|
Apple and Samsung are currently engaged in a high-stakes intellectual property battle, with Apple seeking injunctions in a number of countries to prevent Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab and other Android-based products. Apple claims that Samsung has infringed upon Apple's intellectual property rights by copying the designs of popular Apple devices such as the iPhone and iPad. In a curious turn of events noted by FOSS Patents, Samsung has turned to the film industry in its defense against Apple's request for an injunction in the United States and pulled this out of the bag! .gif) According to court filings, Samsung has presented a scene from Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey as evidence of prior art that should invalidate Apple's design claims on the iPad. From the filing: Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of a still image taken from Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film "2001: A Space Odyssey." In a clip from that film lasting about one minute, two astronauts are eating and at the same time using personal tablet computers. The clip can be downloaded online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ8pQVDyaLo. As with the design claimed by the D'889 Patent, the tablet disclosed in the clip has an overall rectangular shape with a dominant display screen, narrow borders, a predominately flat front surface, a flat back surface (which is evident because the tablets are lying flat on the table's surface), and a thin form factor. The patent in question is a design patent covering the ornamental design of the iPad, with Apple claiming that the Samsung Galaxy Tab is substantially identical to that design. By pointing to an example of a similar design made public in 1968, even if not an actual functioning tablet device, Samsung hopes to demonstrate that there is little variation possible when designing a tablet and show that the general concept used by Apple for the iPad has actually been circulating for decades. ah got to love lawyers!  |
Apple vs. Samsung
-
HoriZon 14,351 posts
Seen 12 hours ago
Registered 19 years ago -
dominalien 10,703 posts
Seen 1 minute ago
Registered 15 years agoA good move by Samsung. -
chopsen 21,958 posts
Seen 12 hours ago
Registered 16 years agoI do like the Reg's headline:
'I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't run Adobe Flash' -
Psychotext 70,652 posts
Seen 23 hours ago
Registered 15 years agoThis little film is full of prior art too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI -
HoriZon 14,351 posts
Seen 12 hours ago
Registered 19 years agoIts getting fun now!
Last week, we noted that a Dutch court was weighing an infringement claim by Apple against Samsung over the Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets, with Apple requesting a complete ban on the sale of Samsungs products in the European Union. A decision in that case was to be handed down on September 15th.
FOSS Patents and Tweakers.net now report that the case has been decided ahead of that timeline, with the judge ordering that Samsung's subsidiaries be banned from selling Galaxy smartphones (but not tablets) in many European Union countries as of October 13th. The ban applies to the Samsung Galaxy S, Galaxy S II, and Ace phones.
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/24/ban-on-sale-of-samsung-galaxy-smartphones-in-eu-set-for-october-13th/
Dont Samsung make most of the screens in Mac's, iPads and iPhones ?? -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoThat's interesting; seems Apple won based on the photo browsing features, of which the patents they failed to assert in most countries by not paying the required fees! -
CharlieStCloud 5,812 posts
Seen 7 years ago
Registered 11 years agoI have a few Apple things in my household... but I kind of wish Samsung would just say 'no' if Apple request for their parts and materials!
Apple have all the money in the world and yet, they are still throwing their toys out of the pram over this. Silly sods. -
Ha that is a brilliant attempt at prior art. Not been following this much recently so will need to catch up. I want apple to get spanked just for that! -
oceanmotion 17,358 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 18 years agoBest thing Apple did last week was resize the Samsung products to look more like theirs and use the non default screens. Wankers. -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoTBF to Apple they did create a wonderful OS that revolutionised smartphones, and then did get copied left,right and centre, so fair game to them trying to protect their investment.
Though it took them a long time to do so. -
oceanmotion wrote:
Nah, not really. But I'm on my phone on the train so I'm not up for explaining this, sorry!
Best thing Apple did last week was resize the Samsung products to look more like theirs and use the non default screens. Wankers. -
Dirtbox 92,595 posts
Seen 15 hours ago
Registered 19 years ago -
oceanmotion 17,358 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 18 years agomowgli wrote:
oceanmotion wrote:
Nah, not really. But I'm on my phone on the train so I'm not up for explaining this, sorry!
Best thing Apple did last week was resize the Samsung products to look more like theirs and use the non default screens. Wankers.
Fair enough, something I may not have read.
Weird how one of the patents is for sliding to unlock. Wouldn't that be Android, so Google's court or perhaps that's the problem with them, let the hardware makers fall on the sword. -
Dirtbox 92,595 posts
Seen 15 hours ago
Registered 19 years ago -
Psychotext 70,652 posts
Seen 23 hours ago
Registered 15 years agorock27gr wrote:
From what I can see of the decision that ruling might actually be bad news for Apple. The judge threw out pretty much all of the claims except for the scrolling / image gallery ones which can easily be changed.
That's interesting; seems Apple won based on the photo browsing features, of which the patents they failed to assert in most countries by not paying the required fees!
That's not going to do them any favours whatsoever in other courts. -
oceanmotion 17,358 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 18 years agoDirtbox wrote:
Fair enough my arse, he doesn't have any points to make other than to disagree for the sake of it.
Benefit of the doubt I suppose. I'm not one to remember what many forum members are like on subjects such as bias or ignorance. -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoPsychotext wrote:
rock27gr wrote:
From what I can see of the decision that ruling might actually be bad news for Apple. The judge threw out pretty much all of the claims except for the scrolling / image gallery ones which can easily be changed.
That's interesting; seems Apple won based on the photo browsing features, of which the patents they failed to assert in most countries by not paying the required fees!
That's not going to do them any favours whatsoever in other courts.
That's true, so either Apple didn't cover their bases very well when patenting the iPhone and OS, or their lawyers are shit.
Did you also notice they haven't actually paid for those patents in many countries, which as I understand makes them unenforceable? -
morriss 71,293 posts
Seen 3 months ago
Registered 17 years agoI've heard that Apple had initially photoshopped the Sammy design to make it look more like the iPad. That was brought up in court.
Well, so my old man tells me. -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoDirtbox wrote:
rock27gr wrote:
Then why are they going after the product manufacturers and not google, who made the interface?
TBF to Apple they did create a wonderful OS that revolutionised smartphones, and then did get copied left,right and centre, so fair game to them trying to protect their investment.
Though it took them a long time to do so.
I guess they though it was an easier target/had more to benefit from this. I aren't a patent expert, I just call them as I see them! -
eleven63 3,052 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 17 years agoGrab your Galaxy SII whilst you can - Apple don't like it up'em... -
I have mine. I have a feeling google is about to come charging into this battle with it's new found patent whore house. -
Post deleted -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoJust like the article says, it's only one simple software upgrade from being "free" again. -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agomcmonkeyplc wrote:
I have mine. I have a feeling google is about to come charging into this battle with it's new found patent whore house.
All they need to do is remove the photo browsing functionality and replace it with a different gesture/presentation.
As Psychotext says, Apple lost more, much more, than they gained from this trial. -
That software in question is also the bog standard android app for gallery viewing.
Google Vs Apple shortly. Let them wipe each other out. -
rock27gr 6,439 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoGoogle remains strangely distant from all these attacks on Android. You would think they'd step up to support their partners, especially given that the attacks are based on Google's software. -
IMO 7,883 posts
Seen 17 minutes ago
Registered 17 years agoThe next time someone goes on and on about how wonderful Apple are, I'm punching them. -
oceanmotion 17,358 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 18 years agoGoogle like a free lunch. I imagine if WP7 manages to gain any traction they will soon change their tune. Buying Motorola may have been the start but could be too late to stop the hardware makers giving WP7 a decent push. -
eleven63 3,052 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 17 years agomcmonkeyplc wrote:
I have mine. I have a feeling google is about to come charging into this battle with it's new found patent whore house.
Hope so, FUCK Apple -
IMO wrote:
Who does this then?
The next time someone goes on and on about how wonderful Apple are, I'm punching them.
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
