Jury awards Apple $1.05 billion in Samsung patent dispute ruling

[chris888222]

The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700.

So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-

Did you do your own homework before spreading known false information?

http://androidcommun...unked-20110420/

Sounds like the article concludes it's ambiguous though, not that it was the other way around, but a good find nonetheless.

Seeing that it comes from an android based blog, this should be reliable enough.

 

[Thesolcity]

So I'm guessing no one looked at/ignored these, right?

Spoiler

Spoiler

Oh, and here's a report detailing how "Touchwiz" was made to mimic the iOS UI. I don't consider myself an Apple fan, nor do I like the system of copyright currently in place, but facts are facts.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

I'm going to be honest, on smart phones these days, how can you do anything that doesn't use a grid system and still works with apps? Having a grid system just makes everything so much easier to navigate through. I mean, if that's one of the arguments Apple used to win, then technically, couldn't Microsoft sue Apple for using the grid system on their computers?

 

[chris888222]

I'm going to be honest, on smart phones these days, how can you do anything that doesn't use a grid system and still works with apps? Having a grid system just makes everything so much easier to navigate through. I mean, if that's one of the arguments Apple used to win, then technically, couldn't Microsoft sue Apple for using the grid system on their computers?

It's not exactly about the grid system, or even about Android OS.

Samsung made use of TouchWiz (or any other sort) to tweak some of the build-in Android OS aspects to match some parts of the iOS. The base android build had none of these at all/very little.

 

[Shuji1987]

The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700.

So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-

Did you do your own homework before spreading known false information?

http://androidcommun...unked-20110420/

Wikipedia: A Korean design patent for this black, rectangular, round-cornered phone was filed by Samsung in December 2006 prior to the release of the image of the iPhone.

So you can still argue about this The blog probably missed that patent filing and therefor makes their whole article invalid, even with the best intentions they had. In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.

 

[ouch123]

The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700.

So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-

Did you do your own homework before spreading known false information?

http://androidcommun...unked-20110420/

Wikipedia: A Korean design patent for this black, rectangular, round-cornered phone was filed by Samsung in December 2006 prior to the release of the image of the iPhone.

So you can still argue about this The blog probably missed that patent filing and therefor makes their whole article invalid, even with the best intentions they had. In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.

Do you know the credibility of the source Wikipedia got that information from? Just sayin'.

 

[Thesolcity]

I'm going to be honest, on smart phones these days, how can you do anything that doesn't use a grid system and still works with apps? Having a grid system just makes everything so much easier to navigate through. I mean, if that's one of the arguments Apple used to win, then technically, couldn't Microsoft sue Apple for using the grid system on their computers?

What do you mean by grid?

 

[chris888222]

The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700.

So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-

Did you do your own homework before spreading known false information?

http://androidcommun...unked-20110420/

Wikipedia: A Korean design patent for this black, rectangular, round-cornered phone was filed by Samsung in December 2006 prior to the release of the image of the iPhone.

So you can still argue about this The blog probably missed that patent filing and therefor makes their whole article invalid, even with the best intentions they had. In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.

For me, it would be the other way round. Before you rage at me or whatever, let me explain why.

An android community will normally do whatever it takes to be pro-android and anti-apple. However, in this article, they aren't protecting Samsung (which uses an Android OS). Even though they didn't say anything nice about Apple, I would have expected them to say things like APPLE CHEATS instead of this.

Wikipedia is very popular and it's an open source community. People can amend the information to whichever way they like (don't let me get started on the Seen Lee incident). On an android community forum, they are (should be) much lesser known than a giant web book like Wikipedia.

 

[Thesolcity]

The F700 was first introduced in 2006 and went on sale in early 2007. The iPhone 3, using the allegedly Apple designed style was released on the market in mid 2007, almost 5 months AFTER the Samsung F700.

So yeah, neither their grid system nor design is original. Seriously did the court even do their homework? -_-

Did you do your own homework before spreading known false information?

http://androidcommun...unked-20110420/

Wikipedia: A Korean design patent for this black, rectangular, round-cornered phone was filed by Samsung in December 2006 prior to the release of the image of the iPhone.

So you can still argue about this The blog probably missed that patent filing and therefor makes their whole article invalid, even with the best intentions they had. In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.

For me, it would be the other way round. Before you rage at me or whatever, let me explain why.

An android community will normally do whatever it takes to be pro-android and anti-apple. However, in this article, they aren't protecting Samsung (which uses an Android OS). Even though they didn't say anything nice about Apple, I would have expected them to say things like APPLE CHEATS instead of this.

Wikipedia is very popular and it's an open source community. People can amend the information to whichever way they like (don't let me get started on the Seen Lee incident). On an android community forum, they are (should be) much lesser known than a giant web book like Wikipedia.

Hi, Devil's Advocate here. I'm just going to throw in that any serious project that uses Wikipedia as a source is almost NEVER taken seriously. That is all.

 

[Urza]

In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.

Opinions are not substitute for fact.

http://www.samsung.c...o?news_seq=3516
>February 8th, 2007: Samsung today announced a new addition to its Ultra portfolio with the introduction of Ultra Smart F700. This revolutionary mobile phone will be showcased at 3GSM World Congress, the largest telecommunications event, next week.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

In my opinion it could have also been pure traffic generation for the website. Wikipedia > some android community I don't know the credibility off.

Why would you form an opinion on a fact instead of actually doing research?

http://www.samsung.c...o?news_seq=3516
>February 8th, 2007: Samsung today announced a new addition to its Ultra portfolio with the introduction of Ultra Smart F700. This revolutionary mobile phone will be showcased at 3GSM World Congress, the largest telecommunications event, next week.

But.. that's when people seen it. They could have had the patent before people seen it.

 

[Shuji1987]

Do you know the credibility of the source Wikipedia got that information from? Just sayin'.

Korean patent database: http://eng.kipris.or.kr/eng/main/main_eng.jsp
Honestly don't ask me how to look it up, I have no idea how that works but I do remember being xfered there from another site to the patent itself.

Or the source quoted by Wikipedia, Bloomberg:
http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/16106-apple-s-war-on-android

I still choose any of the sources over the android community though. It's not that I have any issues with communities or Android or whatever, it's just that other sources are more credible. Also Urza, introducing/revealing doesn't equal a patent filing.

 

[Urza]

My only claim here is that the information you attempted to convey in the image you posted is completely false. The F700 was not shown at CEBIT 2006, and you should actually do research before spouting nonsense.

I also haven't even mentioned patents, so I'm not sure where you get the idea I'm trying to equate anything to anything.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

how about this?

 

[Shuji1987]

Actually on that subject, I agree Urza. I knew this phone had a patent filing in 2006 so I looked up the first image on google and copy pasted the text on the first site lol. So for that I apologize for being lazy.


But to avoid confusion, I am talking about the patent filing of the SGH-F700. The unveiling of the device in feb 2007 is a whole different thing. The timing to unveil it a month after the iPhone to the public may very well be shit timing on Samsung's part though.

Anyways, if you think about it, Samsung can not slap a device ready from scratch to shipped-off in a month time. Just think about the whole R&D process, the development of the OS, the research on how to ideally build and manufacture the device, the materials required to make it, the machinery and location to assemble all of it. It's just a few of the things I can think off. It's simply impossible that Samsung thought:"Omg, cool device 4ppl3 made lololololol. Let'z rip that off GAYS!!11!" as there simply no such resources available to get that done.

My point of view is basically, either Apple took some inspiration from that very patent filing (which I find highly unlikely as well due to time and resources as well) and we basically got two very similar devices with Samsung having a crap timing, or the last and most likely of all: The natural evolvement of smartphones.

Sony did it before, LG did it before as well as Samsung as well as many other companies. Apple didn't invent a holy grail as they want it to appear. So I just don't get why they act that way and why people even agree with them on that part.

edit; jeez so many spelling errors and grammar mistakes.. Time for bed I guess.

 

[IBNobody]

I figured this would happen. It's a sad day for the US consumer.



On the brighter note, Samsung is still cleaning up overseas.

 

[chris888222]

Now, I wonder if Samsung would still manufacture those Ax chips.

On the other hand, Samsung please improve your company infrastructure. I really have no objection against your phone designs or TouchWiz, but no other company takes 5 working days to actually fix a minor phone issue, plus you delayed mine for an extra 3 working days.

Also, $670 for a Galaxy S III with contract is downright atrocious.

 

[Shuji1987]

Now, I wonder if Samsung would still manufacture those Ax chips.

On the other hand, Samsung please improve your company infrastructure. I really have no objection against your phone designs or TouchWiz, but no other company takes 5 working days to actually fix a minor phone issue, plus you delayed mine for an extra 3 working days.

Also, $670 for a Galaxy S III with contract is downright atrocious.

Really $670 with contract? O.o What would the duration be? 1-year I guess?

I got mine on a €25,- p/m 2-year contract and I got the phone and first 4 months free of charge. I got it two weeks after the release so I can't complain I guess.

 

[chris888222]

Now, I wonder if Samsung would still manufacture those Ax chips.

On the other hand, Samsung please improve your company infrastructure. I really have no objection against your phone designs or TouchWiz, but no other company takes 5 working days to actually fix a minor phone issue, plus you delayed mine for an extra 3 working days.

Also, $670 for a Galaxy S III with contract is downright atrocious.

Really $670 with contract? O.o What would the duration be? 1-year I guess?

I got mine on a €25,- p/m 2-year contract and I got the phone and first 4 months free of charge. I got it two weeks after the release so I can't complain I guess.

Singapore has it at around S$600 - S$700 depending on carrier (~ €450) at a plan of S$30 p/m with zero data (~ €20).

You can get the phone at about S$450 - S$550 with a data plan from S$45 p/m onwards (~ €30).

The plans just have caller-id. Contracts are ALWAYS 2 years (Renewal can be done on 20th month)

 

[triassic911]

My only claim here is that the information you attempted to convey in the image you posted is completely false. The F700 was not shown at CEBIT 2006, and you should actually do research before spouting nonsense.

I also haven't even mentioned patents, so I'm not sure where you get the idea I'm trying to equate anything to anything.

If this was a year ago I would look at you as a big jerk. However, I now see why you make these statements. One must have credible sources and have all the facts before stating anything in an argument. I wish more people on these forums were like you, but sadly these are younger people who are still a bit naive.