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

Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

allthingsd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–69 of 69 posts

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#61

Post by peterashford »

threeseed wrote: post #21
patrickaljord wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, for most people watching this from outside of the US, it looks like protectionism racket disguised as a legal verdict. Samsung is eating Apple's lunch and the US is trying to stop that. The US gov keeps pushing for more free market worldwide (which is great), except that when one of its industries or great companies is in danger because of international competition, protectionism is the way. How can th…

How can you be taken seriously when you post such illogical dribble ? To imply that US judges have been 'bought off' by Apple or by the US government is a huge claim to make that deserves substantiation.

As another non-US citizen I have to agree with Patrick. The US legal system looks like it has gone out of its way to punish the foreign competitor. Or more to the point, the jury in this case. Did anyone expect a bunch of US citizens to support a Korean company competing with a US icon like Apple?

As a New Zealander, this whole affair seems like a load of US-centric BS to me.

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#62

Post by peterashford »

WildUtah wrote: post #50

I miss Groklaw. The site owner used to recruit volunteers from the readers to go to the courtroom and write up accounts of the proceedings every day. It was more up to date and informative than the supposedly professional media outlets.

Hells yeah - me too. Groklaw was IMO one of the biggest losses from the whole NSA spying saga.

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#63

Post by sbuk »

patrickaljord wrote: post #58
rayiner wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not protectionism, but rather an attempt to enforce particular rules of the game in the face of changing economic profiles. In a nutshell, American IP policy is predicated on the understanding that the production of IP is America's competitive advantage. The U.S. can't compete with asian countries for low-cost manufacturing, but still dominates when it comes to software, design, etc. There is a reason phones des…

How come Samsung has lost all their software patent lawsuits against Apple in the US while they won in South Korea? Get real.

So the South Koreans are protectionists too?

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#64

Post by sbuk »

WaterSponge wrote: post #29
ykl wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You obviously haven't read the Galaxy S1 design docs then. http://www.scribd.com/doc/102317767/Samsung-Relative-Evaluat...

Serious question... Is it not a normal thing to hardcore analyze your offerings against your competitors? And if so is it a bad faith to do these types of analysis inside your company on your products since it exposes you in court? How has the auto industry get getting along so long without suing each other into the ground?

>Serious question... Is it not a normal thing to hardcore analyze your offerings against your competitors?

Yes, but not to this level. This is a guide book to imitating another platform.

>And if so is it a bad faith to do these types of analysis inside your company on your products since it exposes you in court?

No. I'd suggest that Samsung did go over the top with this.

>How has the auto industry get getting along so long without suing each other into the ground?

They haven't. The automotive industry is extremely litigious, it just doesn't get page views, dead-tree or internet.

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#66

Post by patrickaljord »

sbuk wrote: post #63
patrickaljord wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How come Samsung has lost all their software patent lawsuits against Apple in the US while they won in South Korea? Get real.

So the South Koreans are protectionists too?

Probably, yes.

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#67

Post by josephlord »

WildUtah wrote: post #59
josephlord wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was never as good with the patent issues especially when Google were involved it never felt balanced (with SCO there really wasn't any need for balance or bias as SCO were so far out there you could report it straight and still have clear bad guys).

It was fine for Oracle v. Google as reporting that one straight provided an obvious bad guy, too. And Samsung v. Apple I also provides many obvious bad guys if you follow the case and understand the industry and read the patents. Apple's claims are garbage but Samsung had so much contempt for the process that they let their lawyers utterly fail to make the case. The judge lost control of the case and ended up with va…

I'm not even sure about that one. Oracle are a bad guy (always) but I'm not sure Google weren't one too in that particular case. If you replay the situation in your head imagining MS in the Google role and Sun in the Oracle role would you have felt the same way?

I think the conclusion that API's are not copyrightable is pretty much preposterous from my understanding of copyright law. A decision that there was a 'fair use' right to copy API's for compatibility purposes would have been an interesting and probably valuable development although I'm not sure Dalvik would have applied here.

Groklaw's example API to explain what API's (adding numbers I think) was also applied when considering whether there was creativity in expression and correctly the conclusion was that there isn't in the case of adding but then Groklaw inappropriately extrapolated this view to all API's.

The court reporting could be useful though you are right. Florian Mueller (http://www.fosspatents.com/) attends some of the German ones and I find his reporting on the patent cases very good. Groklaw seemed to have taken the view that you couldn't believe a word he said but I never quite understood why (although it might have been the Oracle v. Google case as he didn't see it the Groklaw way and had at some point consulted for Oracle).

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#68

Post by aroch »

patrickaljord wrote: post #17
josteink wrote: post #4

I seriously can't believe how much money Apple has been able to troll out of those rounded corners and that end-of-list overscroll effect. And now, to top it off, iOS 7 is built on the holo-principles of Android. It's almost like Apple is doing it merely to taunt its foreign competitors, saying very, very clearly: "Sorry guys. I'm untouchable". Utterly disgusting. At least their attempts to outright ban products have…

At this point, for most people watching this from outside of the US, it looks like protectionism racket disguised as a legal verdict. Samsung is eating Apple's lunch and the US is trying to stop that. The US gov keeps pushing for more free market worldwide (which is great), except that when one of its industries or great companies is in danger because of international competition, protectionism is the way. How can th…

So we're going to ignore the German and EU patent battles that Apple has won against Samsung? Way to provide not only biased but willfully wrong information in order to support your argument

Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million

#69

Post by Dylan16807 »

rayiner wrote: post #42
patrickaljord wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, for most people watching this from outside of the US, it looks like protectionism racket disguised as a legal verdict. Samsung is eating Apple's lunch and the US is trying to stop that. The US gov keeps pushing for more free market worldwide (which is great), except that when one of its industries or great companies is in danger because of international competition, protectionism is the way. How can th…

It's not protectionism, but rather an attempt to enforce particular rules of the game in the face of changing economic profiles. In a nutshell, American IP policy is predicated on the understanding that the production of IP is America's competitive advantage. The U.S. can't compete with asian countries for low-cost manufacturing, but still dominates when it comes to software, design, etc. There is a reason phones des…

There's no IP for fashion. And I think the world is a better place if everyone copies GUI design and makes things consistent. Remember that the point of IP is to serve the public at large.
Post reply on HN