Originally Posted by tallison

Can't even believe the verdict was so one sided. Samsung was destroyed by the jury, right down to the patent law

http://live.cnet.com/Event/Apple_vs_Samsung_verd ict

Can't even believe the kid in commerce thinks this is the end of it.

I fell like this is a very fitting ted talk for this case, albiet it doesnt have to do with samsung/apple directly more so with patenting creativity. ... there is a bit about apple in the middle though...

http://www.ted.com/talks/kirby_ferguson_embrac e_the_remix.html

Originally Posted by Yogurt

I have no fucking idea why this was such big news. Of course, there's not going to be any change in the ancient and now-corrupted patent system

It's big news because it set a new precedent... Now companies know they can patent shapes and curves, and get away with calling it "intellectual property". In setting a new precedent, it changed how the US patent system will operate in cases like this in the future.

As for this verdict in terms of the country it was handed out in: The U.S. may be small in comparison to the Asian market, but the American market is still where people shell out money long after they have none (pretty ironic statement, right?)... So that's why America was a prime market: Non-existent money keeps flowing in.

America: Where you can constantly make money off of people who have negative amounts of it...

Canada isn't much better either, just to clear that up.

Originally Posted by Chevalier

I fell like this is a very fitting ted talk for this case, albiet it doesnt have to do with samsung/apple directly more so with patenting creativity. ... there is a bit about apple in the middle though...

http://www.ted.com/talks/kirby_ferguson_embrac e_the_remix.html

Loved that talk!

I personally dont see how Apple managed to get patents for the bouncy scrollbar or slide to unlock or even pinch to zoom.(not sure if they had this one). Software patents to some extent should not be granted, there are only so many ways one can think of manipulating a touch screen.

However I do see how Apple had the right to be pissed of about what Samsung was doing. Copying is ok to some extent, as long as you make it your own. Making smartphones similar to that of apples is understandable. But they were pushing the envelope when they starting making their chargers, cables and packaging almost identical to the iPhones. The law suit also was about the trade dress, to which Samsung most definitely infringed.

Originally Posted by Crzyrio

Loved that talk!

If you liked it, check out the full 4-part series on Vimeo. A very well designed, well paced, well delivered, and quite informative series on ideas and innovation. Parts 3 and 4 are relevant today now more than ever, and may be the more engaging ones. But all 4 are worth the watch.

Part 1: The Song Remains the Same (Music)
Part 2: Remix Inc. (Movies)
Part 3: The Elements of Creativity
Part 4: System Failure

I've posted it a couple times on here, but no one bit :(.

Listed devices it wants banned
http://www.thestar.com/business/scie...t-wants-banned

*Stares intently at shiny new Samsung Galaxy S3*

(Whisper) Stay with me... Just a little bit longer.


*Pets his phone*

Truth is, one of the people was correct above ^^ Samsung did copy certain features, BUT the fact of the matter is whether they DID or DID NOT purchase the phone because of these features it does not change the fact that a patent was infringed upon. This would be like saying Person A invents the first predictive texting algorithm, patents it, and sells the first phone ever made that has it (obviously everyone is buying his phone for that feature) but then Person B makes another phone, with that same predictive texting feature, but this time adds the first touch screen in a cellular device. Person B could easily say that he did not infringe upon any patent because people bought his phone for the touch screen, he would be wrong because even if this was true, a patent was still used without permission

I mean come on I love Samsung and I love Apple but you guys have to admit, Samsung did copy a lot of features from Apple, AND THEY STILL ARE. Like now if you buy a SAMSUNG laptop with Windows 8 installed it has a suspiciously "Apple-looking" Samsung version of the dock that is so famous in Mac OS. Samsung just take it too far sometimes

Samsung won the case in Japan.... surprise !

@macprodigy ... i believe that is a windows 8 feature...not unique to the samsung laptop. As such its more of microsoft copying apple.

furthermore yes even though they did copy some of the more distinctive features other things which they are blamed for copying are basic things which not only seem intuitive to anyone to include but have been done and incorporated into other forms of technology well before apply put it into its phones and patented it. In fact if you look back on most of the tech apple and other modern day phone companies have on their devices, its not all that new. ... heck that pinch-to-zoom "innovation" they are so obsessed over has been around for a long time in other devices, I even have that on my laptop as do most others.

I also agree with what was said about ppl not uying the phones for the apps and techs behind them. If i wanted the apple brand, the apple apps, and their features, I would buy an apple IPHONE. An issue over copying imo would only arise if samsung copied was copying apples tech incorporating it into thier own and selling it for a significantly ceaper price. Right now the only phone samsung has that compares with the IPhone is thier Galaxy series which are pretty much the exact same price.