If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Verge)   Samsung rests its case by asking Apple for a $400 million gift   (theverge.com) divider line 51
    More: Amusing, Samsung, asking Apple, PMPs, home cinemas, Samsung rests, modems  
•       •       •

3976 clicks; posted to Geek » on 17 Aug 2012 at 12:01 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-17 12:00:27 PM
All these bullshiat, circle jerking patent lawsuits, especially those involving technology and vague or plainly obvious descriptions in the end just cost consumers more money and give them an inferior product.
 
2012-08-17 12:19:07 PM
I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.
 
2012-08-17 12:21:52 PM
and that's probably just enough to cover the lawyers fees.
 
2012-08-17 12:33:28 PM
If Apple wants to license retarded patents like battery indicators and panorama gallery views and crap for $30 - $40 per device, I say let Samsung have a nickel per device for "essential" patents, which IMO actually sound like shiat that should have been patented, not the petty crap that Apple patents. Whole system is broken beyond repair.
 
2012-08-17 12:39:30 PM

Endive Wombat: All these bullshiat, circle jerking patent lawsuits, especially those involving technology and vague or plainly obvious descriptions in the end just cost consumers more money and give them an inferior product.


I'm just going to continue posting this, in the hopes it picks up steam.

Help us, IBM. You're our only hope.
 
2012-08-17 12:41:44 PM
I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

I'd patent using strings to keep shoes on peoples feet.
I'd patent stairs
I'd patent paths, gravel and dirt.
Toothbrushes, not a type of toothbrush, just the brushing of teeth in general.

/It'd be fantastic.
 
2012-08-17 12:49:13 PM

hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

I'd patent using strings to keep shoes on peoples feet.
I'd patent stairs
I'd patent paths, gravel and dirt.
Toothbrushes, not a type of toothbrush, just the brushing of teeth in general.

/It'd be fantastic.


I'll license your toothbrush patent for $1 a unit, then sell toothbrushes with rounded corners, patenting rounded corners for $100 a unit!
 
2012-08-17 12:52:49 PM

Bullseyed: hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

I'd patent using strings to keep shoes on peoples feet.
I'd patent stairs
I'd patent paths, gravel and dirt.
Toothbrushes, not a type of toothbrush, just the brushing of teeth in general.

/It'd be fantastic.

I'll license your toothbrush patent for $1 a unit, then sell toothbrushes with rounded corners, patenting rounded corners for $100 a unit!


I'll license both your patents for $1 each. Then slap a motor on it so it brushes your teeth for you. I can sell that patent pending motorized tooth brushing machine with rounded corners for $1,000 a piece!
 
2012-08-17 12:52:54 PM
They got a lot of balls posting that picture of the Galaxy phone on the site.
 
2012-08-17 01:04:41 PM

ericbo84: I say let Samsung have a nickel per device for "essential" patents


FYI, Apple already pays them once for those essential patents via Qualcomm (just like every other phone manufacturer that isn't Samsung). Samsung is asking for Apple to pay again, this time directly.

It'd be no different than if you bought a new car from your local dealer and a few weeks after purchase, the manufacturer demands you pay them the full amount of the car as well.
 
2012-08-17 01:17:37 PM

hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.


It does. Why do you think knock-off Rolexes, Fiero Ferraris and LX bags are illegal? If your overall product too closely resembles a competitor already on the market, you're going to get sued.

And for the few sheep that still believe Samsung isn't an Apple clone, I present to you a final in-house design that was accidentally put into production.

st.gsmarena.com 

/Samsung is making a mockery of Android 
//Moto will wipe the floor w/ Samsung in a year or two, now that they have Google-league resources
 
2012-08-17 01:21:14 PM

digistil: hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

It does. Why do you think knock-off Rolexes, Fiero Ferraris and LX bags are illegal? If your overall product too closely resembles a competitor already on the market, you're going to get sued.

And for the few sheep that still believe Samsung isn't an Apple clone, I present to you a final in-house design that was accidentally put into production.

[st.gsmarena.com image 600x437] 

/Samsung is making a mockery of Android 
//Moto will wipe the floor w/ Samsung in a year or two, now that they have Google-league resources


That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.
 
2012-08-17 01:24:14 PM

change1211: That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.


clapping.gif

It's about cloning a brand.
 
2012-08-17 01:25:37 PM

digistil: hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

It does. Why do you think knock-off Rolexes, Fiero Ferraris and LX bags are illegal? If your overall product too closely resembles a competitor already on the market, you're going to get sued.

And for the few sheep that still believe Samsung isn't an Apple clone, I present to you a final in-house design that was accidentally put into production.

[st.gsmarena.com image 600x437] 

/Samsung is making a mockery of Android 
//Moto will wipe the floor w/ Samsung in a year or two, now that they have Google-league resources


Nothing you just showed means Samsung owes Apple money. I'd like to hear why you think it does.

Also, Motorola Mobility is not going to be all that integrated with Google. There's a reason why the company has retained its name. Not saying it's a good thing (it frankly kind of sucks IMO), just saying that how it is.
 
2012-08-17 01:26:01 PM

digistil: change1211: That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.

clapping.gif

It's about cloning a brand.


Or lazy-ass designers. Plenty of those around.
 
2012-08-17 01:26:58 PM

digistil: change1211: That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.

clapping.gif

It's about cloning a brand.


No, the case is about specific patent violations. Everything else is noise.
 
2012-08-17 01:27:27 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Nothing you just showed means Samsung owes Apple money. I'd like to hear why you think it does.


Where did I say Samsung owes Apple money?
 
2012-08-17 01:28:38 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: digistil: change1211: That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.

clapping.gif

It's about cloning a brand.

No, the case is about specific patent violations trade dress. Everything else is noise.


/FTFY
 
2012-08-17 01:30:22 PM

change1211: digistil: change1211: That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.

clapping.gif

It's about cloning a brand.

Or lazy-ass designers. Plenty of those around.


You don't design with your competitor's branding. Evar. Specifically for this reason.
 
2012-08-17 01:31:17 PM

hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

I'd patent using strings to keep shoes on peoples feet.
I'd patent stairs
I'd patent paths, gravel and dirt.
Toothbrushes, not a type of toothbrush, just the brushing of teeth in general.

/It'd be fantastic.


You just have to add "wireless" or "on a touchscreen" to those and you're golden.
 
2012-08-17 01:31:57 PM

russlar: Help us, IBM. You're our only hope.


Holy crap that is genius. It's like holding a mirror up to defeat a laser satellite that is trying to fry you.

/If years were seasons, then this December would be the December of our December.
 
2012-08-17 01:37:45 PM

digistil: change1211: That may be a very entertaining screw-up on the part of someone in Italy but it doesn't really prove anything in this case. Samsung isn't being taken to court in the US because one of their stores used iOS icons.

clapping.gif

It's about cloning a brand.


Except that they aren't. What you've pointed out (a store that has iStuff icons) and what's being sued over -- "your rectangle with a screen looks like our rectangle with a screen" are not the same things.

Yes, if they replicated the icon, it'd confuse consumers and would be a fair trademark violation issue -- note I said trademark, not patent.

If you're talking about the overall theme, Apple wasn't exactly the first to come up with the posh, white, simplistic theme....every Bond villain in the 70's already had that.
 
2012-08-17 01:38:38 PM

imgod2u: Except that they aren't.


Do you honestly believe that?
 
2012-08-17 01:43:50 PM

digistil: hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

It does. Why do you think knock-off Rolexes, Fiero Ferraris and LX bags are illegal? If your overall product too closely resembles a competitor already on the market, you're going to get sued.

And for the few sheep that still believe Samsung isn't an Apple clone, I present to you a final in-house design that was accidentally put into production.

[st.gsmarena.com image 600x437] 

/Samsung is making a mockery of Android 
//Moto will wipe the floor w/ Samsung in a year or two, now that they have Google-league resources


From your linked article:

Now it's possible this was a display left over from some other event or product

Which is exactly what happened.

I don't think Samsung has anything to worry about with Motorola.
 
2012-08-17 02:07:12 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: digistil: hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

It does. Why do you think knock-off Rolexes, Fiero Ferraris and LX bags are illegal? If your overall product too closely resembles a competitor already on the market, you're going to get sued.

And for the few sheep that still believe Samsung isn't an Apple clone, I present to you a final in-house design that was accidentally put into production.

[st.gsmarena.com image 600x437] 

/Samsung is making a mockery of Android 
//Moto will wipe the floor w/ Samsung in a year or two, now that they have Google-league resources

From your linked article:

Now it's possible this was a display left over from some other event or product

Which is exactly what happened.

I don't think Samsung has anything to worry about with Motorola.


That was tongue in cheek, chief.

Google's not stupid. Never count them out.
 
2012-08-17 02:11:20 PM
Greed gone wild.
 
2012-08-17 02:16:29 PM

digistil: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: digistil: hungryhungryhorus: I really wish this style of patent system extended to the rest of the market. I'd be a billionaire overnight.

It does. Why do you think knock-off Rolexes, Fiero Ferraris and LX bags are illegal? If your overall product too closely resembles a competitor already on the market, you're going to get sued.

And for the few sheep that still believe Samsung isn't an Apple clone, I present to you a final in-house design that was accidentally put into production.

[st.gsmarena.com image 600x437] 

/Samsung is making a mockery of Android 
//Moto will wipe the floor w/ Samsung in a year or two, now that they have Google-league resources

From your linked article:

Now it's possible this was a display left over from some other event or product

Which is exactly what happened.

I don't think Samsung has anything to worry about with Motorola.

That was tongue in cheek, chief.

Google's not stupid. Never count them out.


Sorry. We need a special sarcasm font. It would make internet life so much easier.
 
2012-08-17 04:38:06 PM
Headline:Samsung rests its case by asking Apple for a $400 million gift

Good, maybe we can have a break from these troll-tastic headlines for a while.
 
2012-08-17 04:46:22 PM
All I know is I love my Galaxy S3.
 
2012-08-17 05:20:16 PM

ericbo84: If Apple wants to license retarded patents like battery indicators and panorama gallery views and crap for $30 - $40 per device, I say let Samsung have a nickel per device for "essential" patents, which IMO actually sound like shiat that should have been patented, not the petty crap that Apple patents. Whole system is broken beyond repair.


Samsung was asking for 2.5% per device, way more than a nickel.

/nickel is probably too low, tho
 
2012-08-17 05:21:00 PM
i.imgur.com
Yup.
 
2012-08-17 05:24:05 PM

GreenAdder: [i.imgur.com image 424x600]
Yup.


Would you mistake that for an iPhone?
 
2012-08-17 05:26:52 PM

soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.


And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.
 
2012-08-17 05:28:50 PM

jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.


And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?
 
2012-08-17 05:30:04 PM

soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.


I wish the judge had done what the Euro judge did - make Apple publicly apologize to Samsung.
 
2012-08-17 05:37:51 PM

Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?


Well there's a pretty stupid statement.
 
2012-08-17 05:40:20 PM

GreenAdder: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

I wish the judge had done what the Euro UK judge did - make Apple publicly apologize to Samsung.


The Euro judge (specifically the German one) went the other way, found Samsung to be infringing and Apple's patents valid, and banned sales of the Tab 10.1 in Germany. And the UK judge's order is on hold pending appeal.
 
2012-08-17 05:41:11 PM

change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.


I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?
 
2012-08-17 05:44:22 PM

Theaetetus: And the UK judge's order is on hold pending appeal.


Well, of course Apple is going to appeal it. It's one thing to ask them to give up money. It's another thing to make them admit they were wrong about anything.
 
2012-08-17 05:50:25 PM

GreenAdder: Theaetetus: And the UK judge's order is on hold pending appeal.

Well, of course Apple is going to appeal it. It's one thing to ask them to give up money. It's another thing to make them admit they were wrong about anything.


It's not that, it's that this is one decision out of a whole number of cases worldwide, several of which have gone the other way. Logically, Apple can't "admit they were wrong" since they were right in other jurisdictions, so the order requires them to make false statements, since it didn't limit what they were supposed to say to just the UK.
 
2012-08-17 05:53:25 PM
Like, for example, if Apple has to say "Samsung didn't copy us," but the German judge makes Samsung say "We copied Apple," the two jurisdictions end up with competing and contradictory orders.
 
2012-08-17 05:54:25 PM

Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.

I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?


I was unaware that patent law is in the constitution.
 
2012-08-17 06:00:44 PM

change1211: Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.

I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?

I was unaware that patent law is in the constitution.


This is going to be one of the very few places where Theaetetus and I agree....

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution:

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
 
2012-08-17 06:01:47 PM

tgambitg: change1211: Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.

I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?

I was unaware that patent law is in the constitution.

This is going to be one of the very few places where Theaetetus and I agree....

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution:

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."


Indeed, I just went and read up on that myself. I wasn't disagreeing with him, I was just unaware.

I still think he's a twit.
 
2012-08-17 06:02:24 PM

tgambitg: change1211: Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.

I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?

I was unaware that patent law is in the constitution.

This is going to be one of the very few places where Theaetetus and I agree....

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution:

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."


I should add, however, that he and I disagree fundamentally as to what falls under that clause.
 
2012-08-17 06:02:30 PM

change1211: Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.

I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?

I was unaware that patent law is in the constitution.


O.o

... but anyway, I was referring to his called-for seizure of property without due process.
 
2012-08-17 06:04:09 PM

Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: jso2897: soopey: I really wish the judge had just thrown both parties out of the court room, told them to D.I.A.F., then fined the shiat out of them for wasting the court's time.

And also declared their entire patent libraries public domain. Just to teach them a lesson, and make an example of them.

And taken all of their property away, closed their factories, and left each company's board of directors homeless?

Well there's a pretty stupid statement.

I'm just curious. Since he's throwing out the constitution, how far is he willing to go?

I was unaware that patent law is in the constitution.

O.o

... but anyway, I was referring to his called-for seizure of property without due process.


Look up.
 
2012-08-17 06:04:20 PM

Theaetetus: Like, for example, if Apple has to say "Samsung didn't copy us," but the German judge makes Samsung say "We copied Apple," the two jurisdictions end up with competing and contradictory orders.


Why would a judge in the UK care if his ruling contradicts a German court?
 
2012-08-17 06:09:05 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Theaetetus: Like, for example, if Apple has to say "Samsung didn't copy us," but the German judge makes Samsung say "We copied Apple," the two jurisdictions end up with competing and contradictory orders.

Why would a judge in the UK care if his ruling contradicts a German court?


He doesn't, but Apple does, hence the appeal. And the German court might be a bit peeved, too. My point is that it's not just that Apple "doesn't want to admit they're wrong", but that they're in the position where they're being ordered to say something that is false, because what they've been ordered to say isn't limited to the facts at issue.
 
2012-08-17 06:16:32 PM

Theaetetus: HotWingConspiracy: Theaetetus: Like, for example, if Apple has to say "Samsung didn't copy us," but the German judge makes Samsung say "We copied Apple," the two jurisdictions end up with competing and contradictory orders.

Why would a judge in the UK care if his ruling contradicts a German court?

He doesn't, but Apple does, hence the appeal. And the German court might be a bit peeved, too. My point is that it's not just that Apple "doesn't want to admit they're wrong", but that they're in the position where they're being ordered to say something that is false, because what they've been ordered to say isn't limited to the facts at issue.


How many of these cases have not been appealed anyways, I don't think anyone was all that shocked when Apple appealed.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report