Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#1

Post by pnayak » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 3:40 PM UTC

Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents
wired.com

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#2

Post by SoftwareMaven » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 4:04 PM UTC

Not good when your own designers are saying "too bad it looks like an iPhone". The Sony concept is interesting; it would be interesting to do a courtroom test (can the lawyers differentiate when the judge holds them up). I don't think it would e a problem with the original iPhone, but the iPhone 4 might be. Of course, Sony never created that product.

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#3

Post by shrikant » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 4:11 PM UTC

The five 'reveals':

1. Apple’s early vision for the iPad [...] were extraordinarily chunky and included a kick-stand

2. Google told Samsung that its devices looked “too similar” to Apple’s iPad. Google demanded “distinguishable design vis-à-vis the iPad for the P3.”

3. Apple made 23 to 32 percent on gross margins for iPads sold between April 2010 and March 2012.

4. The iPhone design was inspired by a Sony designer talking about "portable electronic devices that lacked buttons and other ‘excessive ornamentation,’ fit in the hand, were ‘square with a screen’ and had ‘corners [which] have been rounded out"

5. Apple researches consumer sentiment on existing products in order to optimize future designs.

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#4

Post by amartya916 » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 4:18 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Not good when your own designers are saying "too bad it looks like an iPhone". The Sony concept is interesting; it would be interesting to do a courtroom test (can the lawyers differentiate when the judge holds them up). I don't think it would e a problem with the original iPhone, but the iPhone 4 might be. Of course, Sony never created that product.

I also read that Best Buy had people returning the Galaxy Tab because they had originally thought that it was the iPad.

Link: http://allthingsd.com/20120726/documents-in-apple-v-samsung-...

Now, of course one can say that the consumer should have paid more attention to the branding, but I think that's missing the point. It seems that for a few (?) people the Galaxy tab looked similar enough to the iPad to cause confusion and that the big box retailer conveyed the message to Samsung.

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#5

Post by justinschuh » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 4:35 PM UTC

Wired's article certainly presents Apple's side of the story. Although, the Samsung take is pretty interesting: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120726121512518

Apparently, Apple argues that FRAND patents should be effectively free, estimating that Samsung's standards patents are worth less than 1¢ per device. Whereas, Apple thinks its design patents are worth $24 per device, and their utility patents are another $3 on top of that. Were that to hold, it would eliminate Samsung's profit margin. So, it's hard not to read this as Apple trying to cage viable competitors entirely out of the market through legal maneuvering.

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#6

Post by KaoruAoiShiho » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 4:36 PM UTC

Article missed the biggest kicker, which is that the galaxy designs pre-date the iphone:

http://i.imgur.com/KPGYL.jpg

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#7

Post by falling » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 5:02 PM UTC

It’s really depressing that for the first time we can have a glimpse into Apple’s design process (which, whether you like the company or not, is unarguably interesting) and all HN can talk about is petty score counts.

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#8

Post by jemfinch » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 5:17 PM UTC

Is "revelation" really too tough a word for the authors of this article or the readers of Wired?

I really don't appreciate this linguistic trend in the tech community to turn verbs into nouns in a non-standard, ad hoc way when perfectly fine nouns exist. I (unfortunately) hear it with "ask" fairly frequently at work, and it makes me feel like Jules from Pulp Fiction ("Use 'ask' as a noun again, I dare you...")

Can anyone shed some linguistic light on this trend?

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#9

Post by falling » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 5:34 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Not good when your own designers are saying "too bad it looks like an iPhone". The Sony concept is interesting; it would be interesting to do a courtroom test (can the lawyers differentiate when the judge holds them up). I don't think it would e a problem with the original iPhone, but the iPhone 4 might be. Of course, Sony never created that product.

From the fine article: “An Apple industrial designer, Shin Nishibori, then mocked up the design, even using Sony’s logo on the back of the CAD drawing.”

Of course this won’t stop the internet from believing that Apple copied the iPhone design from Sony, but I’ll try to make this my last comment on it.

Re: Apple v. Samsung: Surprises in Latest Court Documents

#10

Post by nirvana » Sat, Jul 28, 2012, 5:42 PM UTC

Hey Falling. You've been hellbanned. Your comments are not appearing to anyone except those who have "turn dead comments on". You may have been hellbanned for daring to defend Apple on HN, who knows since they never say, but they are really active at censoring people for having diverse opinions.

Just thought I'd share this in case you're still reading the thread... I can't even reply to your hellbanned comments alas.