Apple v Samsung: Can Look and Feel Be Patented?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by afv011

Indeed. To me, it reads as "iPhones are largely overpriced", or "people will pay anything for an apple logo". Take your pick.

Part of it will be that, part of it will be that Apple is only competing at the top-end market, where the margins are higher. The Android market share covers all ends of the market, including the low-end, which is dominated by volume rather than margin. Money can be made with both models.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by afv011

IANAL either, but what about cases that are reopened when new evidence surfaces?

That's not technically an appeal (although, as a practical matter you might as well consider it as such). The big restriction on these kind of cases is that the new evidence needs to be "newly discovered evidence," which means evidence that wasn't reasonably available at the time of trial. This is a pretty high hurdle to hit in civil cases because it's hard to show that the evidence wasn't reasonably available.

(Most of the cases you hear about involving newly discovered evidence are criminal cases involving DNA - DNA testing may lead to evidence that genuinely was not available at the time of the trial.)

[afv011]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

oR who see an Android logo? cuts two ways.

Android logo? Which phones have that? I see a Samsung logo in mine, but not an Android logo. Maybe the Nexī?

[ScotiaBurrell]

I trust you captured the point. some people (andropid crusaders) only buy android.

its about the green guy

[tompe]

Originally Posted by afv011

Android logo? Which phones have that? I see a Samsung logo in mine, but not an Android logo. Maybe the Nexī?

The Nexus S has a "Google" logo.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by afv011

Indeed. To me, it reads as "iPhones are largely overpriced", or "people will pay anything for an apple logo". Take your pick.

I'm no Apple fan, okay?
Don't own a single one of their products as I think they aren't particularly good value buys.
That said, not everybody buys their toys for their value. Apple iPxxx are all as overpriced as Mercedes and Porsche cars, Tiffany jewelry, Bose speakers, and other luxury goods.

Hwever, I think people are allowed to spend their money anyway they want to, as long as they earn it or steal it fair and square. Me, I have trouble enough figuring out how to waste my money so I don't worry overmuch how other people waste theirs.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

I trust you captured the point. some people (andropid crusaders) only buy android.

its about the green guy

Actually no, I didn't. Maybe because you didn't make a point. There is not and "android" phone, there are lots of them, so you can pick and choose whichever suits your needs (big screen, small screen, keyboard, no keyboard, expandable storage, 3G, LTE, NFC, ...) so it does not feel like you're told what's best for you, you get to choose what you think best suits your needs. But I understand some people prefer to be told what's best for them - it's their money after all.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Some people make a choice because works for them. Not need to be insulted: "some people prefer to be told what's best for them"

all android crusaders mean like that?

[afv011]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

Some people make a choice because works for them. Not need to be insulted: "some people prefer to be told what's best for them"

all android crusaders mean like that?

That's what I said, some choose, some want to be told what they should do.

Yup, that's what crusaders do, they fight for the truth, it ain't easy, but we carry the torch onwards to show the light to those in the dark.

[Jovvi]

Originally Posted by afv011

Actually no, I didn't. Maybe because you didn't make a point. There is not and "android" phone, there are lots of them, so you can pick and choose whichever suits your needs (big screen, small screen, keyboard, no keyboard, expandable storage, 3G, LTE, NFC, ...) so it does not feel like you're told what's best for you, you get to choose what you think best suits your needs. But I understand some people prefer to be told what's best for them - it's their money after all.

I got an android phone, and an ipad too. I think both have their strong points and their weaknesses. However, after living with the android phone for 3 years I´m really tired of it and next phone will be an iphone. And I will buy it soon. Not because I "like to be told what´s best" but because I want and iphone and are really tired of the android!

If you like android, fine, but please don´t tell me what to think!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Phogg

The biggest thing these suits are doing is pointing out to the public how vastly under chared patent holders are for their patents, considering the burden all this nonsense places on the public courts.

Patents and copyrights need to have annual fees, and those fees need to adjust to reflect the cost of enforcing them.

Probably some truth in that, but afaic the more important thing is managing, determining and issuing the PROPER patents in the first place. Some/many things simply should not be patentable. Software should not be patentable for example. Very broad patents in the "look and feel" area should not be patentable. (and those two are much of what this wasted case is about).

[kennyc]

I only post this for the creative first line which notes the sentiment that Apple seems to be garnering:

Deal of the Day, it is not

Fruity inventor of rounded rectangles, Apple, is taking the unusual step of cutting iPhone prices ahead of the iPhone 5 launch.
...

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/28314-iphone-4s-gets-$50-price-cut

[fjtorres]

Another day, another doozy:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57491406-37/2010-apple-license-offer-to-samsung-$30-per-smartphone-$40-per-tablet/

Apple wanted $30 per smartphone and $40 per tablet from Samsung.

And people gripe about Microsoft licensing their function patent portfolio for $14 per device.

Clearly form is way more valuable than function.

Stay tuned.

[wyndslash]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Another day, another doozy:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57491406-37/2010-apple-license-offer-to-samsung-$30-per-smartphone-$40-per-tablet/

Apple wanted $30 per smartphone and $40 per tablet from Samsung.

And people gripe about Microsoft licensing their function patent portfolio for $14 per device.

Clearly form is way more valuable than function.

Stay tuned.

i find this whole thing funny. apple gets some of its parts from Samsung (as well as from other competitors), right? o.O

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by wyndslash

i find this whole thing funny. apple gets some of its parts from Samsung (as well as from other competitors), right? o.O

Yes; Samsung makes Apple's CPUs among other things.
But however petty they may get in court, neither company is going to let that get in the way of the serious business of making money.

You only see that kind of petulance in publishing.