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

Apple sues Samsung: a complete lawsuit analysis

thisismynext.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–34 of 34 posts

Re: Apple sues Samsung: a complete lawsuit analysis

#31

Post by jamesaguilar »

r00fus wrote: post #13
hesdeadjim wrote: post #5

This has to make things a little awkward considering Samsung has been fabbing Apple's mobile chips.

It's only confusing if you think this lawsuit is meant to be won on merits and not to primarily annoy a competitor into not competing. It's placing pressure on Samsung to "toe the line" and "deliver our components, not your own products".

Seems quite likely from this guy's analysis that it could be won on merits. By making the lawsuit, Apple is also making a statement that it believes the case has merit. And winning the case on the merits (or settling it because a victory for Apple would be likely) would profit Apple significantly.

On the other hand, there is no chance that Samsung will shut down its phone division, whether or not Apple wins the lawsuit.

So I cannot understand how you got the impression that Apple is making this lawsuit in order to annoy Samsung into not competing. That is a much less likely explanation for the suit.

Re: Apple sues Samsung: a complete lawsuit analysis

#32

Post by chalst »

kedi_xed wrote: post #26

How does this compare to another field, say cars? I recently been car shopping for the first time, and the similarities between sedan models is amazing. Due to the nature of a car, and a sedan at that, it seems that all models have to follow a similar design for them to be functional and acceptable. If a trade dress results in the monopoly of an industry, I assume then that the it would have to be avoided, or everyon…

There are two tests a trade dress lawsuit has to meet: first, the features have to be distinctive of the product in the eye of the consumer; second, the features must not be functional. This second requirement should mean that trade dress cannot be used to establish a monopoly.

The actual application of the functionality requirement is hazy. See http://www.akingump.com/docs/publication/549.pdf

It's unclear to me that Apple's claims to trade dress pass the functionality requirement.

Re: Apple sues Samsung: a complete lawsuit analysis

#33

Post by r00fus »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #31
r00fus wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only confusing if you think this lawsuit is meant to be won on merits and not to primarily annoy a competitor into not competing. It's placing pressure on Samsung to "toe the line" and "deliver our components, not your own products".

Seems quite likely from this guy's analysis that it could be won on merits. By making the lawsuit, Apple is also making a statement that it believes the case has merit. And winning the case on the merits (or settling it because a victory for Apple would be likely) would profit Apple significantly. On the other hand, there is no chance that Samsung will shut down its phone division, whether or not Apple wins the lawsu…

> On the other hand, there is no chance that Samsung will shut down its phone division, whether or not Apple wins the lawsuit.

Samsung may not shut down their phone operation but this suit could make them re-evaluate the cost-benefit of Android phones... others have mentioned that this is a proxy lawsuit against Google, I'd agree.

Post reply on HN