bleemck

Apple vs Samsung a blessing in disguise?

Recommended Posts

I recently read a viewpoint on the entire lawsuit that put new light on the proposed ban of certain Samsung phones by Apple. In the past, when facing lawsuits from Apple (HTC, anyone?), companies have simply updated their software pre or post launch to avoid infringement.

My argument is this: Many of the models that Apple seeks to ban are running older software (2.x.x) including the SII's, the S 4G, and Droid Charge. Android's new software is not only meant to streamline Android and even run better on lower-spec hardware, it also finds loopholes around the patents Apple is defending.

So, a simple solution to keeping the Galaxy phones available for sale in the US if they are banned via their old operating system? Update them to 4.1.

In short, Apple suing the pants off of Samsung may just force a lot of companies to expedite 4.1 upgrades to their phones to keep them available. Just a thought.

Yours?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing all the comments from and about the jurors, I think Samsung is content to just take up appeals at this point. Considering that some of the issues were with the physical design, I don't think an OS update would solve the problem anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth reading:

http://m.gizmodo.com/5938219/why-the-apple-v-samsung-ruling-may-not-hold-up

The article makes some very good arguments (with evidence) that suggests the verdict was rushed on the jurors' account, as well as possibly influenced by a bias that the patent-holding jury foreman had. Jurors have recounted that they relied heavily on the foreman for understanding how patents and patent law works... I suspect that he has a vested interest in seeing patent laws enforced strictly and in favor of patent holders. Clearly they didn't take "prior-art" into consideration, or debate whether these types of patents were even valid. I mean, we saw "pinch-to-zoom" in The Minority Report and rectangular tablet computers in Star Trek.

I think some of Apple's claims may hold some water, but not $1 billion worth. Essentially the ruling has made rectangles with beveled edges Apple intellectual property. Square icons arranged in a grid with a dock at the bottom is now Apple IP, too. That's just getting ridiculous.

That being said, and to address the OP's main question, I think this will drive innovation in some ways. There was a different article I was reading that said that it was Apple's patents which really drove the innovation that lead to ICS/JB and will only lead to more innovation and uniqueness while getting rid of the cheap iPhone clones. They cited the S3 as an example of how they can still make great and innovating smart phones without looking like an iPhone clone/wannabe. However, a lot of the lawsuit was on the physical appearances and not so much Android itself, so I don't know if it will really lead to manufacturers pushing out JB any quicker... but I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be very very surprised if Judge Koh decided that this jury was "unreasonable" and overruled them. That would be setting up a huge precedent for the future. Yeah maybe the jury foreman had disproportionate influence and was personally biased, but that's not uncommon among juries. Samsung had an opportunity to remove him from the jury pool from the outset but they didn't. Most of the time you have to live with the jury you get, unless they really do end up doing things that are "unreasonable". I'd be surprised if the ruling went this way.

Will this expedite updates to 4.1 on old devices? Personally, I doubt it. There's probably too much testing/roll-out costs for the carriers. There's so many new devices in their pipelines, they might be better off cutting off sales on the "infringing" devices and just focusing on the new ones.

What I'm curious about are the supposed software infringements on things like "pinch to zoom" and "double tap to zoom". Those are still a core part of the latest Android software, no? What's the future of those features?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it does matter, because it seems clear the jury didn't follow the 100+ page "final instructions to the jury." The judge may not throw it out, herself, however you can guarantee that Samsung will appeal it... and the jury's inconsistencies and comments on the deliberations give Samsung good grounds for an appeal. Also, one jury member stated they reached the award amount they did was because they didn't want it just to be a slap on the wrist.. they wanted it to be high enough to punish Samsung and for it to hurt but not be unreasonable... but the jury instructions clearly stated--TWICE--that the amount was to based on the lost profits and damages caused by the infringing products, and specifically said the amount was not to be used as a punishment for wrongdoing.

As for pinch-to-zoom and such... its hard to say. I really doubt Apple will go after Google over them though. I think Apple doesn't have a strong enough case over only software patents and not the trade-dressing and such claims it had against Samsung. And it *definitely* won't be taking any other legal actions against anyone else until the Samsung case is completely closed and all appeal options have been exhausted.

Google stated pretty confidently afterwards that the ruling didn't really have any meaningful implications for the Android OS itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting development that might discourage Apple from ever wanting to talk about their questionable pinch-to-zoom patent in court anymore:

The jury mis-applied the concept of prior art

The world: wait, shouldn't we go over this prior art stuff again?

Apple: No, no, nothing to see here, move along...

As was noted, Samsung will appeal and we'll see where this goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

more interesting reading about pinch-to-zoom: Apple was able to get a limited and specific patent on pinch-to-zoom implementation, but according to The Verge it's ballooned into a myth about something broader than it really is.

color me skeptical. when multi-billion dollar companies lawyer-up for patent wars, there must be a lot more at stake than a few limited specific patents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps ego, reputation, sales....

Everything they do is for the almighty dollar. If they can capitalize on it, it's an option (or in this case a lawsuit).

We've said it before, I'll say it again; give em' enough rope, eventually they will hang themselves with it.

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Samsung is now trying to claim jury misconduct. Seems like a futile path if you ask me. They're probably just firing scattershot to see what sticks.

http://www.electroni...udiced.foreman/

Actually, there was quite a few reports and quotes by the jury members that one jury member was essentially bullying the others and convinced them to not take prior art into account, etc. It's really kinda fishy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now