http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...msung-copied-the-iphone-and-ipad-in-pictures/
Got copy? What do you think?
Got copy? What do you think?
Apple vs Samsung
- Thread starter UncleFai
- Start date
It is a US court deciding in favour of Apple a US company against Samsung, a Korean company.
It is anti-competition.
If such reasons can be accepted to extract $1.05 Billion, then:
Sanyo may sue Apple. Sanyo SCP-5300 was the first camera phone.
O2 may sue Apple. O2XDA Flame was the first to have the flat rectangular shape with rounded edges.
Apple must be careful about the Korean / Asian backlash if this is perceived as unreasonable bullying against Asian company by an American company in an American court.
Two can tango. Two can play this game. Asian countries that have mobile phone manufacturers can find fault with Apple and fine Apple $1 Trillion for contravening various rules and regulations in those Asian countries. Or stop all sales of Apple products in those countries.
In addition, if Asian consumers see this as an attack on Asia, such that it is unpatriotic or distasteful to own an Apple product, then Apple loses its Asian consumer base.
It is anti-competition.
If such reasons can be accepted to extract $1.05 Billion, then:
Sanyo may sue Apple. Sanyo SCP-5300 was the first camera phone.
O2 may sue Apple. O2XDA Flame was the first to have the flat rectangular shape with rounded edges.
Apple must be careful about the Korean / Asian backlash if this is perceived as unreasonable bullying against Asian company by an American company in an American court.
Two can tango. Two can play this game. Asian countries that have mobile phone manufacturers can find fault with Apple and fine Apple $1 Trillion for contravening various rules and regulations in those Asian countries. Or stop all sales of Apple products in those countries.
In addition, if Asian consumers see this as an attack on Asia, such that it is unpatriotic or distasteful to own an Apple product, then Apple loses its Asian consumer base.
Except in Singapore, where most kids think they cannot live unless they own an iPhone just like all their "frens"
Tired of Apple's obnoxious legal dept crying foul on various companies. It does not make their products any better or more appealing to me.
Just bought my wife an S3 last week and she loved it to bits. I m waiting patiently for my Note 2.
Just bought my wife an S3 last week and she loved it to bits. I m waiting patiently for my Note 2.
Steven Jobs rejoined Apple when it was near collapse and revived the company.
Steven Jobs was an innovator with ideas that brought Apple to new heights.
Then Steven Jobs died.
The Apple company is still benefiting from the momentum of Steven Job's ideas.
But one day the flywheel will stop spinning when the momentum runs out.
His successor Tim Cook is an administrator. He is not an innovative ideas man. He knows people will compare him to Steven Jobs. He cannot create innovative ideas for new Apple products.
So how does he show his value?
He sues other companies. And makes unnecessary enemies.
Steven Jobs was an innovator with ideas that brought Apple to new heights.
Then Steven Jobs died.
The Apple company is still benefiting from the momentum of Steven Job's ideas.
But one day the flywheel will stop spinning when the momentum runs out.
His successor Tim Cook is an administrator. He is not an innovative ideas man. He knows people will compare him to Steven Jobs. He cannot create innovative ideas for new Apple products.
So how does he show his value?
He sues other companies. And makes unnecessary enemies.
They settled and decided to co-operate. See. Steven Jobs was wiser.
Apple & Creative Announce Broad Settlement Ending Legal Disputes Between the Companies
Apple & Creative Announce Broad Settlement Ending Legal Disputes Between the Companies
Last edited:
at that point of time.
Steve Jobs knew at that time, that even if they lost the patent battle for the MP3 Player, they would be the ultimate winners in the end.
fast forward 6 years to today. Apple is fighting a losing battle against Samsung and they're trying to win at all costs to be the king.
see the difference?
Apple picked on Samsung partly because Samsung was selling so well. They are afraid.
Apple dare not pick on a PRC mobile manufacturer-brand. Because PRC can still drag up the worker-suicides in Foxconn and slap Apple very hard.
Apple also does not want to antagonise the PRC market of potential billions of mobile phone buyers.
When a bully wants to bully somebody, he always weigh the pros and cons and pick on the one that he thinks he can get away with bullying.
A bully never picks on the one that can hurt him seriously in retaliation.
Apple dare not pick on a PRC mobile manufacturer-brand. Because PRC can still drag up the worker-suicides in Foxconn and slap Apple very hard.
Apple also does not want to antagonise the PRC market of potential billions of mobile phone buyers.
When a bully wants to bully somebody, he always weigh the pros and cons and pick on the one that he thinks he can get away with bullying.
A bully never picks on the one that can hurt him seriously in retaliation.
Steve Jobs was quoted in his biography as saying that he wanted to destroy android AT ALL COST. read BBC News - Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Android
Only android fanboys would think Apple is suing Samsung because they're running scared. Read How Apple and Samsung cornered all smartphone profits | Digital Trends
Essentially during the last quarter Apple is taking 71% of profits from the entire smartphone industry by just cornering 16% of the market. Samsung on the other hand sells twice as many phones & makes less than half the profits. Bear in mind this is the quarter in which Samsung released their new flagship model the galaxy S3, while Apple sales dropped as people waited for the iPhone 5 coming in the 3rd quarter.
If you only consider market share then yes Samsung is absolutely kicking Apple's ass, but believe it or not some businesses exist to make money (profitable ones that survive). It's revealing that as much as Android is "winning", only Samsung is making any money selling Android phones.
As for claims that Apple is just being a big bully & suing people for ridiculous patents for frivolous "innovations" eg. the swipe to unlock gesture, think abt how come people didn't come up with such a ridiculously simple yet elegant way of unlocking touch screen only devices before Apple came along. Its the care & attention to details that Apple takes towards every minute detail of their products that make them so simple & intuitive to use. It is only because hindsight is 20/20 that's why Apple's innovations are seen to be obvious & unremarkable.
please... go do your homework... before this lawsuit came up, apple went and bought up all patents from companies it had taken technology from.
it's been revealed that "swipe to unlock" was originally patented by another company, along with a host of other technological goodies.
The US judges got to apply their common sense. How would such petty suits benefit mankind?
The first car was without steering wheel. Later someone invented the steering wheel. This was his "user interface" to navigate the car. Can he sue everyone else who put a steering wheel in their cars and prevent them from doing so?
The first few calculators were without buttons (e.g. abacus). Later someone put buttons (this is a "user interface design") on mechanical calculators and eventually electronic calculators with buttons were made. Can the first person who put buttons on his calculator prevent everyone else from using buttons on their calculators?
Someone first made a table with 4 legs. Can he sue everyone else and insist that their tables cannot have 4 legs?
The first transistor radio had a wheel that you turned to change frequency and thus select radio stations. This was their "user interface design".
Can the makers of Regency TR-1 sue everybody else who put a dial on their transistor radios to select the radio station?
The first car was without steering wheel. Later someone invented the steering wheel. This was his "user interface" to navigate the car. Can he sue everyone else who put a steering wheel in their cars and prevent them from doing so?
The first few calculators were without buttons (e.g. abacus). Later someone put buttons (this is a "user interface design") on mechanical calculators and eventually electronic calculators with buttons were made. Can the first person who put buttons on his calculator prevent everyone else from using buttons on their calculators?
Someone first made a table with 4 legs. Can he sue everyone else and insist that their tables cannot have 4 legs?
The first transistor radio had a wheel that you turned to change frequency and thus select radio stations. This was their "user interface design".
Can the makers of Regency TR-1 sue everybody else who put a dial on their transistor radios to select the radio station?
Last edited:
Similar threads
