Comments on: iLegal: As Apple’s products evolved, so did a strategy to protect them

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 10 Sep 2012 01:13:16 +0000

Most the components that Apple products use (like for the iPhone 4s) are not even theirs! I am disappointed that Samsung lost the lawsuit against Apple (in the states), but the battle has only just begun, and if Apple thinks that they can continue to patent silly things like ’rounded edges’, they are fooling themselves. Being a past Apple user, I can confidently say that Apple is not user friendly. If you need to go to a seminar where you have to learn how to use the product (example of where this happens is iPads being sold to businesses or schools – comes with a seminar as part of the package), how is that innovative or user-friendly? Samsung has shown us with their Galaxy Note 2 10.1 that they ARE innovative, and they want consumers to be happy with their products while being able to afford it and be able to use it with no or less difficulty.

By: Rich

Rich — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 05:14:23 +0000

Who said Samsung has not been innovating and only copying?

By: Rich

Rich — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 05:03:52 +0000

Your car will not go from 0 to 60 MPH in 1 second, so you don’t have complete control over it. I suggest you take this fact to any court, tell them it means the car was not sold to you, and see how far you get.

By: Rich

Rich — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 04:48:36 +0000

A tornado that could destroy your house is terrifying. The possibility that someone could accept a post on a tech site is not terrifying.

By: Danox

Danox — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 03:58:26 +0000

Every Asian company should be able copy everything Apple, or a Dyson create just give it all away huh?. like everything else in consumer goods, Dell and HP in five years won’t even be in the consumer PC business, Apple should protect themselves by all means necessary.

By: minicapt

minicapt — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 22:58:30 +0000

I would suggest that Apple’s focus on patents resulted from losing their infringement case against Microsoft in 1994 or 1995. Essentially the judge ruled that, without valid patents, Apple could not claim originator status on their expression of a GUI user interface. The judge also ruled that the GUI concept (as of 1994) was quite generic and that the actual designs used for Apple’s icons, and such, were ‘obvious’.

Cheers

By: minicapt

minicapt — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 22:53:09 +0000

The proper designation is “Rectangles with Rounded Corners”, abbreviated as “RoundRects”. They entered usage at Apple in May 1981. I do believe that predates 2006 …

Cheers

By: Chris Lowe

Chris Lowe — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:35:11 +0000

Wow, rounded corners- really an innovative design.

EXCEPT- Apple copied the rounded corners from Sony.

And Samsung had a design prototype from 2006.

Quit slavishly repeating the Apple BS story and start using your brain.

By: Aaradhana Joshi

Aaradhana Joshi — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 19:09:51 +0000

If Samsung has not been innovating and only copying, I wonder how do they manage to offer so many good features in their devices that others don’t. Above all, irrespective of who wins and who loses the legal tug of war and takes the credit and the IPR home, the actual battles are still fought in the market field and the biggest battle is still to win the heart of consumer – the King

By: aaradhana joshi

aaradhana joshi — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 19:04:07 +0000