why would you throw it away? What a monumental waste. Of you didn’t want it anymore you could have donated it, sold it, or even recycled it.
Oh dear… Butter pull to swallow. Serves samdung right for trying to clone Apple products…
Bitter Pill*
“All I see are headlines about Apple suing everyone for patent infringement. Everywhere I look there are stories about Apple’s latest court case. I’ve read so many comments about Apple the patent bully.
The patent applications, alleged infringements, counter-claims, infringement lawsuits, the patent system, patent trolls, prior-art this, FRAND abuse that; honestly at times trying to follow and make sense of all these stories feels like I’m studying to work for Ally McBeal.
Luckily the tabloids and blogs I read reduce all that complex legalese into laymen’s terms with snappy headlines. From what I’ve read and from the discussions I’ve followed I too am now disgusted by Apple. They’ve failed to compete in the market fairly so are now trying (and have succeeded) to use the courts to stifle competition using patents that are a joke- slide to unlock, rounded rectangles, elastic band scrolling, ‘look and feel’??!!
How these ‘inventions’ were worthy of a patent is beyond me. Awarding Apple $1 billion in damages because Samsung infringed them and copied the iPhone is a sick joke. In disgust I’m selling all my Apple gear and I’m going to use that to support companies that truly innovate, instead of just taking others technology and claiming the credit for it.
Apple are bullies and their products are overpriced and too restrictive. All style (as long as you like aluminium and glass) and no substance. Blah blah blah blah……”
I think that’s how I’m supposed to write a knee-jerk reaction. I haven’t missed anything have I?
Ok i could not quite bring myself to actually bin my wifes ipod, but i have put all her music on her phone and now her ipod has been passed down to our son….which means its days are numbered.
She was looking to change her phone to an iphone 5 when that comes out, but i have put a stop to that idea.
Stop controlling your wife, bro
I completely agree with Samsung’s statement, and I find it ridiculous that the jury were so much in favour of Apple. The price Samsung have been ordered to pay (both monetarily and in terms of reputation) is grotesquely anticompetitive and serves to show the dismal failings of the patent system.
In terms of hardware design, there is no way that Samsung should have lost – the SIII looks more like an iPhone (original, 3G and 3GS) than any of the phones listed. I would agree, however, that the TouchWiz launcher of the Galaxy S generation did highly resemble that of the iPhone, but enough to warrant a $100,000,000,000 fine? I really don’t think so.
$1,000,000,000*
The SIII is a completely unique design… I can’t really see any way in which it resembles an iPhone. The Galaxy Ace and Galaxy S, however, blatantly rip off the designs of the iPhone (4 and 3G/3GS respectively).
Curved and glossy back, low profile camera, the obvious central hardbutton… I never said it looked like a copy of the iPhone, just that it looks more of a copy than those mentioned in the case.
This is very true, maybe Samsung will no better going forward, expensive lesson though….
I think this is a brilliant verdict. Samsung have 0 imagination and have stepped over the line too many times.
I’m glad the jury saw sense.
How much are they paying you?
And the fact Apple are illegally using several of Samsung’s patents, as validated by cases elsewhere? Or doesn’t that factor for you?
They will be dealt with in those cases elsewhere. This wasn’t just about patents.
…yes, yes it was. And the patents I mentioned were rejected by the court in America in this case. Do you really think 3 days is enough time to fairly go through 700 pieces of evidence? Assuming those three days were 8 hour days for the jury, that’s a piece of evidence every two minutes. No. That simply isn’t possible.
It’s happened, anyone can see that Samsung have changed their UI to get as close to iOS as possible. Other manufacturers have done things different and have proved you don’t need to blatantly rip off someone else.
Microsoft and Apple have an anti cloning clause in their license agreement which further proves you don’t need to copy a company with a good product to get a good product.
Samsung have copied from the UI, they way that market it, the way the package it and now, even Apple stores. How can someone defend a company that just can’t help themselves.
http://allthingsd.com/20120823/samsung-opens-new-apple-store-in-australia/ <- Relating to the Store comment.
The Korean case accepted the bounceback patent but not the icon design patent.
Their UI ? you do know its Googles UI as they own android not Samsung.
False. Google supply the initial android software. Samsung build on top of it to make it look more like iOS.
Samsung copied Apple, people need to accept the truth, they even had document detailing l the features to ne copies from the iPhone, not sure how much clearer it could be that samdung are guilty…
not gonna lie, I’ve missed you Taf. :’)
If à day could be stretched to 26hrs, i would spend the extra 2hrs on Gizmodo UK..
you’re almost a myth on these here parts nowerdays, ahaha. people have tried to fill your shoes, alas they all fall short.
Are you mad bro or just another Apple jury employee ?
Neither, a member of the public seeing justice be served.
This is ridiculous. Why is a case this big being ruled on by jurors who are clearly all Apple fan boys? In fact, why is a case like this even being ruled on by jurors at all… who are allowed to pick their own fine etc?
I hope they will do a documentary on the whole Apple v Samsung thing, in time people will then see that Its not just about rectangles with rounded corners but Samsung attempts to copy everything good about Apple products to the point where it became difficult for some consumers to tell them apart…
You’re back! Although I must say, that if Samsung were as bad as this case says, then why didn’t other jurisdictions agree?
No other courtroom has seen the Drama, The Evidence and Witnesses presented as in this case.
No surprises here for me – the American system always does this. It’ll go to appeal, a real grown-up (patent expert judge(s)) will look at it, and massively reduce the fine, or even redact a few. The world will continue to turn, Apple will still suck and make a shit ton of cash (how exactly did Samsung impact on their cash pile? Not much I think), Samsung will still make more and more phones and win in the end.
How dare you come in here and be all calm and rational like that, this is not the time for common sense, well thought through statements, it’s a time to pick up a pitchfork and a burning torch and head to the nearest Apple store.
Seriously though, you hit the nail on the head. This is a long way from over and I have no intention of getting upset about it.
Samsung lost, set of copying, cloning looOoosers…
They should pay more in my opinion..
Nope, I’m not going to be goaded by you, or Token (before he starts). I expect to see a number of articles about this on Giz over the next week, including “what apple could by with their winnings” and I shall not be goaded by them either.
This must be a Samsung trolls nightmare come true?
So Apple won and that must make all the jury Apple fanboys?
By that reckoning, next time a suspected murderer gets off from the jury, the members must be all pro-murder?
This case was never going to come down to whether Apple or Samsung was right, but who’s lawyers could give the best arguement. And from the docs released, Apple clearly won. Most of us on this site know a fair bit about tech and are therefore more qualified on the subject, but the jury probably are not and are ONLY allowed to make the decision based on the evidence provided in court and NOTHING else.
This will go to appeal, and be overturned. Apple will then go to Appeal, where they will win, but significantly less damages.
The accusation of fanboi-sim (oh how I hate that phrase and its derivatives) stems from the sheer totality of the verdict. Absolutely none of Samsung’s claims were upheld? That is the shocker.
But as you say, there will be numerous appeals. Excluded evidence will be allowed in and Apple will win but with less damages. Its debatable as to whether they deserve them, but what is of fact is that it’s the consumer that will pay.
You’re right, but it doesn’t make it any less unjust. Regardless, the money involved is ridiculously disproportionate to the damages actually caused by Samsung, even if the verdict was, what is in my opinion, fair.
The figure was worked out on the number of each infringements provided to consumers. It seems Samsung is a victim of its own success in this award. It is not based on what is was worth, but by how many were distributed.
Then why is the figure called “damages”? I can’t stand how stupid judicial practices have become…
I would assume because a cost has been attributed to each infringement, and that cost has been multiplied buy the number of each infringements being created. Apple probably included a cost for each infringement, and its a damage because Apple paid for the original development.
I have to say your comment is smack on the mark here, as soon as something goes apples way, Fan boyism is thrown around as the cause.
Typical, it seems south Korea is much more able to make un-biased fair and correct judgements, this is just another demonstration of the failure of the American Legal system. $1 Billion is just ridiculous and gratuitous, I hope apple collapse, stumble and face utter disaster somewhere in the near future. It won’t happen, but I can always dream.
Or maybe Korea have different laws and a patent system that works properly.
Firstly, here’s a good breakdown of the full outcome and what did and didn’t infringe on what:
http://m.cnet.com/news/apple-v-samsung-the-infringing-device-scorecard/57500273
But I personally think this was maybe the right decision in the face of the law. Samsung’s designs did change considerably after the iPhone release (they have returned to originality more recently) to what had evidently been popularised by the iPhone. Nokia and Microsoft have shown that there are different and sometimes even better ways of doing things with the lumia range – that’s what should be encouraged from this case.
If you don’t like the verdict then it should be the patent system that you have problems with, not necessarily apple. Current law means that a patent goes to whoever files it first, not the original inventor, and that patents can be given to what many people would consider ‘obvious’ or ‘trivial’. I’m sure some of the lawsuits that apple have been landed with are going to be for equally trivial issues (hypothetical – I don’t think anybody really has time to follow them all).
Just my 2p.
Even in the current system, a patent should only be granted if the technology it’s protecting doesn’t already exist.
But that is the way the current system works, and it’s worked like that for hundreds years. For example, Antonio Meucci couldn’t find the money to maintain his patent caveat on the telephone. If he had, Alexander Graham Bell couldn’t have patented it. However, Bell did, and he is now referred to as the inventor of the telephone. Which patents are you saying existed before the iPhone that were in this case? I suppose you could make a vague argument for pinch to zoom, as I think some trackpads almost had the capability to do it, but if they did, they did it rather terribly. The bounce-back scrolling is intuitive, yes, but I myself (and others) where simply amazed by it, and how it was so realistic. Therefore, it became a major feature of iOS, and deserved the patent. I do not believe I had ever used software before the iPhone/iOS which had that particular feature.
So you’ve identified one unique feature of iOS that is patented… congrats. Anyways, I wasn’t really making a jibe at Apple but rather commenting on TrustyDuckling’s post regarding the broken patent system. Chill, dude.
Haha, sorry. Too much time spent on YouTube I guess, where the commenters are a little less… civilised. But basically I was trying to say that it’s never been a first come first serve thing with patents – it’s whoever’s got the money to file them. If you’re saying that patents shouldn’t be awarded to simple, obvious things, such as pinch to zoom and bounce-back, (which I believe came up in the trial), then I sort of agree with you. And to stop the sale of a device because of such a thing is harsh.
So again, I apologise – I just misinterpreted your comment.
I couldn’t give less of a shit about a fancy animation that shows the end of a piece of content, there’s literally MILLIONS of ways to visualise this. If that’s something Apple want to patent, fine, but what about the hundreds – if not thousands – of app developers that now implement this feature? Are they not also infringing this patent, and does that mean they should be sued for a few hundred mil’ too? It’s become way too ubiquitous a design for them to feasibly do this, so until they wanna go after every infringer and not just their main competitor for their main revenue stream, the patent should be voided.
Pinch-to-zoom, however, is something a bit more controversial to me. The feature is undoubtedly one of the cornerstones of modern smartphones, so much so that I don’t think and regular consumers would consider it a revolutionary feature because they don’t realise how integral it is to their UX. It just works to the point where it’s as standard as using a single touch for selection. My qualm with Apple, to this regard, is that pinch-to-zoom existed before they patented it and, like bounce-back, has become ubiquitous not only in phones, but all touch screen devices. They really shouldn’t have been granted this patent in the first place, it’s way too powerful a technology for any single company to hold.
Cheers for posting that cnet article, it’s got a lot of information there. The bit about the jury is interesting, though I found it funny how they implied that all the jurors were pretty knowledgeable since they worked for certain companies, only to say that they were HR people etc rather than engineers. Though there was an engineer or two on the jury wasn’t there?
Guess no one read this on Skynews -
From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts viewed Samsung as the underdog in the case. Apple’s headquarters is a mere 10 miles from the courthouse, and jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where Apple’s late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer.
Hmmm it was bias from the start, US Company home ground clearly whos gonna lose out!
Rubbish.
Are you suggesting that there is not a single person in Silicon Valley that does not like Steve Jobs?
1. Samsung could have asked for a change of venue – one that would have been granted if opinion is so biased in the area.
2. Samsung & Apple send a day choosing from the jury pool. Samsung removed all people they thought would be biased.
Oh my lord…Do you have any idea how law works in USA? Apparently not. To your first point..
1. Yes, they can ask for a change of venue, which all depends on Judge. Its upto iJudge Koh if she wanted it or not. And not always it is granted.
2. Yes true, But the jurys are selected from common people who are already selected for their Jury service. So its like picking a theifs, from a bunch of murderes. LOL sorry for that example, but it suits.
Please study more about US Law system before commenting
Or watch couple of movies like Runaway Jury and A time to Kill..lol
What was wrong?
You agree with point one – Samsung never asked for a change. In fact during mediation both Apple and Samsung jointly agreed the venue.
2. You also agree. As for you example. if you’ve had a criminal conviction it may mean that you are not allowed to serve on a jury. Not all convictions count, but periods of imprisonment, a suspended sentence of imprisonment or probation can exclude you.
Being a Brit, I don’t know the US system very well, whats your excuse
lol It was wrong because even changing of venue wouldnt take it out of USA.. LOL and in USA there was no chance for samsung!
And for the second point..You didnt get me really. What I was saying is that yes they picked the jury but from a number of people who already resides there. So Samsung can only choose the best among the lot.. but those best wouldnt be chosen if the trial was in UK.
Oh…Iam a brit too mate
haha ..Just pretty familiar with US legal system haha
So then the question would be why didn’t Samsung settle like they were offered. It would have put $15 on top of each handset which when they have a $600-$700 price tag isn’t too much. And most of that would probably be offset against tax payments so the bottom line would have hardly been affected. If you knew they had no chance in the US, how come their lawyers didn’t.
As for the jury, the same would be true for Apple too. They could only pick from what was on offer. That’s not down to Apple or Samsung rigging it, but the US education system if you think people will be led that easily.
Samsung didn’t otherwise that would have requested a change in location, and not agreed to the original that they did.
And if you look at the documents for the case Apple won because they were right. There is no arguement there. The only dispute is the award which was far too high really. But if Samsung play the US tax system properly, they will only be paying half of the final amount after the appeals anyway.
One could also argue that the decision in S. Korea was biased in Samsung’s favour, and if it had been held in a neutral place, Apple’s damages would have been higher.
It doesn’t really matter who wins these little battles over a piece of paper, its always the shareholders that will win, and the consumers as normal who will get the bad end of the deal.
Actually in the extrema case that Samsung had disputes with a large number of the jury pool, a new pool would be created ( providing reasoning for each member of jury rejected has been provided )
Its against US court law to allow a person onto the jury who may for whom of any reason may have a biased influence. ( in the case of company vs company fan boys are not considered bias however ( Unless they came into the court wearing an apple t shirt… ) )
I was expecting ‘apple fanboys’ to chime in here but all I’m seeing are ‘anti apple fanboys’ which seems to becoming a recurring pattern.
The comments section on Giz UK is a volatile place for a lonesome Apple fanboy. Just ask Taf.
I can hold my own, just like Apple did in court… I aint never scared
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viJ5W-E3EJc
You “ain’t never” scared? So you are often scared then
if I could be bothered with Twitter I’d use #doublenegative.
With this verdict some of my faith has been returned to the justice system. Samsung has 150 pages of how to copy the iPhone and mimic it’s features if that alone was not enough proof then I don’t know what is. Also Samsung chose half the jury so the idiots on here need to stop saying they were bribed.
I read up and down the comments and not found any talk about bribery mentioned used on the jurors. Yes Samsung did get to pick half the Jury but it doesn’t really change the fact they are living in the country and area where Apple was founded. Basically this suggests favoritism against a non American company. We all know how much Americans stick with each other.
Ahem… That comment is about as silly as me suggesting that Judge Koh appears to look more Korean than she does American
http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/lucy-koh-e1345144390363.jpg
And to anyone who says those 150 pages were “market research”, I’d say they were wrong. Market research requires you to look at and compare the whole industry – you can’t just choose one manufacturer and say “we need to make all our icons look like their icons.”
The icon design infringement was dismissed in the South Korean court case.
Maybe that was a bad example – but there are key elements to the overall look and feel of the iPhone that Samsung copied. Samsung tried to make these points irrelevant by looking at minute details, rather than the design as a whole.
It’s a bit of a moot point really, since the app drawer is just a grid of icons but it’s not the main focus since you’ve got the home screen as well, the home screen. I’ve never really liked the Touchwiz interface.
Yeah – problem is, they seem to advertise it as being the main screen (or they used to in the days of the Galaxy S).
Neither have I – and I can’t help thinking that the majority of their problems would be solved if they just used stock Android. That, however, I fear will never happen.
ROLL on Google/Motorola versus Apple!
I’m glad Apple won. I’m not quite sure how to say this, because I was pretty sure that everyone was wanting Apple to win before this verdict (apart from Samsung fanatics), but then I looked in the comments here and elsewhere, which seem to show absolute disgust towards Apple. I feel it was the right decision that Apple won, and out of this, we will see Samsung produce some brilliant, unique products. And in the past few months, that’s what they have been doing (arguably) – the Galaxy Note, the Galaxy Note 10.1 (okay, that’s not brilliant, but at least it’s a unique design) and of course, the Galaxy SIII.
I’ve literally been sat here for half an hour trying to type a comment, however, I can’t do so for fear that everyone will hate me for saying what I want to say, and I can’t really word it correctly. Basically, I’m pleased Apple won, but perhaps the verdict was slightly too harsh towards Samsung. And yes, I agree that patenting some features that Apple patented is ridiculous – but perhaps they seem ridiculous because some of the features are so blindingly obvious and intuitive, that we think they should never have been patented?
I apologise if I seem like an Apple fanboy here – I’m not really. I think their products are, generally, brilliant. However, I think that some of Samsung’s new products are looking very good, as well as some of the other OEMs’ products, in addition to Jelly Bean. I must admit I hated Android pre-ICS. But that’s because I simply thought it looked ugly, and now it looks unique, and not like some sort of weird mashup of bits of iOS and bits of Google Desktop. And I do hate how Android gets all the free apps, but with iOS, you have to pay for the exact same app. But I no longer hate the OS as a whole. I’m not quite sure where I’m going with all this, so I’m just hoping someone replies to point out my flaws.
in all honesty I am in exactly the same position as you, what is the point in even trying to counter the Fan Boy accusatory Squad if as soon as we do we are branded fan boys :L
Exactly! Although I do love seeing people having “fanboy wars” on places like YouTube, and the lack of imagination they use.
“Android rules. Apple sucks.”
“Fandroid!”
“iSheep! Baaaah.”
I don’t know if it will help but I think what you say is on the whole true and accurate. I really don’t think that it can be denied that of all android OEM’s Samsung phones have always looked the most like Apple phones, did this cause Apple to lose any money? I seriously doubt it. Are all the features as close a copy as Apple claims, I don’t think so. Does Apple deserve all of the money they have been awarded, not a chance.
Given that the next stage in proceedings is deciding what phones will get banned in the US I suggest Samsung strips touchwiz off of all the phones that are likely to be banned. This will remove any software infringement and allow them to keep selling phones.
Speak your mind, never back down, say what you think in a constructive manner, if people can’t accept that then tough..
I sometimes struggle with that. And being concise is hardly my forte either.
It’s nice that we occasionally agree on things.
What are my options for a large capacity (80GB+) mp3 Player?
ipod classic. Still the best large capacity player out there.
If you’re switching away from ipod purely because of apple-hate that’s a pretty childish knee-jerk reaction.
The iPod Classic is a solid device, but iTunes is essentially bloatware and it still lacks a basic queuing feature. It also forces proprietary filetypes on you which is a ballache if you’re torrenting but not so much if you’re ripping from disks.
And yet, it’s still by far the best MP3 player on the market… go figure.
Which proprietary formats doe they force on you. As far as I was aware, my iPod can play MP3′s which is far from proprietary. Are you getting confused with Sony?
FLAC need to be converted to ALAC, a format almost exclusively used in iTunes. I’m not quite sure whether you could class .m4a as proprietary too, but the fact it only supports one video filetype is a bit silly.
Fair play.
I only use MP3′s. Have a couple of FLAC’s but I just convert them to MP3′s too, as I don’t have anything that will actually play them apart from my PC.
By far the worst thing about all Apple products is the software. If I could get an iPod Classic with less restrictive hardware, it would be a very easy purchase – same with iPhones.
I’m on my fourth iPod, I’m looking for some variety. Also, the headphone jack often plays out of one channel and pauses randomly. I have an iMac and a Macbook, both still work (especially with wondows). Its good that I can have pretty much any OS on any PC/laptop with just a little tinkering. HOWEVER, my iPod often plays out of one ear and I’m looking for some variety, preferably something I could tinker with.
Your choice literally is iPod Classic or iPod Classic. I tried to look for something about 6 months back, and it’s like everyone else has given up trying. This is probably both due to the dominance of iPod and the rise of the smartphone.
Pritty sure this was there point haha
i wouldn’t bother with either Apple over charges for all its products by a massive scale and samsung has no regard for copyright law as proven today by a US court ordering Samsung to pay Apple $1.05bn in damages.
Dont get me wrong i have a IPhone 4 but now relize i could of brought a Android for less with the specifications if your gadgets mad like me and want to save money it has to be Android Anyway if it was me i would go for the HD 3D Sanei N10 Pro google it or have a look at product details on this site http://crazzygadgets.miiduu.com/
Meanwhile in the real world where lawyers don’t pretend that they are the most important people in the world and the serially vacuous don’t have petty arguments over minor UI and design details that somehow seem to take on a air of life and death importance a real hero of science and technology has passed away.
R.I.P. Neil Armstrong
Wow. First I’m hearing of this. Sad if true.
Apologise, didn’t mean to make that come across as if I thought you were telling porkies, its just something so out of the blue its shocking.
No need to apologise, you never came across like that at all.
RIP Jerry Nelson. 1 – ha,ha,ha.
Bit of a hollow victory. Samsung wanted $500m in damages Apple wanted $2.5b; $2.5b – $0.5b = $2b. They got $1b, that is technically a victory for Samsung. But a billion dollars sounds like a lot of money, it isn’t, it is peanuts to these companies, and half that stuff will get quashed on appeal, as in balance to the international decisions all but an idiot can see this ruling is deeply bias.
And technically the ruling is stating buy Samsung it is better than an iPhone at a lower cost, and all the banned products are one or two generations old, it doesn’t have any bearing on the current range, too much, too little, too late.
Considering Apple wanted to stop Samsung’s dominance in the international market, and Jobs wanted to destroy Android, they have gained a very small victory, for now, and got a shit storm coming their way – without Samsung parts you can’t have an iPhone or iPad, Apple can always shop around and pay more for rubbish parts – good luck to them on that. Then you got every company and their wife going after Apple, and they want to move into the TV market, who do they think makes TV screens, Samsung, LG and Sony, who also own all the real TV patents, Apple just priced themselves out of that market.
What about stopping Android? Next year maybe 50m iPhones compared to 500m android devices – this is a small skirmish in a wider war that is getting lost.
Even Taf, the Apple hard-core around here, has a droid device, which kinda sums the whole thing up – Apple are great, they make they best devices, I’ll go buy an Android device. Apple are old and stale, with a twee and dated UI, nobody wants them any more, stuck in the past and fighting the wrong battles. Will the iPhone 5 change that? Yes, if it is open, revolutionary and better than Samsungs latest and greatest with a whole new UX, but will it be that? Nah – a tweaked and slightly larger iPhone that still sucks balls.
The award was 1bn but Apple can ask the judge for 3x the amount.
So Samsung could end up paying 3x the awarded amount.
Or they could win an appeal and pay nothing, as it stands it is what it is.
They could, but if they pay the numbers game properly like I would expect them too, the would pay in installments, and make no profit for a few years. This would mean that the payments they are making to Apple would mostly be coming out of money that would normally to go to the IRS.
In return, Apple would be paying more to the IRS as that extra billion would be pure profit. At 50% (I think).
Mark have you turned Samsung Troll….. :O
Mark you are confused, lets get this right. This is being typed on my iPhone 4, not the One X. I would never get rid of Apple iOS over Android. You can never have too many toys to play with, the one X is just an additional handset. I’m Apple to the core, no changing that .:D
With this 9 seconds video I rest my case: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QzJa_OU0tI
As many have stated, it would appear that the damages awarded far outweigh the crime committed, and/or the impact this infringement had on Apple’s sales.
It probably was stupid for Samsung to be so brazen about copying *some* of the content Apple created, but as someone posted on previous threads where does the madness end? Will car companies sue others for using dashboards, wheels, sun roofs etcetera? Icons, grid size and all that rubbish is an atrocious thing to be able to patent and prevent others to use.
At the end of the day, this has only been such an unrelenting matter for Apple because they are losing their ham-fisted grip on the Smart Phone market.
I literally cannot believe how stupid some people are in these comments. I thought Gizmodo UK was better than its US counterpart, but maybe I was wrong.
Let’s go through the facts.
1. Samsung copied some of Apple’s designs – I own and very much love my Galaxy S, but there is no denying it looks like an iPhone 3G, and that Touchwiz indeed looks similar to iOS.
2. Apple sued Samsung for infringing on patents THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED. First up, that trade-dress patent. The iPhone is a black, rectangular slab, with a screen. That should not be patentable. That is not ‘non-obvious’ design. How are you supposed to design a touchscreen phone without making it a bloody rectangular slab? Every touchscreen phone uses this design as its basis, with minor variations – the GSIII, for example, is slightly more curved, but is still the same basic shape. Next: the bouncing-back scrolling patent. This is a feature found as default in every OS nowadays, and is even implemented in other software – I’m using Chrome right now, and even that has this ‘bouncing-back’ effect. Should Apple have been granted this patent, too? Fuck no, it shouldn’t. Universal search? How is that patentable? Are Apple going to sue MS for using it in Windows XP next?
The American patent system is broken. This case was less about Samsung and more about the consumer – and the ruling has set a precedent. Tech companies will now be scared to be inspired by other products, they will be scared to do market research, in fear of being sued by the big bad Apple. What does this mean to you and I? Apple will be left to do as they please, allowing the market to go stale, and everyone loses.
Except Apple, of course. They reap the profits of this case and beyond, as other companies go out of business in fear of being in direct competition with Apple, lest Apple sue them.
—-AS ABOVE EXCEPT EDITED FOR ACCURACY—-
I literally cannot believe how stupid some people are in these comments. I thought Gizmodo UK was better than its US counterpart, but maybe I was wrong.
Let’s go through the fact.
1. Samsung copied some of Apple’s designs – I own and very much love my Galaxy S, but there is no denying it looks like an iPhone 3G, and that Touchwiz indeed looks similar to iOS.
*edited for fanboyism
The trade-dress was thrown out.
“Update 2: Another giant blow to Samsung—the following devices have been found to infringe upon Apple’s “front trade dress”—meaning the way it looks:
Fascinate, Galaxy S, S 4G, S 2 ATT, S2 i9100, S2 Tmobile, S 2 Epic 4G touch, Skyrocket, Showcase, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, and Vibrant.”
Rather unfortunately, it wasn’t.
I look forward to the day when I can buy any phone from any manufacturer and choose which operating system to install after purchase. The idea of choosing the best hardware design with the choice of OS is very appealing…
I to would take hardware over OS, but look today in the computer world, so many year later and Apple don’t allow that OS on any hardware, even if it is the same intel setup.
This is true. However the world it is changing, Apple make money from the POS System which wasn’t always the case. More devices using Apple Systems could mean more pos sales and in turn higher profits. It could also mean the end of Android competition as manufacturers wouldn’t have to rely on Android to make sales, the User could connect to Apple to download the OS for a fee.. we can Live in Hope I guess.
Too sensible to happen.
I doubt it would end in Android competition, since there are many, many people who prefer Android to iOS, much as there are many, many people who prefer iOS to Android.
Check the evidence linked below.
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/102368733?width=360
It says “highly confidential for attorneys eyes only” on ever page, this needs to be changed to “infringement evidence – for the attention of Samsung Trolls”.
Thanks for linking.
Reading through that, it gives a good insight into the mindset of Samsung at the time. I get the impression that they were trying to up their game by comparing themselves to the biggest competition at the time, but really lost their way in doing it. Rather than seeing that the iPhone supported a feature better than them and finding ways to come up with a *better* way of doing it, they mostly just did a 1:1 copy of what Apple had done.
This was evident with the SGS1 (I own one) and the way they marketed it. All the pictures showed the app drawer, which was basically an exact copy of the iPhone’s. The rectangular shape with a silver bezel and a single hard button at the bottom was so similar that one of the things I heard so often was people observing that I own an iPhone. If it’s possible to confuse things like that, then you know something is off.
Hopefully this ruling will push innovation in the market. I do worry though that if we start patenting things such as pinch-to-zoom, we’re going to end up with a market full of different products with different UIs and just lots of confusion, with app developers having to design their apps to meet a tonne of different standards. Whilst having all devices exactly the same is bad, having all devices completely different isn’t much better.
Considering this case is so out of wack with the international rulings maybe the real people that need to be dragged into the court by Samsung is the American Patent Office – now that is a case I’d love to see. As it seems they are excepting patents for anything and everything just to make a quick buck – I could see someone in the States getting a patent for ‘ a cylinder underpinned to a chassis as a mode to move the chassis frame and other heavy objects.’
Apple have just been granted a patent for a circular object that attaches to the front wheels of vehicles that allows the vehicle to turn….i would laugh but….it wouldn’t surprise me!
I’m happy to see Samsung kicked hard in the nuts over their blatant copying of Apples hard work.
Remember, Apple were on the floor a few years ago, being ridiculed by the ‘Microsoft fanboi’s’ whilst being loved by their actual customers.
It’s taken poor old Apple years of hard work and genius innovation to drag themselves off the rocks and into the spotlight, and unlike Microsoft who made crap, the Apple stuff is a pleasure to use and own.
So, for Samsung to come along and steal the success is simply not playing fair. This is a re-run of the Japanese motor industry, whereby everything anybody made was copied in one way or another.
Oh, and I’m not a ‘Fanboy’ just a very happy Apple punter, who used to use Windows and Nokia phones, but got tired of being let down by them…
In the rest of the World outside the USA, it looks like a USA Court protecting it’s own. Clearly this must be a defeat for Google/Android more than Samsung. Most of Samsung’s SmartPhone range look massively better than iPhones however the OS (Android) makes them seem similar.
Where are the US Governments Anti-trust lawsuits against Apple, as was done with Microsoft a few years ago? Clearly the US Govt. is protecting Apple, is that so all voice and data traffic on Apple products can be eve-dropped?
To any free-market supporter, the protectionism given to Apple must seem outrageous. I just hope the rest of the World supports Samsung way more from now on. Samsung/Android products are better in every way but don’t enjoy Govt. protectionism.
It doesn’t help that so much is written about Apple. Every suit they file is reported on, analysed, discussed. Then there’s the product rumours and the patent filings, whether obscure old ones that haven’t seen the light of day, or ones that hint of future gadgets, or discussions of the latest patent they’ve been granted claiming OMG! Apple have been awarded a patent for a black rectangle. Then there’s the Android vs. iOS “debate”, my phone is better than your phone, Apple FTW! Apple are too restrictive. My 6″ Android, Octo-core with 2GB RAM, 18MP camera and the latest rooted Android OS ‘JellyCupCakeOreoCookieSandwich” wipes the floor with the iPhone and its girly 3.5″ screen.
Your phone doesn’t define you. You’re not more or less of a man (or woman) depending on which phone you scored for free on a 2 year contract at £36 a month. That 2 year commitment may be longer than most marriages, but you’re not required as a result to become Android’s bitch, or Apple’s whore and then take sides and blindly hate the competition. Apple beat Samsung in a court case they didn’t beat you. Apple’s victory isn’t your victory. It should be enough that you simply bought the iPhone because you liked it, or the Samsung Galaxy SIII was a better fit for you- either way it’s just a phone. And if nobody asks your opinion about which phone to buy-take the day off from acting like an over enthusiastic Carphone Warehouse salesman.
A JellyCupCakeOreoCookieSandwich sounds delicious, pity I don’t have the culinary skills to make one
You’re right though, in the end being so allied and aggressive for a company is a bit silly. Companies make good and bad products. Some make more good ones than others. Some may/may not copy others. I’m more interested in how this will affect us as consumers!
People don’t hate on Apple because they got an Android phone they hate them because they are greedy, control freak, patent trolling c*nts – hence the Android phone. And those 2 year contracts are just idiot bait, I don’t care if they are for Android or iPhone devices, if you end up paying £36 a month for two years for a phone (plus insurance) then you and your children need chemical castration – your genes are surplus to requirements on this very small planet.
The insurance bit I agree with, just get a all inclusive current account such as the Halifax Ultimate reward, it will give you mobile insurance, home emergency breakdown covet, roadside assistance and travel insurance amongst other benefits.
The £36 per month, now that’s not too bad really, what other choice do you have if you want a new phone and talk allot, PAYG would be too expensive…
Regardless of whether Apple should have won or not, how can a jury give any sort of rational decision on this.
Brands, and Apple are one of the biggest, are built to influence people’s decisions, build loyalty, and generally make people believe that they are the most awesome thing ever. Apple clearly have done this pretty well; why else are they selling £1000+ laptops by the tonne? How else would they have more than one product in almost every household in every western country??
How can a jury, who are exposed to Apple marketing 24/7 (admittedly Samsung as well but it’s obvious whose brand is more powerful in America), distance themselves from this. I’m no legal expert but in a criminal case aren’t the jury not to be associated with anyone involved in the case??
This isn’t a criminal case, no-one’s going to jail over this. You’re right in that a jury needs to be unbiased (CNET has an article about the jury themselves) but from what I gather this will get appealed anyway and it’ll be reviewed by people whose career is dealing with this kind of thing.
serves them right for copying… i think android should be sued too since it acts the same as ios expect more open… obviously they dont own the right to not copy… doesnt change the fact that they did copy.
funny those samsung fanboys say it looks totally different from iphone lol
you mean it acs the same because its a phone opperating system. There would be no argument here ATAL. Android itself is an OS, expandable to many devices. Even ras-pi.
So is this Taf guy a troll or just the biggest fanboy ever to grace this website?
At any rate, I think the fact that most courts in different countries came to much more moderate verdicts shows that the US Patent and Legal system is broken
The foreman of the jury has come and said that they sought to punish Samsung. This is despite their instructions to not punish the loser and instead consider an appropriate penalty in terms of loss of earnings to Apple + a bit extra.
The foreman also stated that they chose not to read the instructions given by the judge in order to not waste time. They have now wasted EVERYBODIES time.
It’s ridiculous as well how long the jury spent deliberating over this case when you consider the amount of evidence and claims being made by both companies.
Samsung copied a couple of features from apple so what ? Yes, there’s documents to prove it! Step one for any business is to document the success and adapt from the competition. Fine agreed they copied, but the compensation is ridiculous.. I wish owned a soap company that made block soaps with rounded corners, I could become make billions!
Maybe a philosophical Steve Jobs would look at this and see what his company has become……..the one thing that he used to fight against…..Big Brother.
A scene that happens with far too many companies nowadays, they start of small and are all for the people……they get big and are all for the end of a profit margin.
A sad sad day for future technology and building on what we have learned from past ventures. Tim Cook will look at this (as per his statement) as a crack down on people who steal, well you need to get a huge mirror out and look at it Mr Cook. Your company has stood on the shoulders on innovators in the past and I’m sure will do again.
We have unwillingly created a monster and its name is Apple.
(I am only a fanboy of technology, I own products from both companies before that accusation gets thrown at me)
Without wanting this to add to the back and forth about evil Apple and copying Samsung – the thing I find strange is that the Galaxy S was included in the decisions.
Earlier in court proceedings, the judge ruled that the Galaxy S, Galaxy SII and another device couldn’t and shouldn’t be considered in the trial as they were international devices and not intended for sale in the US. Neither party could therefore use the SGSI, SGSII & other in the trial but could only focus on the US carrier variants of the devices. And yet in a lot of the hardware decisions, the SGSI and SGSII feature.
I think this must be one of the biggest articles for the number of messages for sometime on Giz UK. Yet some of the Samdung fanatics like Kockzion have chosen to stay away, must be a bitter pill to swallow