Apple's $1B patent verdict could corner market

31/08/2012 8:53:07 p.m.

the DR wrote:

what a joke as samsung make most of the components in apple devices who is using whos technology i will never buy an apple device again

29/08/2012 4:14:02 p.m.

Mike wrote:

What next? Microsoft sue Apple for using icons on the phones similar to the windows operating systems?

Apple to counter sue they used icons earlier than Microsofts.

Apple to be sued since they copied the idea off others of using icons from the mid 80's.

The problem with the ruling is that they have gone for the 'look' not the detail. And today the look is cosmetic.

Take a windows operating system, you can change the appearance greatly, and it is still the same system. The samsung has a bigger screen, more rounded corners, yet phones generally are all moving to rounder appearance. The underlying code is very different. Samsung will tackle the differences on the appeal. The rounder look will probably turn full circle as they increase screen size to the edge again so expect the rounding to disappear a little. Then they will bring soft screens in and the phones will get much smaller again but be able to open up bigger.

On the software development side, everyone has been heading towards icon based interfaces since around 2000 when new development tools started working towards this. Microsoft even had its windows-lite to try to cope with smaller devices than full computers, and yet it was more the 3rd party development that really made the changes that have flowed through to like of the iphone and galaxy.

Could even re-write the TV3 web page to give exactly the same access to news, but to use icons instead of the text labels. Or icons with text labels in such fine print you need to zoom in to read them.

27/08/2012 8:56:48 a.m.

Trademe wrote:

According to reports from the jurors who were interviewed after the court case, the evidence against Samsung was pretty damning... "Reuters spoke with jury foreman Velvin Hogan who explained that they found Apple's arguments persuasive about the need to protect innovation. Furthermore, Hogan says it was "absolutely" clear based on Samsung executive testimony that the infringement was purposeful. In the CNet interview with another Apple v. Samsung juror, Manuel Ilagan reiterated that it was "clear there was infringement". When asked for specifics, he said: "Well, there were several. The e-mails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, they showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea -- I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn't answer one of them. They didn't help their cause." Both jurors claim that their decision was deliberate and not rushed. According to Ilagan, the process was helped by the experience within the jury pool. Hogan, the jury foreman, had previously worked as an engineer and holds a patent himself. Meanwhile, others on the jury were said to also have engineering and legal experience." Hardly a biased judgement.

26/08/2012 7:44:45 p.m.

Al wrote:

Of course when it comes down to it, An American company suing a foreign company in an American court, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion whose going to win, isn't it?

26/08/2012 7:06:21 p.m.

Terence wrote:

Hardly an unbiased court process, very unlikely an American court would find against an American company. If the case was held in a Korean court the outcome would have been reversed. Should have been decided in a European court which would have been more unbiased. Still, I was trying to decide between a galaxy3s and an I-phone. I will be getting the 3s.

26/08/2012 6:50:53 p.m.

cyril wrote:

Ahhhh the greed of the big corporates has to be seen to be believed.