Apple Wins Patent Ruling As Jury Finds Samsung Infringes

Post by mchanson » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 12:08 PM UTC

pinaceae wrote: post #317

programminggeek wrote: post #10

This is both unsurprising and somewhat meaningless as there will be an appeals process that will last for months and possibly years. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that Samsung made their products to look like Apple products. They changed their icon styles and other UI elements away from Android standards to match the Apple style. Some of the things Apple invented and patented on like pinch to zoom an…

On a greater scale this is the clash of 'Western', as in US/Europe, and East-Asian mindsets and culture. If you look into other areas like pharma, the same battles are being fought, with India and China essentially ignoring 'our' patent laws for their domestic markets (see their recent changes in laws). China has forced manufacturers to build factories in China in order to be able to sell products there, regardless o…

Post by dsirijus » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 12:28 PM UTC

eftpotrm wrote: post #328

justincormack wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Apple make more profit. Thats how they decided to compete, not for market share.

And how's that profit sustainable? They currently have near-monopoloy perceived first-mover prices and margins as 'the only credible device' (iPad) and 'the coolest device' (iPhone). They have the perception as being 'the only system with the good apps' (iPad) - noticeably they don't have that any more with the iPhone. Realistically, how long can they keep it with the iPad and, once lost, what means do they have of g…

Post by pinaceae » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 1:07 PM UTC

mchanson wrote: post #331

pinaceae wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a greater scale this is the clash of 'Western', as in US/Europe, and East-Asian mindsets and culture. If you look into other areas like pharma, the same battles are being fought, with India and China essentially ignoring 'our' patent laws for their domestic markets (see their recent changes in laws). China has forced manufacturers to build factories in China in order to be able to sell products there, regardless o…

If this ever effects the US or Europe to to great an effect I'm pretty sure WTO can help. China is not selling these sorts of products to the world yet so it's a pretty meaningless threat so far.

Post by justincormack » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 1:15 PM UTC

bkorte wrote: post #233

recoiledsnake wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They take 73% of the profit in smartphone market I chuckle every time I hear this. How much profit of the web server market does Microsoft take with IIS vs. the free alternatives like Apache and Nginx? Who wins in the Server OS market of Windows Server vs. Linux/BSD? Who dominates the web dev tools market of Visual Studio vs. Eclipse/etc. ? The same arguments you make can be made against the above too. The idea of p…

You do understand that businesses exist to make money, right? Profit share is one of the few metrics that matter.

Post by wklauss » Sat, Aug 25, 2012, 1:56 PM UTC

vesky wrote: post #175

siglesias wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing this audience, I'll probably get downvoted, but I'll say it anyway. That's rather cynical. This is precisely the kind of trial that doesn't require expert thinking because most of what is up for debate is whether Samsung willfully attempted to fool customers into thinking that their products were just like an iPhone by copying the trade dress. And determining such a thing is a matter of common sense. This rem…

Reports already show that the jurors had not idea what they were doing. Many of the claims they made had no actual basis of infringement. This reeks heavily of people that had little idea about how the system actually works and gave verdicts that were more speculative rather than grounded and based on hard acts of actual infringement. http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/24/hang-on-a-minute-jurors-awa...