Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 25 Aug '12 19:59
    So Apple have sued Samsung for $1billion. That's going to hurt anyone. Apple say that Samsung cashed in on the Iphone and copied their idea with their own smart phone. Samsung say that Apple can't have the monopoly on rectangular phones with touch screen displays. The Galaxy does look very similar to the Iphone but then again most large touch screen phones do look very similar by the nature of their design. So who is right?
  2. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Aug '12 20:04
    When there's a problem in a technical company, Asians turn to engineers.

    Americans turn to lawyers.

    Samsung's cheaper. So I have one.
  3. 25 Aug '12 20:12
    Patent legislation is horribly, horribly outdated. Unfortunately neither legislators nor judges tend to be very knowledgable when it comes to technology or economics.
  4. 25 Aug '12 20:44 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    When there's a problem in a technical company, Asians turn to engineers.

    Americans turn to lawyers.

    Samsung's cheaper. So I have one.
    I am not a big fan of Apple, but they definitely turn to their engineers in innovation and product develop, and they patent such innovation and product development. Further, a company generally must turn to lawyers to protect their intellectual property, especially in an egregious situation like here where Samsung blatantly and willfully copied products in Apple's patents, and refused to pay for it. Samsung wanted to copy Apple's patented innovation for free. Now, Samsung will have to pay a license fee and/or be outright excluded from selling certain phones and features. Moreover, the $1B damage award is likely to be increased by the judge I would think because of how egregious Samsung's behavior here. The cost of Samsung phones will go up a little, and certain Samsung phone products and features will not be available. Yet, Samsung has solidified themselves as a dominant number two in the smartphone market. Further, negotiations will go on for a long time.
  5. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Aug '12 20:52
    Further, a company generally must turn to lawyers to protect their intellectual property, especially in an egregious situation like here where Samsung blatantly and willfully copied products in Apple's patents, and refused to pay for it.


    Is that how Russia is going to handle Chinese theft of patented military technology?

    Any company in America needs lawyers, yeah; that's what I said - Americans turn to lawyers. But Korean companies don't have the muscle represented by American lawyers. They can't sue people into submission. They have to actually make good products.
  6. 25 Aug '12 20:55
    Originally posted by moon1969
    I am not a big fan of Apple, but they definitely turn to their engineers in innovation and product develop, and they patent such innovation and product development. Further, a company generally must turn to lawyers to protect their intellectual property, especially in an egregious situation like here where Samsung blatantly and willfully copied products in ...[text shortened]... inant number two in the smartphone market. Further, negotiations will go on for a long time.
    Just how much did Samsung copy Apple's ideas though. Yes they have created a large touch screen phone and yes admittedly it does look very similar. But isn't that where the similarities stop? For starters it uses a completely different OS.

    I have a Nokia C3-00 which is almost the spitting image of a Blackberry although the functionality is completely different, so why aren't Blackberry taking Nokia to the cleaners? I'm not looking for an argument, rather just some clarification on patent law.
  7. 25 Aug '12 20:56
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Further, a company generally must turn to lawyers to protect their intellectual property, especially in an egregious situation like here where Samsung blatantly and willfully copied products in Apple's patents, and refused to pay for it.


    Is that how Russia is going to handle Chinese theft of patented military technology?

    Any com ...[text shortened]... lawyers. They can't sue people into submission. They have to actually make good products.
    Samsung was and is well-represented by high-end capable American law firms and attorneys, that's for sure. Further, Samsung obtains a lot of patents with attorneys, and Samsung suits more than Apple.
  8. 25 Aug '12 20:58
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Further, a company generally must turn to lawyers to protect their intellectual property, especially in an egregious situation like here where Samsung blatantly and willfully copied products in Apple's patents, and refused to pay for it.


    Is that how Russia is going to handle Chinese theft of patented military technology?

    Any com ...[text shortened]... lawyers. They can't sue people into submission. They have to actually make good products.
    It is a struggle to deal with intellectual property theft in China, but it is getting better.
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Aug '12 20:58
    Originally posted by moon1969
    Samsung was and is well-represented by high-end capable American law firms and attorneys, that's for sure. Further, Samsung obtains a lot of patents with attorneys, and Samsung suits more than Apple.
    Samsung also sells to other countries who don't give a rats ass about American lawsuits.
  10. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Aug '12 21:00
    Originally posted by moon1969
    It is a struggle to deal with intellectual property theft in China, but it is getting better.
    I dunno...they hit Google really hard with a cyber attack not all that long ago.
  11. 25 Aug '12 21:07
    Originally posted by Sicilian Sausage
    Just how much did Samsung copy Apple's ideas though. Yes they have created a large touch screen phone and yes admittedly it does look very similar. But isn't that where the similarities stop? For starters it uses a completely different OS.

    I have a Nokia C3-00 which is almost the spitting image of a Blackberry although the functionality is comple ...[text shortened]... the cleaners? I'm not looking for an argument, rather just some clarification on patent law.
    The patent infringement is going to cost Samsung and its devices quite a bit. Some examples of Apple patents infringed by Samsung include:
    - Patent 381: Bounce Back Scroll functionality which occurs when one scrolls to the end of a list.
    - Patent 091: that includes Pinch to zoom, one finger scroll and zoom navigation. (Except for a handful of devices, almost all Samsung handsets and tablets use this feature. Then again, it’s quite standard across the Android platform itself and also features in some other mobile operating systems as well.)
    - Patent 163: Tap to zoom
    - Apple’s design patent.

    Patents help spur innovation because companies and investors know they can invest in research and product development, and that such will be protected for 20 years so that they can get a viable return on their investment.
  12. 25 Aug '12 21:10
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    I dunno...they hit Google really hard with a cyber attack not all that long ago.
    I have worked a lot with Chinese patent attorneys and with the Chinese patent office, and it is getting better. The Chinese government is now actually enforcing patent rights against Chinese companies, unlike just a couple of decades ago where such enforcement was unheard of. Apparently, many in the Chinese government and business elite want to be better accepted in the world intellectual property community.
  13. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Aug '12 21:16 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by moon1969
    I have worked a lot with Chinese patent attorneys and with the Chinese patent office, and it is getting better. The Chinese government is now actually enforcing patent rights against Chinese companies, unlike just a couple of decades ago where such enforcement was unheard of. Apparently, many in the Chinese government and business elite want to be better accepted in the world intellectual property community.
    Interesting.

    Do you have any insight into how they're handling the Russian military technology issues?

    http://rpdefense.over-blog.com/article-china-cleans-out-russia-103291307.html
  14. 25 Aug '12 21:22 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Samsung also sells to other countries who don't give a rats ass about American lawsuits.
    Yeah but it is difficult for a company to be economical with a product line if they cannot sell in the US. Further, there is incredible cooperation in worldwide patent law. That was one reason for the recent US patent reform act was so to be further more in line with the rest of the world (e.g., going from first to invent to first to file like the rest of the world). There has been for a long time good cooperation worldwide in patent law,

    Further, courts and patent enforcement bodies in other countries often reach similar conclusions as US courts. An exception is in cases where a lot of litigation document discovery is required, which such makes in more difficult for patentees in Europe which has less liberal discovery rules.

    Generally companies obtain patent protection in US, Europe, China, India, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil, and sometimes Russia, but also other specific countries as needed. For a given invention, it is typically the same patent filed in all of these countries through the worldwide Patent Cooperation Treaty. It is expensive.
  15. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Aug '12 21:25
    Be careful you're not being played by a Chinese propaganda/PR campaign.