Samsung Must Show Cell Phones to Apple

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
A federal court judge in California has ordered Samsung to turn over five unreleased phones to Apple as part of the patent infringement case Apple brought against the company. So Samsung has to cough up secret phone designs to Apple? What if the devices do NOT infringe on Apple's patents? The courts just got a free look at Samsung's unreleased products thanks to this judge?

"Although the Court expresses no opinion on the merits of Apple's claims, the Court notes that Apple has produced images of Samsung products and other evidence that provide a reasonable basis for Apple's belief that Samsung's new products are designed to mimic Apple's products."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Steve ..sorry but.. you didn't read the article well or missed the part where ...

.... limited the results of discovery to "Outside Counsel Eyes Only," meaning neither Apple nor its in-house counsel will get a peek at the phones or related marketing materials.
Click to expand...


I .umm...love...you...
 
Even so, that doesn't mean the plans couldn't still be "mysteriously leaked" after this.
 
martinmsj said:
Steve ..sorry but.. you didn't read the article well or missed the part where ...




I .umm...love...you...
Click to expand...

I am glad you love me...:eek:

What I am talking about, and I thought was rather clear, is the court is asking Samsung to cough up secret UNRELEASED products.

Someone please explain to me how unreleased products infringe on ANYTHING. :eek:

:D
 
OK, so does the Court's look-e-loos also get to peek at Apple's upcoming phones to make sure they don't infringe on Samsung's designs? Tit for Tat, bro. Just try to keep Gizmodo out of it this time.
 
Steve said:
I am glad you love me...:eek:

What I am talking about, and I thought was rather clear, is the court is asking Samsung to cough up secret UNRELEASED products.

Someone please explain to me how unreleased products infringe on ANYTHING. :eek:

:D
Click to expand...

amen brother, not to mention how through anything other than industrial espionage would apple have reason to believe that an unreleased, pre-production product would infringe on anything of apples?
 
[/QUOTAmong other evidence presented by Apple, the judge cited a TV news report that quotes a Samsung executive saying, "We will have to improve the parts [of the Galaxy Tab 10.1] that are inadequate. Apple made [the iPad 2] very thin."
E]
That made me laugh. Not sure who is more of an idiot here - Apple for presenting that quote as evidence or the judge for citing it. So anything thin is grounds for a patent infringement. What next? Black turtlenecks? Actually Jobs can have that all by himself.

If 'thin' confuses buyers then I think Apple growers and producers everywhere should launch a class action lawsuit against Apple for confusing buyers too.
Click to expand...
 
Among other evidence presented by Apple, the judge cited a TV news report that quotes a Samsung executive saying, "We will have to improve the parts [of the Galaxy Tab 10.1] that are inadequate. Apple made [the iPad 2] very thin."
Click to expand...
That made me laugh. Not sure who is more of an idiot here - Apple for presenting that quote as evidence or the judge for citing it. So anything thin is grounds for a patent infringement. What next? Black turtlenecks? Actually Jobs can have that all by himself.

If 'thin' confuses buyers then I think Apple growers and producers everywhere should launch a class action lawsuit against Apple for confusing buyers too.

edit:stupid tags
 
Matalim said:
Let's take a look at Apple's patents and look at the samsung phone in question. You decide if Apple has a case or not.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/04/11x0418b7323f.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/04/4-20-11-apple-sues-samsung.jpg
Click to expand...

Looks similar, but really don't all smartphones these days look similar in much the same ways? My Galaxy S phone is shaped the same, has the ear speaker in the same place, and has buttons on the bottom. There isn't a whole lot of variation in the first place...
 
Lawsuit also says that Samsung's Touchwiz interface infringes on Apple's iOS so it's not all about the hardware.
 
To be honest with you, Apple is getting given too much. If I were samsung, I'd fight this tooth and nail and then dump cause a few 'delays' on any shipments to Apple factories and exit supplying them altogether.
 
Matalim said:
Let's take a look at Apple's patents and look at the samsung phone in question. You decide if Apple has a case or not.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/04/11x0418b7323f.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/04/4-20-11-apple-sues-samsung.jpg
Click to expand...
That photo is grossly misleading. The Galaxy in that picture has been configured to resemble the iPhone but like all Android phones it's only one of a million different combinations of looks. I love how the courts and media use that picture but ignore pictures of the Galaxy screen full of widgets, TouchWiz features, customizations, etc. If I knew nothing about android and TouchWiz I'd say Apple has a slam dunk but my guess is that Samsung will steamroll them in the end.
 
I would just box up some dog shit and ship it to Apple with a note "This is all you're gonna get"
 
It is a rectangular block with a touch screen. How different can it be from one another? It is just ridiculous that companies are suing each other with reasons like that. So, should the Wright bros start suing plane companies because of wings, Ford suing car companies because of wheels, and the Chinese government suing the whole world because of paper and explosive??! Greed for the win... man...
 
Apple sued me because I had a liver that Steve Jobs wanted. What Apple wants, Apple gets. Foxconn blows up, and the world worries about iPad shortages. Sorry, folks, this is why I don't like Apple. The companies ethics and way they do business. Not cool at all.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Apple sued me because I had a liver that Steve Jobs wanted. What Apple wants, Apple gets. Foxconn blows up, and the world worries about iPad shortages. Sorry, folks, this is why I don't like Apple. The companies ethics and way they do business. Not cool at all.
Click to expand...


The way they do business? The American way?

Also the world doesn't worry about iPad shortages, stock holders do. And if you're saying people should feel sorry for 3 people dying in China they don't know, that's a bit unrealistic. Thousands of people die everyday, the only reason they got this attention is because of Apple being connected to it in some way.
 
Steve said:
I am glad you love me...:eek:

What I am talking about, and I thought was rather clear, is the court is asking Samsung to cough up secret UNRELEASED products.

Someone please explain to me how unreleased products infringe on ANYTHING. :eek:

:D
Click to expand...

The headline you wrote says "Samsung must show cell phones to Apple."

That's not true. Samsung is showing upcoming cell phones to independent counsel. Not to Apple.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Apple sued me because I had a liver that Steve Jobs wanted. What Apple wants, Apple gets. Foxconn blows up, and the world worries about iPad shortages. Sorry, folks, this is why I don't like Apple. The companies ethics and way they do business. Not cool at all.
Click to expand...

Wait, let me see if I got this right. You don't like Apple because in your morbid fantasy, Apple sued you for your liver, and because one journalist commented on iPad supplies in addition to fatalities at Foxconn?
 
lol Samsung had phones that looked like the iPhone long before the iPhone was released, same with LG.
 
Intellectual property is idiotic. The idea you can have a right to property that supersedes everyone's right to use their own property is crazy.

And the idea that patents result in more innovation is crap. If Apple wins where is their incentive to innovate? They now don't have to advance to compete.

(Not saying Samsung wouldn't do the same thing. They most certainly are... )

For a patent lawyer on the stupidity of patents.
http://blog.mises.org/16849/
http://blog.mises.org/16970/
 
I dont like how this case is going already, I don't see a similarity myself:-iPhone, rectangular, glass on both sides, no access to the battery, or memory, antenna on outside edge of aluminium bezel, only similarities are the camera on front and back, and lower spec.

Galaxy S, toughened glass front, access to battery and memory, 4G capabilities, higher spec main camera, entirely plastic, not flat and boring on both sides, and it's a little larger in screen size and general dimensions.

Spec wise, the two brands couldn't be any more different.

And the Judge taking heresy as fact, should reconsider his career...although he probably has an iPhone In his pocket.

Before you cast me as an android supporter, I have an iPhone, but with the lack of anything ground breaking from Apple, I'm looking to switch in the next few months.
 
The other thing that bugs me, who the he'll gets an iPhone confused with a Samsung Galaxy?

I went to the store and asked for an iPhone, if I wanted a galaxy (and I will when I can upgrade), I would have asked for one, unless I'm a cut above the average retard Apple assume I am.
 
Just found another interesting tidbit, Samsung manufacture most of the key components, for Apple's product lines of iPad and iPhone, such as the LCD screens, A4, and A5 processors, and the flash memory, they are probably only taking this action because they have switched parts suppliers.
 
Matalim said:
Let's take a look at Apple's patents and look at the samsung phone in question. You decide if Apple has a case or not.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/04/11x0418b7323f.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/04/4-20-11-apple-sues-samsung.jpg
Click to expand...

No, they do not.

Two completely different devices in the pictures.

Only a brain dead moron would get them confused. IE Those who had no clue what they were buying in the first place, AKA the perfect Apple consumer. :D
 
So apple makes a living by copying other technology and making it "magical" yet when it happens to them they have a tissy fit?
 
lathode said:
The way they do business? The American way?

Also the world doesn't worry about iPad shortages, stock holders do. And if you're saying people should feel sorry for 3 people dying in China they don't know, that's a bit unrealistic. Thousands of people die everyday, the only reason they got this attention is because of Apple being connected to it in some way.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget that Foxconn had to put up a suicide net to encourage people to stop killing themselves while working there.
 
Is this going to screw with the projected release date of the Galaxy S2, or will this drag out way beyond the estimated July-September?

I'm still confused that aside from the shape, how do you not see the difference between something covered in Samsung, and Galaxy logos, compared to the Apple insignia, and the completely blank, apart from the circular home button style?
 
Despite Samsung needing no defense in those comparison pictures, I'm going to add another defense. The Samsung phone only looks like that when you launch the app drawer where all the icons are located, otherwise it looks nothing like it on the home screen because you can put custom widgets all over the screen of all different shapes and sizes. It doesn't even come out of the box with a home screen that looks like an iPhone. That's like saying if I launch Google maps on both an android device and on an iPhone and they look the same inside the app, Apple is infringing on Google!!!! Guess what, I can up an ancient windows phone with a grid of icons and it looks like the iPhone software!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top