Sign in / up

back to article Apple seeks whopping $2.525bn Samsung patent payout

It looks as though scheduled talks between Apple and Samsung CEOs to discuss damages for patent infringement were doomed to failure from the start, as court filings show Apple is demanding $2.525bn in costs and penalties for the use of its fondleslab and smartphone designs. Apple claims that Samsung has knowingly infringed on …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    bloody ridiculous...

    If this goes through, and Apple gets $22 per tablet, at what point does it stop? 10", 7", 5"?? At what point does a device stop being a phone and become a tablet? Will all rectangular devices suddenly become a target for this bunch of tossers?

    Maybe someone needs to remind Apple and the American legal and patent systems that a tablet is so-called, not because someone thought it was a great name, but, because the design was a natural evolution of the tablet shape that has been used by numerous civilisations throughout history.

    Apple did not invent the rectangle. They did not invent the tablet computer. They did not invent round corners.

    They did not invent.

    84 9
    1. Big_Ted
      Reply Icon

      Re: bloody ridiculous...

      Worst its over $30 possible, $24 for the design and more for UI bits.

      1 0
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Joke

      Only one thing can stop Apple

      UNLEASH THE POWER OF THE PYRAMID!!!!!!!

      10 0
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Only one thing can stop Apple

        If you think it's not worth much why are they copying it then.

        These are not standard patents, manufacturers can use different things like the 10.1N changed design that the courts agreed with, they don't need to imitate iOS's browser scroll (pure Android doesn't) and surely there's other ways of unlocking the phone other than slide to unlock.

        Don't do the same things and the problem is over. Simples.

        9 57
        1. kissingthecarpet
          Reply Icon
          Devil

          Downvoted for S*****s

          The use of bleedin' "S*****s" was enough for an automatic downvote.

          2 13
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Downvoted for S*****s

            Downvoted for the automatic downvote.

            7 6
        2. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Only one thing can stop Apple

          My old p4 desktop computer is rectangular in shape. Is Apple going to start going after desktop computer (and televisions that are rectangular in shape) manufactures for making their computers rectangular in shape?

          All hail to monopolies, patents and the upper 1 percent

          5 2
        3. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Prior Art

          Slide to unlock was around LONG before Apple stole the idea.

          http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/10/26/slide-to-unlock-patented-by-apple-despite-prior-art/

          0 0
      2. Captain DaFt
        Reply Icon

        Re: Only one thing can stop Apple

        Or, you know, stick a keyboard on'em and go back to calling'em netbooks.

        0 0
    3. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: bloody ridiculous...

      You could say that of anything - Dyson did not invent vacuum cleaners but should they not be able to protect their intellectual property and this prior art / sci-fi crap - so if someone invented a 'transporter' they should not be allowed to patent it because they had them in Star Trek?

      5 39
      1. DavCrav
        Reply Icon

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        "so if someone invented a 'transporter' they should not be allowed to patent it because they had them in Star Trek?"

        There is a difference between a patent and a DESIGN patent. If someone does invent a transporter, they could patent it, but not the design of it if it's the same as that of Star Trek. Or at least, that's how it should work, because you didn't invent the design. It's hardly rocket science.

        35 1
        1. Euchrid
          Reply Icon

          Re: bloody ridiculous...

          "If someone does invent a transporter, they could patent it, but not the design of it if it's the same as that of Star Trek. Or at least, that's how it should work, because you didn't invent the design. It's hardly rocket science."

          Slight tangent, but a few years ago, a couple of guys did try to patent a warp drive, which IIRC was briefly granted. I seem to remember that there were claims that the appllication was rather influenced by a Star Trek book.

          0 0
      2. ToddRundgren
        Reply Icon
        WTF?

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        There must be an inventive step. e.g. a car driven through the front wheels, like the mini, or a tablet computer that has finger scrolling software, but not a "RECTANGLE WITH ROUNDED EDGES". This is simple american protectionism!

        3 1
      3. Eponymous Cowherd
        Reply Icon
        Thumb Down

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        "Dyson did not invent vacuum cleaners but should they not be able to protect their intellectual property"

        Yes they should, and they did. Dyson patented the "cyclone" technology and, because of that had exclusive rights to manufacture devices using that tech until the patent expired (which it has).

        The difference between Dyson and Apple are Dyson's inventions are just that. Inventions. Real, technological and scientific inventions that took time, effort and real research to develop, and deserving of the protection a Patent affords.

        6 0
      4. Mark .
        Reply Icon

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        The Star Trek transporters weren't actually real, you know. On the other hand, the design of rectangles and rounded corners *was* real - whether it's in a film, or not. That's the difference. A working transporter would be an actual new invention - rectangles and rounded corners aren't.

        0 0
    4. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      "They did not invent."

      Yet there was really nothing like it around.

      Explain.

      5 42
      1. Bill Neal
        Reply Icon
        FAIL

        Re: "They did not invent."

        HP TC1100, 7 years older & had better specs

        A quick google image search shows it many places.

        31 0
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "They did not invent."

          Oh the HP TC1100. That sir is really like an iPad and worked oh so well without the keyboard and just your fingers. Nice hard drive too - always a good idea on a tablet - and such a pleasure to use weighting in at "just" 4 lb.

          For fuck sakes the examples some people come up just shows how hard they try not to get it.

          4 45
          1. ToddRundgren
            Reply Icon

            Re: "They did not invent."

            There is unfortunately a precedent for patenting a form factor!

            Rodime pateneted the 3.5" disc format factor and still get royalties from: Seagate, WDC, et al to this day.

            The "patent" world has gone mad, though by allowing a rectangle to be patentable.

            1 0
            1. Chris007
              Reply Icon

              Re: "They did not invent." @ToddRundgren

              "Rodime pateneted the 3.5" disc format factor and still get royalties from: Seagate, WDC, et al to this day."

              I was under the impression that patents lasted 20 years??? I remember using 3.5" discs way back in the 80's so would have expected this patent to have expired?

              0 0
              1. Anonymous Coward
                Reply Icon
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: "They did not invent." @ToddRundgren

                25. And your point is?

                the OP was pointing out that there is precedence for patenting a form factor. The duration of a patent would seem completely irrelevant.

                Fail.

                0 1
                1. Chris007
                  Reply Icon
                  FAIL

                  Re: "They did not invent." @AC 2/7 12:44 GMT

                  1st - My point was that the OP stated that the inventor of the 3.5" format was still earning money "to this day" and if patents last 20yrs this wouldn't be true.

                  2nd - I was [sort of] right and therefore a Fail on you sir - http://www.uspto.gov/inventors/patents.jsp shows 20 years. Further basic checks showed that the length of patent protection in force in 1987 was actually 17 years.

                  An apology is not necessary but I sentence you to 100 hours of listening to Justin Beiber :)

                  0 0
          2. John Stirling
            Reply Icon
            FAIL

            Re: "They did not invent."

            Hmm, methinks you don't understand the difference between 'design' and 'function'. I will grant you that the function is different, but the opprobrium being heaped upon Apple isn't about function it is about design - specifically rectangular with rounded corners.

            The thing could be used to make toast for all it matters in terms of function, it is a rectangular tablet with rounded corners, that is the intellectual 'property' Apple sought to protect, and that is the IP that they clearly did NOT invent.

            whether they are due the pennies for the function around fumble fingers, I don't know, maybe, but they can sod off for the design.

            0 0
        2. Hans 1
          Reply Icon
          Flame

          Re: "They did not invent."

          It is not black, does not have a button on the front, has buttons left right and center, has an ugly keyboard and is waaaay toooo thick ... oh, you are moaning because of rounded corners? I think Apple a moaning because somebody copied their whole design which took years to mature.

          Seriously, you @pple h8ers, who can tell the difference between an iphone 3 and any of the Samsungs lying on the table (blackenning out the Samsung logo on some models)? I cuold not - buff said.

          2 30
          1. John Stirling
            Reply Icon

            Re: "They did not invent."

            and yet it is the rounded corners which are worth $22 dollars per machine.

            Since we agree that the rounded corners are not special we must therefore agree that the litigation is largely (in financial terms) baseless, and that the company pursuing baseless litigation is therefore being 'bad', and is nothing special.

            Then we can subsequently agree that they should get out of the courtroom, and get back to marketing products peerlessly.

            Glad we're all in agreement

            2 1
        3. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "They did not invent."

          HP TC1100 appears to bean no resemblance to an iPad.

          Explain?

          0 0
      2. h4rm0ny
        Reply Icon

        Re: "They did not invent."

        Others have said that there is prior art. I expect there is but my comment on the matter is that it is more than a design issue actually. If you have something that just stands on your desk like a monitor for example, then rounded edges make no difference other than as a design aesthetic. But if it's a device you are to hold comfortably in your hand, lounge around with, turn about at different angles, then sharp corners are no longer just a design aesthetic but a practical matter. Rounded corners on a tablet are pretty much obvious for anyone who's ever held one in their hand.

        There's a reason you don't often see square steering wheels in cars and it's not just because of tradition.

        4 12
        1. Slef
          Reply Icon

          Re: "They did not invent."

          "There's a reason you don't often see square steering wheels in cars and it's not just because of tradition."

          And there was me thinking no more square wheels after the Austin Allegro!!

          1 0
          1. Chika
            Reply Icon
            Coat

            Re: "They did not invent."

            How long has it been since anyone last built an All-aggro? Could the current design owners sue for prior art?

            1 0
        2. ToddRundgren
          Reply Icon
          Thumb Down

          Re: "They did not invent."

          You do in racing cars.

          Your argument sounds like you have a few Apple products.

          1 1
          1. h4rm0ny
            Reply Icon

            Re: "They did not invent."

            "You do in racing cars."

            Really? Actually square, not just rounded but slightly squarified? I can see the latter being useful for knowing exactly where you are with it or the ability to quickly exert more force without having to maintain as hard a grip, but actually square sounds both uncomfortable and more dangerous if you slammed into it. Do you have a photo of a racing car steering wheel?

            "Your argument sounds like you have a few Apple products."

            I have no idea where you got that from. I don't have any! I prefer Windows (both on computers and phones). I'm very confused how you took my post as having a pro-Apple bias. I was essentially saying that rounded corners are an obvious thing for practical reasons that anyone would almost certainly arrive at. The implication being that it's not the sort of thing that should therefore be patentable.

            2 0
      3. Homer 1
        Reply Icon
        Headmaster

        Re: "Yet there was really nothing like it around."

        Apple fanboy bullshit.

        In fact this design has been "around" for decades:

        "A tablet computer that looks remarkably like an iPad seems to spring up on a weekly basis. But this device, also hailed as the future of home computing, was made 17 years ago. Called The Tablet, it provided a glimpse into tomorrow's world that was incredibly accurate."

        Why do Apple cultists insist on revising history? Next they'll claim that Apple "invented" the computer mouse, the GUI, the home computer, the smartphone, and the portable digital music player.

        Apple "invented" precisely nothing - zip, squat, nada, zero. Ever. Period.

        The fact that Apple claims so many (disputed) "patents" is one of the biggest jokes in the industry, and a decidedly unfunny joke at that, considering their "claims" include simple geometric shapes that they could not possibly have "invented". Apple's one and only "accomplishment" was to "shamelessly steal" everybody else's ideas and resell them, rubber stamped with a fruity name and logo, and even that was shamelessly stolen from the Beatles.

        Apple should be "applauded" for making so much money off stolen ideas and litigation ... in the same way that Al Capone should have been "applauded" for racketeering and murder.

        The sooner those gangsters go bankrupt the better.

        58 1
        1. Euchrid
          Reply Icon

          Re: "Yet there was really nothing like it around."

          Why do Apple cultists insist on revising history? Next they'll claim that Apple "invented" the computer mouse, the GUI, the home computer, the smartphone, and the portable digital music player.

          Sadly, they’re hardy the ones. How many times do people say that Apple stole, rather than licensed, research from Xerox PARC? Or for that matter, claim that the PARC invented the GUI? People get some het up about certain companies that they’ll simply choose to not bother access easily obtainable information.

          “Apple should be "applauded" for making so much money off stolen ideas and litigation ... in the same way that Al Capone should have been "applauded" for racketeering and murder.”

          In the case of Capone, he – like many others - took advantage of a situation, namely the Prohibition Laws. That legal situation created an environment for racketeers to prosper and to fund expansion – just as it allowed Joseph Kennedy to fund/buy a presidential election. That doesn’t excuse what Capone did, just that he (and others) were an inevitable product of a flawed system – which I would say is exactly what’s happening with patents in technology.

          A company like Apple ain’t going to go broke soon and we can’t rely on insolvency to sort out the problem of patent litigation – and in fact, the judge at a recent case that Apple lost seems to be indicating that something needs to change (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-judge-posner-us-patent-system-out-of-sync-20120705,0,4814825.story).

          1 1
        2. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "Yet there was really nothing like it around."

          Had Knight-Ridder codified and applied for design patents, they could have protected their product.

          Did they?

          "The sooner those gangsters go bankrupt the better." - Don't hold your breath.

          1 1
        3. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart
          Reply Icon
          Thumb Up

          Re: "Yet there was really nothing like it around."

          @Homer 1

          Thank you for such a succinct post, I've bookmarked it.

          0 0
        4. Hans 1
          Reply Icon

          Re: "Yet there was really nothing like it around."

          Wait, it doesn't look like an iphone/ipad. We are talking about something like this. All new tablets look exactly like that, almost to the drop of paint.

          I agree on some of the patents - yet these phones and tablets look exactly like iphones/ipads - people confuse them with iphone/ipads !!!! they do not even want to change the color, because the copiers are banking on punters buying their products thinking they bought an iphone.

          I side on Apple for this one.

          1 3
      4. Nya
        Reply Icon

        Re: "They did not invent."

        HP TC1100...10.4", rectangular, rounded corners...called a tablet. Released in 2003 or something. Apple has never invented anything. Copy, patent, and then advertise they invented it as the patent says so yes. Invent? no!

        1 0
      5. JohnG
        Reply Icon

        Re: "They did not invent."

        "Yet there was really nothing like it around." ...from Apple.

        I have two Siemens SIMpads gathering dust in my attic. These were sold in 2001, have 8.4 inch touch sensitive colour screens and black cases with rounded corners. Running WindowsCE, they had a web browser, email client, media player and could also be used to read documents, spreadsheets, etc.

        Then there were the various UMPC devices from an assortment of manufacturers..... All of these preceded Apple's ipad by some years and none of the manufacturers involved considered their tablets to be novel enough to warrant design patents.

        4 0
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "They did not invent."

          More's the fool them :)

          0 0
      6. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart
        Reply Icon
        Flame

        Re: "They did not invent."

        @AC 24th July 2012 19:38

        Yet there was really nothing like it around.

        Explain

        OK, the original design concept for "slide to unlock"

        http://pics.kuvaton.com/kuvei/apple_slide_to_unlock.jpg

        Does that explain it for you?

        0 0
    5. Medium Dave
      Reply Icon
      Devil

      I am reminded of Austin Powers...

      Dr Evil: "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark..."

      Sigh.

      I remember when Apple used to make really good computers for a living, but that seems like a lifetime ago.

      23 2
      1. Neil Greatorex
        Reply Icon

        Re: I am reminded of Austin Powers...

        "I remember when Apple used to make really good computers for a living, but that seems like a lifetime ago."

        Unfortunately I've been around since long before 'Personal Computers' & for the life of me I can't remember when Apple ever made "good computers", perhaps you can enlighten me?

        Or, to use the blight that's affected any remotely rational discussion lately: "Citation needed".

        12 8
        1. Medium Dave
          Reply Icon

          Re: I am reminded of Austin Powers...

          You need to think back to the original Mac and Mac II. Y'know, before they invented the letter "i".

          IIRC, was about '87 or '88 when they discovered the joy of trolling the courtrooms claiming somebody had stolen their mojo, and it's been downhill ever since.

          But, if you thought Windows V 1 was the dog's whatsits, I'm not going to argue.

          0 0
      2. Charlie Clark Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: I am reminded of Austin Powers...

        I thought it was Jonatton Yeah?

        0 0
        1. LinkOfHyrule
          Reply Icon
          Joke

          Well Rounded

          I just used MS Paint to draw a rounded rectangle and then suddenly, iTunes popped up a dialogue box titled cease and desist telling me to erase the rounded rectangle immediately or they would, to use their exact words "sue my fucking Windows using scum, ass off!"

          I am of course joking, I don't really have iTunes installed *shudders*

          33 1
    6. Hans 1
      Reply Icon
      Mushroom

      Re: bloody ridiculous...

      Apple did not invent the rectangle. They did not invent the tablet computer. They did not invent round corners.

      Apple invented a slick device which was the thinnest smartphone device when it came out. The big novelty was that it hardly had any buttons and that the few there were were hidden. The front was all black, had rounded corners, the keyboard was the touch screen, the screen was exceptionally big for a phone ... no other phone on the market at the time had all these features. For years, competitors tried to create the "iphone" killer and failed .... until they copied its design 1:1 (Made in China-style) and started selling the copies way under Apple's prices - they had no R&D costs for the device, so it was easy ... TBH, I cannot tell the difference between phones when I see the Galaxys, iPhones etc - I could tell the difference between Nokias, Blackberry's, Samsungs, Motos etc before. On some models, Samsung has even dared to put its brand name ... imagine a copy of a Ferrari-red (Yes, 'Ferrari red' is a patented colour) Ferrari F458-lookalike by Chevrolet with Chevrolet written all over it.

      This is not the case of rounded corners, this is a case of carbon-copy.

      Apple started selling tablets, which had been on the market for a decade. At that time, it just took its design for the iphone and increased the size. No tablet before looked anything like the ipad. Again, competitors launched tablet lookalikes.

      Example Fujitsu "tablet" (I have one in my closet - it was given to me):

      http://www.retrevo.com/s/Fujitsu-ST5020-Laptops-review-manual/id/3090ci968/t/1-2/

      I think you guyz are "bloody ridiculous" and no, I do not consider myself an "Apple fanboy" - I am probably gonna get a Galaxy SIII - because it is just like the iphone without walled garden.

      0 26
      1. Ian Yates
        Reply Icon
        Stop

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        "Apple invented a slick device which was the thinnest smartphone device when it came out. The big novelty was that it hardly had any buttons and that the few there were were hidden."

        Granted it has three buttons on the front instead of one and is 0.6mm thicker (but 50g lighter), but the LG Prada was announced and released before the original iPhone. So who copied whom?

        Every time I read these patent throwing stories, I'm amazed that this stuff can even be patented. Who would ever produce a handheld device with non-rounded corners? Even the original Gameboy had them.

        Calling any of the devices "carbon-copy" is disingenuous: Apple have the iconic single button with square symbol; how could anyone not recognise an Apple product by that alone? I've never seen that copied.

        They should all grow up and stop!

        5 0
      2. nsld
        Reply Icon
        Facepalm

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        Hans

        This is what you wrote:

        "No tablet before looked anything like the ipad"

        Did you not notice the picture in the article from the Kubrick movie?

        In terms of prior art your staring straight at it.

        And if you cannot tell the difference between an iPhone and the Galaxy or any of the others I suggest you get a new guide dog!

        4 1
      3. JohnG
        Reply Icon

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        "Apple invented a slick device which was the thinnest smartphone device when it came out. The big novelty was that it hardly had any buttons and that the few there were were hidden. The front was all black, had rounded corners, the keyboard was the touch screen, the screen was exceptionally big for a phone ... no other phone on the market at the time had all these features"

        But all of these features existed in different devices pre-dating the iphone. HTC grew from first producing large screen smartphones for HP and subsequently, in their own right. They and other manufacturers also offered large screen phones without buttons on the front. Apple's skill (as always) was in combining many existing ideas in well-marketed package - but it is a disgrace that they now claim to have invented all these things.

        3 0
      4. John Stirling
        Reply Icon

        Re: bloody ridiculous...

        Apple did well with the iphone for two reasons, 1) it was an Apple product, and they have seriously loyal (to the point of irrational) customers - how lucky are they?, and 2) the technology had reached the point where it worked. There were many smart phones previously, I owned some of them, reasonably large screens (but not as big, or hi res, as they weren't practical), reasonably functional (but not as functional), and a bit heavier.

        The iphone was a fairly obvious improvement in terms of hardware and design tailored to a tightly designed, and highly quality assured user interface - which now looks rather dated, but at the time was revolutionary - but let us remember, it was the software that made it an iphone not the hardware.

        1 0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like