Originally Posted By: rg200amp
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Anyone who's read my posts in the past knows how I feel about this. And all it's done is make me lose faith in our court system. Honestly, what do you think would be the situation today if a century ago a single company had patented "A motorized, self propelled coach with 4 wheels". This really is the same kind of things. The jury is also clearly ignoring abundant prior art. This whole thing makes me sick. Well I will never be buying an iphone. I'll keep my Galaxy S2 forever if that's what I have to do.
Cause Samsung is a great company?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/business/worldbusiness/06cnd-samsung.html
http://www.asiaone.com/Business/News/Story/A1Story20110610-283339.html
http://news.techeye.net/business/south-korea-makes-example-of-samsung-corruption
No billion dollar company is clean. Not even the Vatican!!!
Samsung went out of their way to make their phone look and act like the iPhone. That's a fact. That's why the jury ruled the way they did.
Your example of a company owning the rights of the car is not the same. Four wheels is NEEDED. A windshield is NEEDED. A motor is NEEDED.
Apple is not looking for compensation from Samsung because they used a touch screen. Because they used a CPU. Because they have a power button.
They sued Samsung because Samsung built their phone to look just like and act like the iPhone. Because Samsung incorporated pinch to zoom. Rubber banding. Those thing are not NEEDED to build a smart phone. They are features that apple spent time on polishing and incorporating into their product to set themselves apart from the competition. Only the have Samsung reverse engineer it and build a phone just like it.
Taking ideas and concepts is one thing. Making your phone look and work like just like your competion serves no use to the public.
This ruling is going to be good for consumers. It's going to push new and better innovation that sets every company apart from each other.
That's like saying that a car having a CD player/USB integration can be patented because it's "Not NEEEDED" The first company to put them in didn't try to patent them, and sue all other manufacturers that have since put it in. It's the same thing.
This ruling is NOT going to be good for the consumer. These patents are for things that just make sense on a smartphone. According to apple, swiping your finger on a screen to unlock it, no matter how it works, is stealing from them. Same thing for pinch to zoom. [censored], I had a samsung dumb phone with a touchscreen a few years before the iphone, that had pinch to zoom. So you are telling me that pinch to zoom should be allowed to be patented? Come on now.
All this is going to do is mean that Samsungs products in the US are going to be banned from sale. That is good for the consumer how? Less choice. Windows phone, blackberry, or iphone. Sounds like a plan to me.
