Apple v Samsung: Can Look and Feel Be Patented?

[wyndslash]

This is a sporting event.

[fjtorres]

ZDNET's Take:
http://www.zdnet.com/mutually-assure...le-7000002887/

Apple has been asking for it, and now they're getting it.
Cupertino has been doing its best to sue Samsung's Android tablets and smartphones out of the market rather than compete with them. Now, Motorola -- under Google's control -- is returning the favor. Motorola Mobility is asking the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to ban the import of iPhones, iPads, and Macs.

Welcome to the next logical step in the world of patent warfare: mutually assured destruction (MAD).

Even back in 2005, I said just how stupid it would be for companies to get involved in a patent MAD war.

Jobs insisted on making it a winner-take-all grudge match and, for some reason, Apple's current chief executive Tim Cook has stayed the course.

Sure, Apple has just become the most valuable company ever, but how long will they stay that way if Apple loses big at any of these patent lawsuits or ITC hearings? Remember, this isn't really about Apple paying megabucks to its rivals; it's about having the iPhone, iPad, and Mac being banned from sale.

How much will Apple be worth if it can't sell the iPhone 5 in the US in September? How much will Apple be worth if Apple can't sell its products in the 2012 holiday season?

If Apple wants to take a chance on going from being the biggest company of all time to being the all-time example of how a company can destroy itself with dangerous lawsuits. Cook and Samsung chief executive Kwon Oh Hyun should come to an mutually beneficial agreement as soon as possible instead of continuing to play at business thermonuclear war.

To quote from the 1983 movie, WarGames, there's only one way to "win" at thermonuclear war: "The only winning move is not to play."

[ScotiaBurrell]

that is zdnet open sores writer

[afv011]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

that is zdnet open sores writer

come again?

[murraypaul]

Have to feel for the jury in this one:

Samsung's lawyer won something else that is likely to help their client: the 20-page verdict form asks pretty much all of the roughly 700 questions Samsung previously proposed to put before the jury, while Apple had advocated a more aggregated format. Judge Koh adopted the substance of Samsung's proposal and merely optimized its visual presentation with a tabular format.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by afv011

He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

World War III.....

Unlike anyone had expected.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by afv011

come again?

oops. open source.

[ScotiaBurrell]

The challenge for Koh was to ride herd over two famous and massive companies and their legion of attorneys -- some with equally massive egos.

If she seemed short tempered, it is often because someone is taking up time or creating what she considers unnecessary paperwork. As the two sides filed motion after motion, exhibit after exhibit, Koh and her staff likely felt buried under an avalanche of documents.

Love says Koh has two law clerks and two administrative assistants working for her.

"Counting herself, that's five people," Love said. "Compare that to the number of lawyers for Apple and Samsung. They each have dozens of lawyers filing documents, seemingly every day and all night long. It's incredibly natural for Judge Koh to be frustrated at the lawyers when you consider the deluge of paper being filed...The reality of federal court is that she doesn't have the manpower to deal with all this."

"She's done a great job," Love said. "There's many big personalities in the room, big names. Her job was to keep them under control and keep them moving and she did that."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...nder-pressure/

[ScotiaBurrell]

Samsungs tactics will have won on the technicality if this is true.

"I am worried we might have a seriously confused jury here," Koh told legal counsel from both companies. "I have trouble understanding this, and I have spent a little more time with this than they have."

"It's so complex, and there are so many pieces here," she added. "I am worried we might have a seriously confused jury here," Koh told legal counsel from both companies. "I have trouble understanding this, and I have spent a little more time with this than they have."

"It's so complex, and there are so many pieces here," she added.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...samsung-trial/

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

Samsungs tactics will have won on the technicality if this is true.

Not if it results in a hung jury.
In that case the winners are the lawyers: "More billable hours!! Hubba-hubba!"
(Cue the theme from JAWS.)

[SeaKing]

I thought that in very complicated cases (not murder of course) they would just have a judge or a panel of judges who could judge the legalities without having to explain it to a jury.

In that kind of case, the lawyers don't have a jury to play to, and the judge can just tell them "cut to the chase."

[ScotiaBurrell]

Samsung:

Apple is "attempting to block its most serious competitor from even playing the game," he said, stressing that "competition is what built this country." The jury's decision, he said, could change the way competition works in the United States altogether.

"The fact is consumers make choices, not mistakes... there's no deception, there's no confusion, and Apple has no credible evidence of it." Apple, he said, thinks it's "entitled to have a monopoly on a rounded rectangle with a touchscreen." Verhoeven also stressed form following function in technology. "Just think about walking into a Best Buy store. You go into the TV section. All of the TVs look the same. They're all boxes. They're all flatscreens. They're all minimalist designs."

Apple:

"Witnesses can be mistaken. They can be mistaken in good faith," McElhinny said. "Exhibits that are created in a trial are always created with a purpose. They can confuse, and can mislead. Historical documents are almost always where the truth lies."

"They sat with the iPhone and went feature by feature, copying it to the smallest detail," McElhinny said. "In those critical three months, Samsung was able to copy and incorporate the core part of Apple's four-year investment without taking any of the risks, because they were copying the world's most successful product."

"From the very beginning, Samsung has disrespected this process," he said. "Apple brought you two of its most senior executives: (Phil) Schiller and (Scott) Forstall. They were willing to face cross. No Samsung execs were willing to come here from Korea and answer questions under oath. Instead of witnesses, they sent you lawyers."

[afv011]

I seriously doubt anybody bought a Samsung phone thinking they were buying an iphone. That's apple premise, that they lost gazillions of dollars due to people buying the wrong phone because they were confused. Seriously, how ridiculous is that?

[din155]

Hopefully Apple doesn’t think people are that stupid.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by din155

Hopefully Apple doesn’t think people are that stupid.

If you had ever played with an Apple product, you'd know that they do assume everyone is stupid.