Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

slashgear.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 203 posts

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#61

Post by novalis »

flatline3 wrote: post #34
taligent wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is. Apple can't get back lost sales and revenue as a result of patent infringement by their direct competitor.

I think it's unfortunate that taligent has been downvoted into the negatives, because he (or she) is correct. How much is market leadership worth? How big of a check would Apple have to write RIM to restore their market advantage? How big of a check would Apple have to write Nokia to put them back where they were in the marketplace 4 years ago? I'd argue that there is no check large enough to restore a lost market ad…

"If Apple won their current market position through innovation, and Samsung is eroding it by taking advantage of that innovation counter to patent law, there's no reasonable amount Samsung could pay to set things to right."

Let us say that first "If" is held by the judge as a given and that allows for him to deny the same rights to the other party. How does that work at all ?

When one of these gets overturned "there's no reasonable amount" Apple "could pay to set things"..."right.". How is that loss calculated ? Is it calculated at all ?

This automatic assumption after the cry wolf turns to nothing in the end and the plaintiff abused the law and the courts to retain commercial position while trying to cement its stand through jurisprudence.

This is a sad state of things and points to a needed overhaul, if not, it will just go on and on until it breaks in the end. Billions of dollars later, the "leaders" will have chocked everyone else not because of innovation but because of bad legislation that assumes too much at the preliminary stages based on incompetent assertions that cannot be equated like other parts of the law. Yet, here we are.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#65

Post by thechut »

ars wrote: post #4

I'm starting to hate Apple more and more. Apple: Are your products so terrible that you have to force people to buy them by preventing any other competition? I think it may be time for high profile developers to boycott Apple till they stop acting like this.

I completely agree with you ars, Apple is getting totally out of hand. They are becoming what Microsoft was in the 90's and it absolutely sickens me.

Consumers have the right to choose what products they want to buy.

I have been slowly switching away from the Apple products I own. And this just reaffirms that I will never buy another Apple product.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#66

Post by bishnu »

SoapSeller wrote: post #56
cromwellian wrote: post #41

Boy, they are getting a lot of mileage out of that regular expression "data tapping" patent, even though people were doing the same thing years before, including a NeXTStep app released with source and published on USENET in 1995 1 year before the Apple patent was filed https://groups.google.com/group/comp.archives/browse_thread/...

IBM Simon(1993/4) also had the same functionality[0]. Also, it seems that their main patent(8,086,604[1]) for this case describe a metasearch engine, something that have been around at least since the mid 90s(long before the patent was filled in 2004). [0] http://youtu.be/wnFsJ9z_caY?t=1m57s (warning: terrible video quality ahead) [1] http://goo.gl/jjG1P

Is this kind of stuff not brought up in court? How can you possibly patent something that already existed?

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#67

Post by lukeschlather »

flatline3 wrote: post #34
taligent wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is. Apple can't get back lost sales and revenue as a result of patent infringement by their direct competitor.

I think it's unfortunate that taligent has been downvoted into the negatives, because he (or she) is correct. How much is market leadership worth? How big of a check would Apple have to write RIM to restore their market advantage? How big of a check would Apple have to write Nokia to put them back where they were in the marketplace 4 years ago? I'd argue that there is no check large enough to restore a lost market ad…

Shouldn't the plaintiff though be the one to take on that risk?

If the damage of losing market share is truly irreparable, then the court would be doing irreparable harm to Samsung on the basis of Apple's unproven allegations.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#68

Post by zmmmmm »

This seems to be based on the most bogus of Apple's patents - things like "slide to unlock" (something used on physical door's for hundreds of years, moving it to pixels doesn't suddenly make it inventive) and auto-converting data to links (well documented back into the 90's.

It's a shame that the places where Apple really moved forward are not where they are exploiting their patents. It seems, those ideas were already beyond Apple's ability to patent, so instead they got a bunch of bogus stuff through and are using it anyway. It really besmirches their actual amazing record of inventiveness that they take rubbish like this forward. I hope these all get overturned.

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#69

Post by pm90 »

raganwald wrote: post #53
notatoad wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that isn't what is happening here. If you wanted a bicycle metaphor, apple has invented a wonderful carbon fibre bicycle that everybody wants. Then, despite the fact that bicycles have existed for a hundred years, they got patents on things like "using levers to shift" and "building a frame out of tube-like structures". And now, every time somebody starts to make a bicycle that is even remotely competitive, th…

Those are fine arguments against Apple’s business strategies, but not arguments that Apple’s products are terrible and/or inferior. Especially not arguments that Apple’s products are inferior to whatever-it-was that its competitors were doing before Apple introduced the iPhone.

Nobody said its products are inferior. The argument _is_ against its business strategies, which is quite absurd, to say the least. I think the reason why ars advocated a boycott was as a 'protest' to show Apple that it must not partake in such activities. And please please don't give me the argument that Apple is a corporation that exists only for its profits etcetc. There are ways to maximize your profit without being so paranoid

Re: Apple granted preliminary sales ban of Galaxy Nexus

#70

Post by FaceKicker »

mythz wrote: post #37
jellicle wrote: post #2

>According to Judge Koh, “Apple has articulated a plausible theory of irreparable harm” in its argument against Samsung and the Galaxy Nexus, because of “long-term loss of market share” along with “losses of downstream sales.” This is not what "irreparable harm" used to mean. Apple's lawyers are celebrating tonight. EDIT: If I plan to kill a cat, and you file a lawsuit to stop me, the judge may issue an injunction fo…

It is irreparable harm considering they can't get back the monopoly/leading market-share effect at this very young stage of the tablet market. i.e. Sales and profits now is a lot more important than Sales and Money later.

Doesn't that just mean more money though? I'd agree that the analysis of the damages would get pretty fuzzy at best if you're trying to account for such factors, but it's still ultimately just a loss of money.
Post reply on HN