Samsung may try to block next iPhone in Europe too Samsung could try to get the iPhone 5 delayed or banned in Europe, a source has told South Korea's Maeil Business Newspaper today. The Korean giant is considering a lawsuit against the next version of the Apple smartphone due in October, in the expectation that iPhone 5 will make use of some basic telecoms technology that …
copying? How crazy can you get. All smart phones basically look the same - same as tablets. Exactly how many designs are there to make a "tablet" - and how different would they be? This is a problem with the EU for letting a company patent a "look" - no matter how generic. Not to mention that Apple stole the ipad design from previous designs both in movies and by other companies.
At which point do loyal Apple, or Samsung customers think well sod this for a game of soldiers, I'm not buying any other products from them, they are blocking me buying a product I want, or even a plague upon both your houses.
PS. Please sign me up as a patent lawyer, seems to be the most lucrative field to be in now.
So in a world were consumer confidence and purchasing power is crashing the two giants of the smart phone industry are locked in a death-embrace rather than actually providing the products that might make some money and keep consumers happy. The human race deserves it's slow decline into obscurity!
But I'm bored of this now.
Why don't they both just pack it in and behave like a set of grown-ups rather than spoiled petulant children?
Accept that noone in their right mind is going to confuse the two, put them both on the market, and let the best combination of hardware and software win.
Because they know that they can't win. This isn't a swipe at the quality of iProducts; it's inevitable that the major companies who are in competition both with each other and with Apple are going to put more effort into innovating than Apple can, if only because five heads are better than one.
Apple have thus far been able to maintain their strong grasp on the smartphone market because of their monolithic approach - don't have a range of products that do different things, have one that does everything - but now HTC, Samsung et al have caught up, Apple can no longer call the tune. The only way they can maintain their market share now is to prevent other companies entering the market.
As for the Samsung lawsuit, I believe it's a bluff. They don't expect the judgement to be passed, but when it isn't, they can use that as another lever to have the rulings against the Galaxy range struck down.
I doubt you have seen a Galaxy phone as they look "exactly" like iPhones. Samsung deserve everything they get for copying the design with a lot of attention to detail ... I cannot speak for the Galaxy tab, never seen one ....
Samsung, come up with your own design or feel the full force of the law.
Samsung will be waving basic phone patents that most likely everybody is using without paying anyway.
> I doubt you have seen a Galaxy phone
I have.
> as they look "exactly" like iPhones.
No they don't.
Superficially - they are both roughly rectangular, and about the size one would expect for a smartphone.
The similarity? They both have rounded corners. BFD. So does my dining-room table. Sharp corners are unpleasant when they come into contact with humans. The solution to that problem - rounding off the corners - is as old as the hills.
Otherwise, the icons are different, the layout of the screen is different, the way the phone works is different. They do, however, both have an icon of a phone handset that is used for phone functions. And Apple didn't invent that.
Vic.
A Galaxy S looks like the twin brother of an iPhone 3G(s). Albeit a large and thin brother.
Compared to an iPhone 4 there's a very noticable difference.
Many websites in their review also suggested the same e.g.:
"The glossy black plastic and metal-effect bezel both echo Apple’s second/third-gen smartphone; the irony, of course, is that the Cupertino company has now moved on with the almost retro lines of the iPhone 4, and the Galaxy S feels a little indistinct in comparison." (source: slashgear.com)
And there are a lot more who suggest the same (another example from s Dutch website: "Opvallend is dat iedereen die de telefoon voor het eerst in zijn handen krijgt vrijwel meteen zegt: “Goh, het lijkt wel erg op een iPhone”. --> translated as: "Everybody who gets the phone in their hands say: "Gee, this looks a lot like an iPhone") (source: androidplanet.nl)
And just look at: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9000_galaxy_s-review-478p2.php#
The 2 top photo's show the galaxy next to an iPhone 3GS. Even the UI resembles iOS screen filled with icons and a grey bottombar with its 4 icons.
You gotta be blind NOT to see the iPhone resemblance. Remove the 2 imprints next to the bottom button and the samsung logo on top and you'd swear it was a bigger iPhone 3.
Just recently I've been regularly walking past a poster advertising the Samsung Galaxy S II. From anything over a couple of feet away... sorry, it's looks absolutely identical to an iPhone which is exactly what I think it is every time I glance at it. Practically the only differentiating feature you can make out from a distance is the word 'Samsung' written underneath the ear-piece.
I don't ever recall getting confused between Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, Motorola and Blackberry phones in the past. They all had their own distinctive and recognisable designs.
I'm so glad that Samsung is using the full force against Apple. Apple are the big bullies of this tech world and it's only Samsung that seems to be standing up against them. If it wasn't for Samsung, Apple would be doing the same to other manufacturers. However, the heated court battles with Samsung only seem to allow Apple to lightly attack the other companies. I really hope Apple crawls back under the rock from where it came from. This will finally allow everyone to focus on producing good tech for the consumers rather than spending wasted effort in courts over patents.
.....near us punches me in the face. Instead of hitting him I decide to get my dibs in my smacking you one. Would you regard this as rational and fair behaviour? No? I am not surprised. However that *is* the logic of *your* argument. I do know how many times Apple have been sued with regard to the iPod but I do know that that has nothing to do with Samsung and provides not the slightest rational justification for Apple starting a war with them.
Apple have been bullying everyone they could for decades by bringing ridiculous law suits against other companies.
Back in the 80's they did this against Microsoft, as they claim they invented WIMP interfaces. It took years to resolve and in the end it was up to Xerox to threaten Apple with the same suit. The difference being that Xerox HAD invented/design computers using Windows, Icons and Mice years before at their Palo Alto research centre and could easily prove it.
Apple were renowned then for spending vastly more on lawyers that R&D, the same is probably true today. Particularly when their intellectual IP consists of daft claims like making things with metal cases with rounded corners!
Stop making up history. Apple never claimed to have invented the WIMP which was demoed in the 60's and not by Xerox. Apple licenced Xeroxs design. When the Lisa and Mac proved more popular than the Xerox star, Xerox threatened to sue Apple but didn't.
Apple sued Microsoft over copying it's UI. The case went to court and Microsoft claimed they could copy Apples UI due to a their contract with Apple. The court agreed with Microsoft.
Xerox did file suit against Apple – the reason being was that Xerox reasoned that if Apple did win its case against Microsoft, then it could the main winner, not that it felt cheated by Apple. However, its suit (or rather, five out of six counts of it) was thrown out of court because Xerox had licensed its GUI research to Apple.
This is covered to that Wikipedia article but you linked to, but it’s worth reading up a bit more - it was a most speculative attempt to leverage more money from the original deal by a new Xerox CEO, if Apple won its copyright lawsuits. Worth a punt by the company, but a very cynical move... but business is business.
You mention the iPod being targeted by patent holders and yet completely overlook the fact that Apple stole the interface directly from Creative. Cue legal argument that ends with Apple paying Creative $100 million compensation and having to license it in an ongoing agreement. Your 'years of being targeted' argument falls down right there. They deserved to be targeted as they were profiting from someone else's work which is pretty much the Apple way of doing things. Steal it first then pay the fine later as the profits outweigh the amount they will be fined. That or start a legal argument of their own claiming they 'invented' it despite there being plenty of prior art which is the case currently against Samsung.
How about letting the US play silly games with patents for using your left forefinger to click a button or suchlike but put a time limit on the validity of maybe three or four years. It gives the 'creator' some time to get to market and get a return on their efforts but doesn't kill all future development. Has the advantage that all these Trolls would suddenly be HUGELY out of pocket.
It would stop all these silly children in their tracks and allow us to get on with real headlines, how is the LOHAN REHAB going anyway?
Perhaps a better way would be for the rest on the world to void all US patents, due the that fact the US Patent office just passes everything, dispite there being internationally accepted rules like:
"IT MUST NOT BE BLOODY OBVIOUS"
The USPO has passed many patents for thing like: the wheel (done as joke, but it was granted) to imaginary antigravity devices.
But then again we have daft judges in Germany (and elsewhere) who haven't got a clue about anything technical passing stupid judgements on things they don't understand.
Reap what you sow etc.
As someone who is getting my first smartphone in October (probably Apple) I don't blame Samsung at all for retaliating to Apple's patent trolling.
Maybe I'll be forced to wait for the dust to settle in which case I'll carry on using my £10.50 a month "dumb" but effective device.
F*cking grow up.
The iPhone is either successful enough to shrug of competition or it's not and you should do better. Playing the weasel patent game is IMHO exceptionally weak (and has IMHO tarnishes the Apple image), and you ought to kick your lawyer's nuts for advising you on a strategy of mutual destruction (remember - he makes his money either way).
What? Oh, you left? Well, then give the dimwit in charge a call instead.
Why would Jobs even care.
The same is true for Microsoft.
All the ppl whom started these companies have already left the building, filthy rich, with a big mansion somewhere quiet and a with fully loaded bank-account. Hell, these guys do "charity" now as a hobby. Why would they even care about all the other sharks left in the pool?
It's all upto YOU. YOU don't like it... then DON'T buy their products! I started boycotting Samsung products 3 years ago due to personal reasons. And I'll keep boycotting them for as long as I can. If others followed my lead the samsung wouldn't have a foothold in Europe at all. The same with Apple. If you don't like Apple's attidute, then steer potential customers away from their products. Because let's be honest, most El Reg-readers are considered tech-savvy by friends and family. And are called upon for advice when siblings want to buy new techtoys. That's the moment when YOU are in control and might influence their spending decision. Even if it's just one person in your family or just one friend who follows your "advice".
" in the expectation that iPhone 5 will make use of some basic telecoms technology"
Can I get something banned before I've even looked at it ?
By all means, when it comes out, take it apart and then, with proof, get further shipments banned and sue for damages - but surely you need some form of proof. If an EU court uphold a ban based on speculation then we seriously need to amend the law.
"Can I get something banned before I've even looked at it ?"
No, but that is not what the article says. So far it was just public saber-rattling by a Samsung executive. They will certainly cite something more substantial if the actually sue Apple in Europe.
Anyway, given how the broken patent system works, it will not be difficult for Samsung or any other traditional major cellphone maker to find something in Apples products to sue over, if they really want to. The main reason for the current patent armageddon is that the newcomer Apple barged into the gentleman's club that the telecom field used to be, and didn't play by the established mutual-back-scratching rules.
you might wish to re-read the article.
Samsung didn't sue Apple because of the iPhone 5, well not yet. They are making an assumption that the iPhone 5 will make use of some of their patents. Based on this assumption, they are getting ready to sue once the iPhone 5 is out and they have the conformation that the patents have been violated.
they will try to ban the iPhone 5 _AFTER_ it comes out, not before that.
I SO hope Samsung win.
Someone needs to stop Apple, otherwise everyone will be paying patent royalties to Apple for years and years to come - and us, the consumer will suffer through inflated hardware costs.
I just wish people would stop buying Apple products until they back down.
Apple:- what goes around comes around.
Apple you started this fight. With your BS about tablet shape/look.
If Samsung ends wining this case this will affect all Apple phones. Apple could be force to relase IMEI numbers so all iPhones could be blocked from working in Europe. So iPhone, iPhone 3, iPhone 3GS will not be able to connect to any mobile network in Europe.
Yeah, but no. That's not at all how it works.
Most of the time successful patent infringement suits lead to a verdict where the infringer is required to cease infringing (ie stop producing/selling the product in question) and pay damages for existing infringements.
Expecting them to track down and retrieve past products sold *before* the infringement was ratified through the legal process is excessive, and sets bad precedents when taken in the context of the USA's b0rked patent system.
Don't let the facts ruin the fantasy though ;)
For giving them the laws to do this. If they really want to help the economy you drop the entire patent thing on the ground for anything that involves a cpu be that software or hardware. On the balance of things any possible value from patents is outweighed a million-fold in today's age by the disadvantages.
Blame the Greeks for all this tosh, circa 500BC (according to wikipedia).
"encouragement was held out to all who should discover any new refinement in luxury, the profits arising from which were secured to the inventor by patent for the space of a year."
It has to be said, they started it off with a far more sensible system than we have now.
Interesting to see that the first 20 year patent in the UK was for coloured glass. Where would we be today without green bottles?
Wow that is a shock! I actually don't care for all the copyright/design/patent fighting. Both companies are behaving badly there. However I am wondering what Samsung has actually done that's innovative. The didn't write the OS. They don't write the apps. They didn't design the processor. They didn't come up with the UI metaphors. What do they do other than regurgitate other peoples' work and bang out cheap phones.
I can appreciate the importance of trademarks, which prevent other organisations or individuals from playing off the goodwill earned by a brand. And I can appreciate a limited form of copyright, in order to protect the investment made in a work. I can even appreciate patents in a limited form, especially to protect smaller businesses from being ripped off by those with more money. But the problem is the scale and scope that they currently enjoy.
For instance, the newly passed copyright extension in Europe is a perfect example of what's wrong with the current system. Rather than let copyrights expire and usher in a new era of creativity or create an incentive to invest in the industry, large corporations seek to hold on to income generated from business deals up to nearly three quarters of a century after they were made.
Instead of protecting and encouraging investment in an industry it is actually diminishing it, as large companies seek to monetise existing products instead of innovating. That goes against the very reason they protections were introduced. They have failed the common sense test.
Surely 'basic telecoms technology' is something used by Fisher-Price baby alarms - and just about every device that 'coms' in one form or another.
And also surely, 'basic telecoms technology' must pre-date anything Samsung might have invented - especially as (according to wikiP) their telecoms business only started in the 80s with telephone switchboards.
Something else puzzles me - after reading the wikiP. Samsung is now a mega-corp involved in multiple industries - a bit like Hitachi. I can't see how a company that started as a woolen mill in the 1950s, had the necessary where-with-all to develop all the things it got into without copying other companies products along the way.
I might be wrong, but I don't think I am.
Apple have brought this on themselves to be honest, I really hope Samsung win for the good of "innovation" in a broken system.
I wonder though if Apple have found a new supplier for components or even fabing them themselves without necessary playing ball with the complex wireless licensing system. Be a bit silly if they are..
... before checking if it violates their patents???
Apple managed to get a court to order Samsung to send them [Apple] some pre-release version of the Samsung Tabs so they could "check it doesn't invalidate our patents".
Why the hell don't Samsung use the same court and ask the same question - Apple would go fricken' ape at having to put an iPhone 5 "out in the wild". That would be hilarious to see
Come on Samsung play Apple at their own game - they got pre-release versions you should too.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
