Apple Must Publicly Post That Samsung Did Not Copy iPad
microcars writes "A judge in the U.K. has ordered Apple to post a notice on its website and in British newspapers alerting people to a ruling that Samsung Electronics Co. didn't copy designs for the iPad. This is the same Judge who ruled earlier that Samsung's Galaxy Tab was not as cool as Apple's iPad."
We can expect that Apple will wriggle to avoid doing this in any meaningful way. What's the smallest size ad they can place? What's the smallest typeface? Do all elements need equal prominance?
They'd likely put a huge ad saying "Buy Apple iPad, the judge said it's cool" in a large font with the "Samsung did not copy" message in a tiny font in a corner of the ad (maybe even upside-down text). They'll go as far as they think they can while avoiding a contempt finding.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
How about a system something like this:
If you file a frivolous patent case against a competitor and lose, you must advertise for the said product on your website for X time period, give a public statement/apology AND you must also pay the defendant's legal expenses.
Maybe something like that would deter more patent trolling?
Yes. Apple innovated the shit out of that rounded rectangle.
/sarcasm
Maybe obvious to you, but I know lots of people who think other tablets must be having very similar functionality as iPad because, they have same size, shape, touchscreen and outward appearance. Try telling them that they are not related to each other and are independently developed and see how many of them believe you.
I don't own iPad, instead own Android tablet that I bought with the same expectations that it would work as good as iPad. Unfortunately, the specific Android tablet (Toshiba Thrive) does not support Cisco VPN Anyconnect app (supported on iPad) and hence I can't use for my office use. It is now just a game machine for my kids. Yes, I feel like ripped off due to similarity between the two products outward appearance.
hey protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable
I'm pretty sure they didn't "innovate" a rectangle with rounded corners.
Hell no, Chiclets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiclets are rectangular and have rounded corners, and have been around since 1906.
Be seeing you...
Those examples are all of Google using it's patent portfolio to fight back against companies that struck first with patent suites. They are keeping a clean image by actually staying clean.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
I'm not sure I can call an exceptionally wealthy company going after Nokia who's knocking on death's door a defensive move especially when they could have always filed the antitrust suit against MS which would have made more sense given it's MS that is benefiting much more by going after Android hardware companies. But that would mean going after someone who is equally as strong and it's much easier to try and bankrupt Nokia and kill of a WP manufacturer. Just as MS should go after Google but they pick on the weaker guys.
And quite frankly allowing HTC continue the whole problem of patent lawsuits rather than actively trying to fix it doesn't help anyone but themselves (and HTC) and they could have kept those patents and went after Apple but they didn't. They're trying to have their cake and eat it too imo to keep their image clean, imo so yes I'll admit there isn't *that* much at the moment but I think that's going to change.
That's really the crux of the issue. It's much easier for someone else to do all the engineering and hard work it takes to create an experience that nobody ever had - and copy it at a fraction of the cost. That goes for "Hassalblad" cameras and "Rolodex" watches. They've got no skin in the game except the expense of pulling molds off the original. In the US, they arrest people for having Louis Vuitton or Gucci knockoff hand bags. By that measure, Samsung qualifies. So does Hyundai but we can't see past the acquisition price. No doubt, they make really good ripoffs,but we bear (or submerge) the guilt of ripping off the originator when we buy it. Of course it's a good value, even if it lasts half as long.
I wanted new shoes over there and the local shoe shop in Itaewon handed me a Sears catalog. A real one. I pointed to the shoes I wanted and they had them custom made the NEXT DAY for 10% of the Sears price. Can't resist supporting that.
I have that Top Gear episode. Love that series. The real one.
Most of the stuff on