Hans-Christian Andersen
hans.andersen at phulse.com
Mon Aug 27 03:27:03 CDT 2012
The US patent system is completely absurd (for many many reasons), but Android and Samsungs models were obvious duplications of Apples designs and UX. This is an aged old argument, that is finally percolating up to a final legal ruling. In my opinion, the cats out of the bag. Google and all the other Android vendors have already done irreparable damage and I think Apple should just innovate, rather than litigate. But, if you judge the situation on its merits fairly (taking those rose tinted sunshades off and put yourself in Apples position), it is completely fair to say they got ripped off. They reinvented the mobile space and everyone else just copied what they did (aside from Microsoft, that is). Imagine if you spent all the R&D to produce a product that completely turns a market upside down and all your competitors (and even your manufacturers) simply copy everything you do? Well, I imagine you'd probably feel differently. If you outsourced your ideas to another company and they started producing their own in-house versions of your product, you'd be pretty upset as well. But, at the end of the day, these sorts of arguments will fall on deaf ears by certain types of people because they don't want to hear differently. My two cents. - Hans On 2012-08-26, at 11:07 AM, Stuart McLachlan wrote: > It just goes to show how screweup the US patent system is - and the US legal system :-( > > > > On 26 Aug 2012 at 8:26, Jim Lawrence wrote: > >> Upon some basic investigation into the suit Apple and Samsung filed against >> each other and Apple won, it all leaves me wondering >> >> I first assumed that the case hinged on complex technology that the other >> had used and failed to compensate the other for...like one of the companies >> had invented Gorilla glass, or the special glue to hold on the glass, or the >> diode chip, or miniaturized camera technology, or voice receptors or >> miniaturized chips, or a certain type of SD RAM, or their board >> configuration or even a certain type of interface or protocol. >> >> To my amazement it was none of these. >> >> Did you know the following "technologies" and I use the word with disbelief, >> are patented? >> >> 1. A double tap on a screen to expand the screen. >> 2. Bounce-back if scrolling beyond the screen real-estate. >> 3. Multiple gestures recognition on the screen. >> 4. Ornamental design of white or black on cell phone/tablet case. >> (other colors as well) >> 5. Rounded corners on phone/tablet design. >> 6. Rounded corners on screen icons. >> >> It is like patenting a handle on a door or a certain height of a chair or >> the first Ford being able to patent the paint colour black, on a car. >> >> Then the whole court case was a setup. The courtroom was less than 10 miles >> from Apple's headquarters. The jurors were selected from the immediate area. >> As far as I can see the whole event could just as well taken place in an >> Apple boardroom with the jurors being Apple employees. Rest assured if any >> juror had disagreed with the guilty verdict their future, in Silicon Valley, >> would have been very limited. >> >> IMHO, the whole trial was a joke, a farce and a setup. Samsung did not have >> a song of winning or even breaking even. If I had been the judge in the case >> I would have laughed them out of court, fined them both substantially for >> wasting the courts time and sent them both on their way. >> >> Jim >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dba-Tech mailing list >> dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com >> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech >> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > dba-Tech mailing list > dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com