Apple v Samsung: Can Look and Feel Be Patented?

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

By the time that rolls around, the affected devices will already be obsolete and Samsung won't care if they're banned.

Or Apple. This was about getting a win in court to scare other supposed copy cats away.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Apple’s claims from this case aren’t very far-reaching. What they won, effectively, is a weapon to use against anyone who copies a narrow set of behaviors, appearances, and packaging designs.

If Samsung wasn’t so blatantly idiotic about copying so much from the iPhone, Apple wouldn’t have won so many of their claims. In fact, Apple lost most of their more generic, less-blatantly-copied iPad claims.

http://www.marco.org/

[afv011]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Not all evidence is created equal.

Well, apparently all the prior art evidence Samsung presented is worth nothing according to the jury.

[ScotiaBurrell]

We were debating the unregistered trade dress claims. That took a while because some of the guys wanted to give protection to round corners, the icons, and rectangles, but they were not registered. So, some of the jurors said 'Why are we playing patent office? We're not the patent office. Its not even registered.' And some of the jurors, when you look at the combination of those features, said it looks like an Apple. But we didn't want to shut out Samsung from the market because we thought 'OK, well, if Apple had tried to get a patent for all that stuff and didn't, so now they wanted us to be the ones to get it for them. We didn't want to do that.

http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/08...v-apple-trial/

[latepaul]

I found this quite entertaining.

[greenyouth]

Apple already won this lawsuit. Competition is good but at least company must see to it that they can be unique from other brand.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by latepaul

I found this quite entertaining.

LOL, too funny. The truth is, the average person has no clue as to the details of this lawsuit, nor do they care. They'll respond just like these people did.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by afv011

Well, apparently all the prior art evidence Samsung presented is worth nothing according to the jury.

This.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by latepaul

I found this quite entertaining.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by afv011

Apparently the jury decided Samsung was guilty the first day of the trial. Samsung only started presenting their evidence the 2nd week.



Source

Doesn't sound very impartial to me, but then, what do I know?

The first day of *deliberations,* not the first day of trial.

[ScotiaBurrell]

oh dear.

anti-apple crowd not taking this well at all.

This is a very common trend in this entire debate that saddens me to no end: the iPhone is being compared to simple feature phones, while in fact, it should be compared to its true predecessor: the PDA. PDAs have always done with few buttons.

http://www.osnews.com/story/26309/A_..._was_i_obvious

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by latepaul

I found this quite entertaining.

Heh. That made me chuckle a bit.

[Dopedangel]

Jury foreman in Apple vs Samsung case admits they didn't consider prior art: "it was bogging us down".

Samsung might get a huge pr boost because of this decision the more statements the jury makes the less likely it is Apple is getting anything out of it.

[david_e]

You don't get an appeal simply because you didn't win. Neither do you get one based on out of context comments snipped from an interview with a juror.

[heySkippy]

Originally Posted by latepaul

I found this quite entertaining.

A google login screen is entertaining?