From The Blog

Displaying items by tag: Samsung

2001In the recent patent wars between Apple and, well just about everyone else you hear a lot about Prior Art.  This is when someone can point to something that was created or in use before the item in question was patented. For example, if I tried to patent a circular disk intended to hold data, video or music I would not get it because of the CD-ROM, the DVD-RROM etc. So what about Apple’s recent legal action against Samsung? They claimed that the Tab 10.1 was a copy of the iPad and violated their patent.  However, there is plenty or prior art to invalidate the concept design patent for the iPad.

One of the funniest that Samsung has brought to bear in the case is a screen shot taken from the Stanley Kubrick Movie “2001: A Space Odyssey” where two of the astronauts are sitting watching a video feed on a tablet device.  Now Apple fans will say that Apple is allowed to patent this because Mr Kubrick did not! So since they (Apple) spent their hard earned money to take this concept and make it real they deserve the patent.  Well there are two problems with that argument. First of all there were real tablets in existence before the iPad was even put to paper. But the second and one that I find the most ironic is that every movie is by its nature copyrighted. So images, concepts and ideas are considered the property of the copyright holder. This means that Apple violated Copyright when they designed the iPad.
Something to think about while we all wait for more interesting news.

Source CNET

Discuss in our Forum

Published in News

screenshot-page-28Apple’s legacy of patent lawsuits might be coming unraveled in the EU. Although the California based company did get an injunction on Samsung selling the Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Ace it only barely managed that one. The issue that got Samsung caught was the “way” you scroll through the Photo Application on the listed phones. Oddly enough the application in question is not a Samsung app but the default photo app that is released with Android 2.3 (which is the default OS on the phones in question).

Not affected by the ruling were the Galaxy Tab and Tab 10.1 which come with a different flavor of Android. The Judge also appear to have rejected the claim that Samsung copied Apple in the design of the Galaxy Tab and the Galaxy S. More than likely this decision was influenced by the fact that the evidence used to support this fantasy of Apple’s was falsified intentionally or not.

Apple also took a blow in that the Judge ruled that Patent No. 1,964,022 is now null and void in the EU. This means that Apple can no longer use it in any legal actions. Patent 1,964,022 cover the “slide to unlock” feature that Apple uses on the iPhone.  Samsung has said that they will replace the software that is in violation of Apple’s patent and then begin selling the phones in the EU again. Apparently investors feel that Samsung will do just fine as Samsung’s stock went up after the verdict while Apple’s fell on the announcement of Steve Jobs’ resignation.

The fact that Samsung is conceding and changing the one application (that is not even theirs) could be an indication that they may have some counter suits of their own planned for Apple and want to remove any bargaining chips from the table before they fire back. Things could get messy for Apple in the next few months especially if the courts in the EU decide to do anything about all that falsified evidence, maybe at Samsung’s request…

Discuss in our Forum

Published in News
Saturday, 20 August 2011 14:47

Apple caught using more misleading evidence

screenshot-page-28Ok, I could not let this one pass. After hearing about the first instance of inaccurate evidence presented by Apple in court. I honestly thought that occurrence might have been nothing more that old images or an accident involving someone trying to fit both pictures in the same space. However, now we hear about another case where Apple has done exactly the same thing. This time the case in question is in the Netherlands where Apple is trying to get a permanent ban AND a recall of all Galaxy Smart Phones and tablets.

At this point it seems that Apple is willing to lie, cheat and maybe even steal to get what they want (market dominance). I certainly hope that the courts hold Apple responsible on both counts. It is very clear that Apple feels it is above the law in the US where they have led a charmed life with the Patent office and the US International Trade Commission. Now they are taking this to the EU where they managed to get an ex-parte, non-hearing preliminary ban on the Tab 10.1 with inaccurate images as evidence. Thankfully, as of this writing the ban has been lifted (citing jurisdiction issues) in all countries in the EU except Germany. With mounting proof of falsified (or at least wildly inaccurate) visual evidence being used by Apple we would certainly hope these injunction requests are dropped for good and Apple required to face the consequences of their actions.


Source ITWorld.
Picture credit WebWereld.

Published in News

screenshot-page-28It looks like Apple may have made a serious blunder in their EU case against Samsung. As we have told you previously Apple has made the claim that Samsung copied the iPad2 in their design of the Galaxy Tab 10.1. As such they have sought an injunction and been granted a preliminary one banning sales of the Tab 10.1 in all areas of the European Union except the Netherlands.

However, we are hearing now that some of the evidence presented was inaccurate. According to Macworld and the images used do not show the Tab 10.1 properly. According to Samsung’s site the Tab 10.1 has dimensions of 257.7 x 175.3mm this represents an aspect ratio of 1:1.46. Careful review of the image in Apple’s complain reveal that it has an aspect ratio closer to 1:1.36 putting it very close to the dimensions of Apple’s iPad2.

Now the question is whether Apple actually manipulated this image or if they used outdated images (knowingly or not). If it is the former then Apple is in serious trouble as they have presented false evidence in a legal proceeding. If it is the later then they will still face some serious consequences as it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to present accurate information in any litigation (even in the EU). Samsung has filed an appeal to the original injunction and with this new evidence they have a very good chance of winning. No matter the cause I am sure that the Court System will be keeping a closer eye on Apple in the future. Let’s remember Apple’s presentation during the “grip of death” problem and the iPhone 4 where they cherry picked three phones to prove the grip issue was global. After that incident it was shown that even with those phones the issue was very limited and not the same as what Apple was trying to show. It actually prompted statements and the threat of legal action from Samsung and HTC at the time. So we would honestly not be surprised to find that Apple knowingly used an outdated image of the Tab 10.1 in their evidence to further their case.

Apples-Flawed-EvidencePicture Credit

It will be interesting to watch the outcome of this one.

Discuss this in our forum
Credit to forum member Kelevmor for passing this one along.

Published in News
Friday, 12 August 2011 22:20

Who copied who?

Electric-Kettle-with-Tea-Pot-WX-8971-Looks like things are heating up between Apple and Samsung. I am not talking about anything like a war between the two companies or anything like that, but in the realm of stupid and asinine complaints. We kick off things with Apple’s complaint that Samsung “Copied” the iPad and iPhone. They base this in the fact that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 looks like the iPad and that some of Samsung’s phones look like the iPhone… (their words not mine). Apple then goes on to say that Samsung copied the look and feel of the iOS (where have I heard that before).

I hate to say this but, if you were to pick up 20 smart phones they would all be very alike. They are all around the same size and shape and the UI’s are also very close. If you dig deeper, the way they operate are also nearly identical; after all how many different ways can you swipe or tap with your finger? No, this one smells of Apple trying to delay a product that has a very good chance of hurting their sales. There is no other reason to ask for the injunction. The funny thing is that there are almost no real patents being bandied about here by Apple. This is because if they throw those out Samsung has a few of its own to drop on Apple some that could even be tied to the A4 SoC in the original iPad…

For Samsung’s part they are making the claim of “Nuh-Uh!” followed by the “you never said that!” defense. As it stands right now they are pushing for a rehearing on the claim that an injunction was not mentioned or requested in the original complaint. They are also claiming that the judge that approved the temporary ban did so without allowing Samsung to present evidence in its defense.  This is very hard to believe as it represents both an unethical and illegal move by the judge in question. It is even harder to believe considering that an injunction and ban is exactly what Apple went for in Australia.

To be honest both companies are acting a little childish and unprofessional. If you ever wanted to see just how arrogant companies can be here it is, and to top it off you get to see just how ignorant the legal system is to how technology and the tech industry as a whole works.

Discuss in our Forum

Published in News
Page 29 of 29