Slashdot Mirror


Apple Sues Samsung In Germany Again

New submitter tguyton writes "Apple is going after Samsung again in Germany, this time over 10 phones including the Galaxy S II. It should come before the courts in August, a month before their tablet case in September."

33 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. How do we... by Sez+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... get rid of the legal structure in place that makes this type of lawsuit have a good enough chance of prohibiting or delaying a competitors product that it makes good financial sense to proceed?

    I wish that money spent on lawyers was spend on engineering, or alternatively, entertaining commercials.

    1. Re:How do we... by Baloroth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unfortunately, it is the lawyers themselves who have a disproportionate influence over the legal structure itself. They are also the only ones who would know how to fix it and every reason not to. Hence, our current problems.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    2. Re:How do we... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      we 'buy' justice from the legal store (system).

      is there any wonder that the store owners don't want to give the secret to 'stocking the shelves' away? or let people produce their own goods?

      a bit far for an analogy but the point is that they line their pockets due to how bad the system is. they have NO REASON to make the wheels turn faster and more efficient. they would argue themselves out of jobs.

      it really is that simple. if tax laws were simple, we would not need accountants and such.

      people keep complexity because their job 'depends' on it. nothing much more than that.

      therefore, don't EVER expect it to change. its a constant, like gravity.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:How do we... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And one couldn't say the same thing about Apple? All the technologies that they use have been done before in one form or another. Heck, Jobs was often quoted saying Good artists copy; great artists steal...

      How is it ok (encouraged even) for one company to do it, but the other is just a vulture...?

    4. Re:How do we... by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Sigh, there's no reason to abolish patents and copyrights in general. Scale copyrights back to say life + 20 or perhaps 28 + 28 and remove the government from enforcing it and we'd be mostly there.

      Patents are a bit more complicated, ban business methods and software patents. Fund the USPTO through taxation, they aren't going to do their jobs well as long as their paycheck depends upon volume of patents granted.

    5. Re:How do we... by forkfail · · Score: 3

      How else in our mechanized age could we keep folks working, when we don't need them tilling fields or making goods anymore?

      --
      Check your premises.
    6. Re:How do we... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I prefer the Frank Herbert solution. The winning lawyer in a case that goes to court is require to ritually kill the losing lawyer, and invoking legal rules is grounds for summary judgement against you. It gives both sides' lawyers a strong incentive to settle amicably out of court...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    7. Re:How do we... by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Exactly. Lawyers have been able to inject themselves into the business of software and design to the degree they have because it represents a new source of revenue for them. Executives are all agreed on it because as bad as being sued is, it's better than facing an openly competitive field with no barriers to entry.

      Artificial barriers to entry like these patents increase the cost of goods, reduce the competitive field and drive monopoly rents.

      Without these rents, you would not have obscene profits and obscene salaries arrived at in this manner.

      You'd still have obscene profits but it would be in exchange for extreme value.

      But that would mean real work instead of lawyering, and the lawyers can't have that.

      It would also democratize opportunity, and the CEOs and politicians that are funded by them can't have THAT!

      We all know this is exactly true. We all know it's a game that is genuinely rigged to self reinforce the societal position of whoever has power and money currently.

      This is a deeply poison pill the effects of which no nation or civilization ever escapes no matter how draconic a regime they try to enforce.

      It's not substantially different than the corruption that drove the Arab Spring to topple its dictators.

      Software patents turn each and every programmer on this board a criminal on a daily, no, an hourly basis. That's not even an exaggeration, or hyperbole, or overstating the case; that's a material fact . It drive developers out of business and stops them from starting businesses every day

      How is this different from the events that set off the Arab Spring?

      from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12120228

      Mohammed Bouazizi, 26, sold fruit and vegetables illegally in Sidi Bouzid because he could not find a job. Last month he doused himself in petrol and set himself alight when police confiscated his produce because he did not have the necessary permit.

      Call them what you like. The 1%. The Royal Family. The Coke Snorting Class. The Lawyers. The Politicians. The Executives. The Parasites. Whatever you want to call them, the fact is they never see it coming because they're so out of touch with the rage hey engender in everyone else. They think they can keep all "those" people under control because "those people" don't matter, have no power and are so fucked they'll never get unfucked.

      That's what they think.

    8. Re:How do we... by green1 · · Score: 2

      Why should we provide for their family? My work doesn't provide for my family past my death, if I want to do that I have to save my earnings and invest them for the future. Why should Artists/Authors be any different?

      There are all sorts of things content providers WANT... there are all sorts of things we all WANT. That doesn't mean that there is any good reason to give it to them.

      Naturally copyright wouldn't exist at all. The existence of it is an artificial limitation of people's rights. To limit people's rights requires a good reason. If we decide to do so then the trade off must be carefully considered to give the maximum benefit to society as a whole, not to the minuscule percentage of society engaged in the creation of artistic works.

  2. Goose and gander by srussia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It isn't just Apple that Samsung has a tendency to "draw inspiration" from. (...) So before the usual anti-Apple rhetoric starts a-flyin', keep in mind that Samsung is one of those companies whose business is centered on making commodity knock-offs of popular products. I don't blame Apple for suing to protect Jonathan Ive's design work, because if one of the knock-offs is low quality or problematic, it can end up hurting Apple's brand.

    So if say, Apple (ahem) "draws inspiration" from an inferior product and makes it higher quality, then would the "inspirer" not have grounds to sue since it can only enhance its brand?

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
    1. Re:Goose and gander by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't just Apple that Samsung has a tendency to "draw inspiration" from. (...) So before the usual anti-Apple rhetoric starts a-flyin', keep in mind that Samsung is one of those companies whose business is centered on making commodity knock-offs of popular products. I don't blame Apple for suing to protect Jonathan Ive's design work, because if one of the knock-offs is low quality or problematic, it can end up hurting Apple's brand.

      So if say, Apple (ahem) "draws inspiration" from an inferior product and makes it higher quality, then would the "inspirer" not have grounds to sue since it can only enhance its brand?

      How does this hurt or help "their brand"? Does anyone mistakenly buy a Samsung product thinking it's actually made by Apple? An Apple product thinking it's a Samsung? Is there a stupid Apple logo on the back of Samsung's products, or something very similar? Should GM be suing everyone for making a vehicle with a steering wheel, a clear knock-off of their product? Should BP or Shell or 76 or whomever sue other people for making "knock-off" gasoline?

      Apple tries again to achieve monopoly through edict of the court system. They want to make a certain interface or whatever, and then live in a fantasy world in which no one else, somehow, responds to the demand pressures created by the desire for that product. Apple inhabits a reality distortion zone in which they, a VERY LATE COMER to the cell-phone game want to imagine that the fact that some people want to buy their version of a cell phone, that that means that ALL people who want to buy a cell-phone actually want to buy THEIR cell-phone.

      It'd be like a ugly person thinking that the hot person's rejection of advances over the years could ONLY be because the other person is gay (or straight, as the case may be) and not an actual rejection of him/herself. It's a comforting fantasy, but a fantasy nevertheless.

      They're delusional, and I hope everyone they sue counter-sues for the frivolous lawsuits they waste people's time with. Apple wants to imagine that when people consider buying a Samsung (or whatever) smart phone, that they are only doing so because what they REALLY want is an Apple "product". Again, Apple is delusional, possibly high.

      Imagine some hot chick in Hollywood suing another hot chick who came into the business a little later for taking movie rolls away from her, because CLEARLY the studio wanted to hire HER (the earlier chick) for the role. Afterall, the other hot chick is CLEARLY a knock-off of the previous one. Same pretty face, soft, plump, yet perky boobies; smooth, creamy, supple, toned thighs; long, lustrous platinum-blonde hair... see where I'm going with this?

      It would be nice if Germany just shut all this BS down right now, but they have no incentive to do so, even though neither company is actually IN Germany, so they should toss the thing out on lack of jurisdiction... or is Apple on the sly really Apfel GMBH? I thought Samsung was Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Taiwanese... or whatever. In any case, NOT German. So who is this a German court's business? Because they sell there? What a buncha crap.

      I didn't need any more reasons to feel utter disdain for Apple, and here they gave me one for free.

  3. It's gone beyond ridiculous. by forkfail · · Score: 3, Informative

    Honestly, if someone could find a way to patent the wheel, they'd do it.

    Our patent system is such at this point that there is no advancement possible without asking permission and paying royalties to someone else. Every fundamental idea and concept is owned. As anything that has any sort of visual representation and interface.

    Of course, all this is incredibly ironic, given that back in the day, Microsoft and Apple both flagrantly ripped off what are considered to be absolute fundamentals of a GUI from Xerox.

    --
    Check your premises.
  4. It's all they've got left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's all Apple has left: patents and lawsuits. Without Steve Jobs at the helm, what else did you expect them to do? Innovate new products? Please, even with Steve leading, all Apple has ever done is scoop up companies doing actual innovation and copy them. (It's become cliche to point out that Apple stole the Mac GUI from Xerox. Even more cliche is pointing out that they "licensed" it without realizing that the point is that they claimed it as their own without giving any credit to the people who actually designed it.)

    Have you seen iOS 5? All the new features were either stolen directly from Android (notifications, Siri, iCloud if we're honest) or ... um... actually, I think I listed all the new features.

    Have you tried Mac OS X Lion? It's this weird bastard child of Windows and iOS. And, yes, I mean Windows. They flat-out stole quite a few things from Windows and added them to Mac OS X. Even the style changes from Snow Leopard to Lion makes it look more like Windows Aero. Why they went that why?

    Well - this is Apple, post Steve Jobs. All they've got left is copying other people and then suing them.

    1. Re:It's all they've got left by forkfail · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, perhaps it is cliche.

      Regardless, it seems like quite a number of companies (not just Apple) are saying, "To get here, I stood on the shoulders of giants. And by God, I'm going to make damn sure no one else does."

      This doesn't spur innovation; quite the opposite, really. Especially when you consider that pretty much all commercial works these days are derivatives of something else. And for the most part, if you want to learn/build something new, you need billions of dollars and a particle accelerator.

      --
      Check your premises.
    2. Re:It's all they've got left by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's become cliche to point out that Apple stole the Mac GUI from Xerox

      This is 'stole' meaning 'paid a big chunk of Apple stock in exchange for it and then added original features like the desktop metaphor with the trash can, the menu bar, window title bars and others?' Do you, by any chance, work for the MPAA?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:It's all they've got left by billcarson · · Score: 2

      I don't fully agree. Many innovations of Apple came down to combining nifty products that were available, but underused at the time. For instance, look at the original ipod: it was the first to give a proper use to those mini-hd's, which were a novelty at the time. That is basically why their R&D budget has been so low: they looked for the right technology that was available. That being said, I still think it requires some imagination to envision these products, with or without big budgets.

  5. Re:Is it legal by MrDoh! · · Score: 2

    Hmm, probably a civil/criminal thing, and some /tiny/ change in the model allows it to be reopened.

    It's obvious at this time that they've realised it's economically worthwhile to lock them down in a court, and it's just a warning to anyone else who'd think of entering the market that if they do well, they WILL be sued. So with Apple threatening legal action to totally block in one way, and MS grabbing for royalties in the other, it adds a huge extra cost to using Android they're hoping will stop future competitors.

    Seems to be working well for them at this time alas. What's the solution? As said above, the only way it'd get fixed would be the lawyers wanting it to be fixed, and it's too much of a gravy train for them to ever want it solved.

    --
    Waiting for an amusing sig.
  6. Re:Is it legal by hedwards · · Score: 2

    Right, and that's why you want to get suits against you dismissed with prejudice and ones that you initiate dismissed without prejudice if things aren't going to go to completion.

  7. Patenting the wheel? by sconeu · · Score: 2
    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  8. Re:Motorola and others by Torvac · · Score: 2

    thats a clone ? like a black bmw is a clone of black dodge because of the color and 4 wheels and those bastards even installed a black round steering wheel this time and a radio in the middle console ?

  9. Re:Apple should take a page from Microsoft's playb by ichthus · · Score: 2

    Sounds reminiscent of the anti-Linux on the netbook tactic Microsoft used.

    --
    sig: sauer
  10. No details on the patents in question by msobkow · · Score: 2

    As Apple has engaged in an all out abusive patent war on anyone who dares compete with their Dynabook ripoff technology, I say "Fuck Apple."

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  11. Someone at Apple finally saw the commercial? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I guess someone at Apple has finally watched Galaxy S2 commercial?

    In online gaming, this kind of thing is usually remarked upon as "u mad?".

  12. Has Apple learned nothing from MS? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Insightful

    MS behaved once like a complete asshole and it slowly found itself in a world where nobody liked it anymore and it was starting to hurt the company. Nothing like outright revenge but in its proposed standards being ignored and its rivals providing each other with support just because. Or do you think IBM has no alterior motive in supporting Linux then because it doesn't care what it sells support for? IBM doesn't just sell patents to google for the hell of it either to fight Apple, or do you think IBM liked it when Apple ditched their CPU? Oh, not that it made much difference, Apple was a very small buyer but why help Google for just a tiny bit of cash with patents that IBM might one day need themselves?

    Reputation matters. How much? Well so much that MS has bought advertising space from GOOGLE to advertise its own browser despite that everyone who can USE Internet Explorer has it installed by default (it comes with Windows). Paying your competition to advertise a product given away for free... that was not the Internet Bill Gates envisioned in the 90's.

    Apple had a good reputation, god knows what for, pre-OSX the only time I saw Apples, they were crashing but still, it was a good rep, intresting devices and it never hurts to be considered the plucky underdog against the mega-corp. But right now, a LOT of mainstream media, at least in Holland, is presenting these cases as the relatively small Apple bullying the "small" mega-corp and super diversified semi-government Samsung... it would be like comparying say Harley Davidson against Yamaha. Sure both build motor cycles but HD isn't even in the same class when it comes to business clout.

    And yet in this case, many are starting to see Apple as the big evil giant stamping on its smaller cuddlier competitors. When Samsung becomes cute, you know you are doing something wrong with your image.

    Yet, the tablets do like a lot alike. Gosh, what do you know, so do many e-readers and for that matter phones. How many phones do you know that are rectangle with a rectangular screen and 12-15 buttons below it? Some form factors just belong to a type of product. Go ahead, redesign the refrigerator with a unique design that has not been seen before since the days of cupboards making started god knows how many centuries ago. Good thing Apple wasn't around when Gutenberg copied the printing press from the Chinese. We would have a thousand different book designs for each and every publisher.

    It would be better if plenty of people hadn't already found evidence of how many if not all of Apples own designs had been done by others before.

    Everybody copies from everybody else, in science they are even proud of it "if I seen furthest, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants". Artists are inspired by their predecessors but suddenly in our society the slightest hint of similarity is evil. And for what? To protect your profits so you don't have to innovate (compare the iPad 2 to say a device like the Asus Transformer or the Samsung Note)? That works, for about as long until someone passes you (IE6 anyone?)

    It doesn't surprise me that the "new" iPhone is just a small update and that none of them have really upped the stakes let alone tried anything NEW. Smaller, bigger, new design... just updates.

    If you want a color e-ink display, you got to go to Korea. Not silicon valley, korea. Go to China and you can buy mobile phones that run rings around western models, laptops with features and specs you just can't get here. The west has become so obsessed with lawsuits, real innovation has stopped. Sure, maybe Apple can stop Samsung now on one of its many different markets but what if next some Chinese company comes up with a NEW idea that Apple wants to copy? Oops, it just introduced around the world that implementing the same broad design as someone else is illegal. Apple and MS have both been in court before for this where they claimed the other copied something only to find they themselves copied it too.

    Apple is fighting a legal battle it i

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  13. Don't buy Apple products. by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There. Fixed that.

    1. Re:Don't buy Apple products. by Kenja · · Score: 5, Funny

      I tried to not buy Apple products but I ended up not buying Samsung products due to how simular they where and the marketplace confusion it caused.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  14. Software patent regimes by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Sorry about teh unformatted post previous.. I am sure Slashdot is moving to WYSIWYG any day now ;)

    Let's be clear about one thing- IP lawyers are succeeding in creating a parasitic lifestyle on our industry and on our lives and futures. They impose themselves as non-value producing entities on an industry and then begin siphoning off money from that industry.

    They do not add value, they remove value; they do not promote progress, they retard progress. There are so many dollars being thrown off from any given product, and lawyers have conspired to insert themselves into that revenue stream, directly and negatively effecting your bottom line.

    This parasitic lifestyle is as good an example of the 1% staging a systematic assault on the 99%.

    In fact, The imposition of a software patent regime is as clear cut a case of the 1% consciously organizing to cut off economic opportunity from the 99% as you're going to find outside of a smoke filled room in Texas.

    There are about the same percentage of software developers who favor software patents as there are climatologists who don't believe in global warming. 98% of software developers want to write software, create a product, and add value.

    Precious few look at the patent troll lifestyle with envy and wish to pursue a career litigating over simple minded applications of middling value.

    But for those that do favor software patents, just exactly how do you propose to win at this game?

    That the realistic cost of acquiring a software patent starts at 15-30k and goes well north of there.

    http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/01/28/the-cost-of-obtaining-patent/id=14668/

    although note that one IP lawyer comments that "In Los Angeles it is not unusual for partners to charge in excess of $600/hour which makes your estimates on the low side."

    which is more than you're likely to make from your patent:

    The cost of patents is greater than the revenue they generate. ÃoeAbout 97 percent of patents generate less revenue than the patent costs." Return on patent costs. How much does it cost to patent an invention? (Andy Gibbs, CEO of PatentCafe.com Inc., quoted in Celia Lamb, ÃoeNew program at Sierra College aims to help would-be Pre Plastics,Ã Sacramento Business Journal, February 7, 2003)

    But never mind that, now that you have spent more than your likely savings on your one single patent, exactly what is it you're thinking about doing with this patent?

    Licensing it? Do you think that licensing is automatically negotiated and enforced by the government?

    No, you're going to pay a lawyer an hourly rate which is two to ten times what your own hourly rate is to approach, approach and then re-approach company after company none of whom are even slightly sympathetic to your request for a taxation on their profits and will, in fact, do everything they can to resist any kind of licensing deal, including using the tactic of exhausting the rent-seeker's financial ability to pursue rent.

    Oh so let them use your "intellectual property" you'll sue! For millions! Well, good luck with that. Because you're sure as hell not going to be doing that on your own unless you're in the 1% or can find some subset of 1% who are sympathetic to your quest to join their ranks via litigation.

    The cost to sustain an infringement claim starts at one million US and goes to 5 million and beyond. So unless you're befriended by some part of the 1%, you're not going to be enforcing your "intellectual property rights" anytime soon.

    So what do we have, really? We have a system which has the net effect of imposing an impossibly high barrier- call it a poll tax- upon the most vibrant and valuable form of economic participation our economy has - starting a company.

    And who created that barrier?

    Highly paid (1%) lawyers working for highly compensated (1/10 of 1% ) CEOs.

  15. Re:patent pending - lawsuit pending by jackspenn · · Score: 2

    Don't steal it, patent it.

    --
    Respect the Constitution
  16. Here's my problem with the "looks" issues by vawwyakr · · Score: 2

    How many TVs looks like a big rectangle with a screen? How many remotes are just a bunch of buttons? How many computer screens are a rectangle with a screen and maybe some buttons on a corner? How many mice are little rounded things with a few buttons at the top? Most things LOOK pretty darn similar, particularly after some initial iterations of refinement where eventually everything looks about it optimal as possible. Sorry but eventually you gotta just let go and try to make a better product.

  17. Re:the Patent / Copyright regime by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wall of text crits you for over 9000

  18. Must be good... by Computershack · · Score: 2

    Judging on how much time and money Apple are spending trying to block the sale of the Samsung Galaxy S2 it must be one hell of a good phone. One could almost deduce that Apple think its actually better than their iPhone 4S with the amount of attention they're giving it. Might be worth looking at the Galaxy S2......

    --
    I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
  19. Re:Wow by scot4875 · · Score: 2

    I found a nice racist troll first post to be a refreshing change of pace from the recent rash of +5 'informative', but actually incorrect and completely offtopic first post trolls that have hit pretty much every Google or Apple article over the past few weeks.

    --Jeremy

    --
    Jesus was a liberal
  20. Re:Motorola and others by tqk · · Score: 2

    ... if one of the knock-offs is low quality or problematic, it can end up hurting Apple's brand.

    i) How can Samsung releasing a Samsung product hurt Apple's brand? Does Samsung hardware arrive with Apple's logo affixed?
    ii) No need to worry about Apple's brand hurting anyway. They're already shit in my eyes.
    iii) Apple's using the legal system the same way politicians use protectionism. Can't compete against less expensive, more nimble competition? Tie 'em up in court, get injunctions to prevent them from making any sales, yada, yada.

    I used to recommend Apple to friends and family, but no more, and no I won't fix your broken Mac. Enjoy your brick, sucker. I go out of my way to steer people away from Apple now. Overpriced, mediocre, artsy-stylish hipster crap.

    Apple's abusing the patent and copyright systems worse than just about everyone else with damned near every move they make these days, so to hell with them. No sympathy, whatsoever.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.