Samsung offers Apple TOP-SECRET peace deal in Australia Samsung has held out the olive branch to Apple to end their patent dispute in Australia, a Sydney court was told today. The lawyers didn't elaborate on what the proposal might be, or indeed if it could be applicable in any of the other fronts in the Apple v Samsung IP clash, but Apple's lawyer Steven Burley said the company …
At last, some common sense, perhaps if Apple and Samsung spent more time talking to one another about their relevant products these bullsh*t lawsuits that deprive the market of technology wouldn't tale place.
Perhaps this will be the start of a domino effect where they'll negotiate among themselves on all these [stupid] internationally lodged patent disputes and then we, the consumer can buy what we want.
That way the retailers get to make a buck opposed to the law firms..
Apples beef is about looks and has nothing to do with real technology theft. Any consumer is NOT going to be 'Tricked' into buying a Galaxy if they want an Apple product, but Apple is desperate to restrict options to the general public. You can't even use an Apple IPAD without registering it first..... Not roadblocks when using Android based tablets, but Apple hasn't been sued YET for the incredible restrictions it places on its consumers. I'm just dumbfounded how MS gets sued over a web-browser and Apple doesn't get jack over the numerous restrictions it enforces on its consumers. To all Apple Fans....don't drink the cool-aid, because your a member of a cult that controls your movement and access with every Apple product.
The main reason Apple haven't been sued before is because in past years they were an insignificant little outfit with a minute market share for desktop computers. They didn't have a monopoly, and thus couldn't get sued for being anti competitive.
On the other hand, now they have a large market share in hand-held devices the chances of being hit for being anti competitive have risen somewhat.
The whole point is that one company spent billions developing something and then another came along and copied a whole chunk of it, and you mistakenly think this is about choice. Its not, its about theft. I conclude from your initial statement that you are the sort of person who downloads music for free to avoid paying the originator.
There are plenty of alternative phones out there and Apple is restricting none of them. All it is doing is saying that if you want to design something then fair enough, but don't peel the label off my kit design and sell it as your own.
WTF has registering an iPad got to do with theft ? If I buy a car, it has a car key that I have to get from the manufacturer. thats not restricting my choice as there are alternative cars out there.
Buy Apple kit if you want, or not as you decide but stop moaning that Apple won't do business just to suit you.
If you want to buy Samsung, then buy Samsung but ffs stop moaning because you want to buy Apple with a Samsung label on because you mistakenly believe you have a right to tell Apple how to run their business just to suit you.
You sir, are the classic "entitlement kiddie" who thinks they have the right to decide how others operate. When you grow up, have a real job and find yourself being ripped off by someone copying you, then I will have a really good laugh however I somehow doubt you will ever originate anything but would instead try and copy someone elses design as its easier that having an original thought.
Drivel indeed from you. You are wholly missing the point that Apple in its "innovation" has ripped off the design and IP of other companies. the Samsung Pad is also not that similar to the iPad in most respects, if you have ever seen one or held one...unless you are saying that if someone invents the car and nobody else can produce anything remotely similar on 4 wheels...where on earth would we be now with such ridiculuous restrictions. In fact, humans are genetically wired to copy any successful as part of our survival mechanism, therefore it is not criminal but flattery and should be encouraged to enable progress. Yes a copy fee may be appropriate but not a block.
The look and feel is what the case is about, nothing to do with technology. It's about product design, packaging design and the UI design. All of which are patented by Apple.
Are you telling me that Samsung haven't bought an iPad or iPhone, stripped it and worked out the cost of it, looked at the construction of it? I worked at a company that produced network gear and I remember seeing a "cost analysis" of a competitors product, so it must be fairly common practice.
If there's any IP case against Apple it is that they aren't paying licences to some patent trolls and lets face it most people don't want to feel the trolls.
"The look and feel is what the case is about, nothing to do with technology. It's about product design, packaging design and the UI design. All of which are patented by Apple."
To me, that's the big issue right there: The look and feel should be copy write, and the technology should be patent. And both should apply only to the non-obvious (rounded corners being obvious, as does being flat, rectangular and with a smooth screen).
Oh, and don't Samsung manufacture parts for the iPad? Things like the resistive screen? Tends to suggest they know a bit more about how the iPad works than, say, Apple...
It is about lunacy
The entire IT industry is a bunch of lunatic hippies which deliberately hides its head in the sand and ignores IPR law and then cries foul.
There is an essential part of product development in _ALL_ other industries - it is called FOA - Freedom to Operate Analysis. When you have an idea for a new product you sit down with your IPR person and do an analysis of the possible traps and pitfalls. If you are likely to walk into a minefield you work around them _IN_ _ADVANCE_. A startup business plan without of FOA will never get any money in all other industries.
The law is an arse, but its the law. It may be better to change it, but as long as it is as is we have to live by it and in the current law landscape that means doing FOA. Now tell me which IT company does it? In my 20 years in the field I have yet to see one.
>If you want to buy Samsung, then buy Samsung
Unfortunately Apple see fit to decide that you must not be allowed to buy Samsung.
>When you grow up, have a real job
Shit, I'm 55 years old and have worked all my adult life yet I still haven't grown up enough to recognise that Apple aren't really a competition stifling predator but are really a cuddly innnovative company.
Bleh, I really cant be arsed taking all your arguments/assumptions apart piece by piece. Your rant is most definately worthy of the pages of the Daily Mail tho.
Let me respond to each of the points you make in order...
-The whole point is that one company spent billions developing something and then another came along and copied a whole chunk of it, and you mistakenly think this is about choice. Its not, its about theft.
I don't believe for a second that Apple's development costs for ANY of their products has ever been anything apporaching that order of magnitude. This equates to employing 1,000 engineers for 10 years and paying each at least $200,000. Please quote a source for this figure.
I am also a bit fuzzy about what Samsung have copied that equates to stealing millions of man-hours of labour? As far as I am aware, the detail of the lawsuits in question is that they have copied the 'look and feel', such as form factor (my Kindle has roudned corners, does this breach Apple's patents / copyrights too?
- conclude from your initial statement that you are the sort of person who downloads music for free to avoid paying the originator.
I don't think that is a conclusion that anyone else would draw. What it is, is an ad-hominem attack, a clear logical fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
-There are plenty of alternative phones out there and Apple is restricting none of them. All it is doing is saying that if you want to design something then fair enough, but don't peel the label off my kit design and sell it as your own.
The device in question, AFAIK, is a tablet-form computer, not a phone. Apple has been very restrictive of Samsung's tablet in particular, but seeking to restrict its sale. If Samsung had 'peeled the logo' off the iPad and tried to market it as an Apple product, then they would have a clear case and I would be right behind them. As it turns out, they haven't and I'm not.
-WTF has registering an iPad got to do with theft ? If I buy a car, it has a car key that I have to get from the manufacturer. thats not restricting my choice as there are alternative cars out there.
Realy, I've never bought a car and had to register my details with the manufacturer in order to get the key and drive it away. I believe the normal procedure in this sort of situation is to hand over a large amount of money to a car dealer and he hands you the key.
More to the point, what has theft got to do with the need to register an iPad?
-Buy Apple kit if you want, or not as you decide but stop moaning that Apple won't do business just to suit you.
The point here is not that Apple won't do business to suit me, or others (personally, I won;t do business with Apple), but that Apple are seeking to prevent people from doing (legitimate) business with Samsung.
-If you want to buy Samsung, then buy Samsung but ffs stop moaning because you want to buy Apple with a Samsung label on because you mistakenly believe you have a right to tell Apple how to run their business just to suit you.
If I want to buy Samsung, then I find myself in a bit of a pickle, because Apple are actively seeking to prevent me from doing so. They mistakenly believe they have the right to tell Samsung how to run thier business.
-You sir, are the classic "entitlement kiddie" who thinks they have the right to decide how others operate. When you grow up, have a real job and find yourself being ripped off by someone copying you, then I will have a really good laugh however I somehow doubt you will ever originate anything but would instead try and copy someone elses design as its easier that having an original thought.
...and you end your argument with another ad-hominem attack. You make (incorrect) assumptions about the other poster in order to try to belittle him.
Like Apple, you act like the playground bully. You also seem to imply that Apple somehow originated the idea of a tablet computer (false), with the form factor of the iPad (demonstrably false, see 2001 A Space Oddyssey for prior art, for example), or a touch-screen interface (again, false, touch-screens have been around for a long time)
Personally, I find Apple's tactics against Samsung to be petty and foolish. They are destroying their own reputation, as well as alienating one of their parts suppleirs. They may have been first to market with devices like the iPad, but that doens't mean that they are innovative - the idea wasn't new, they just brought it to market when it became cost effective to produce. To try to stifle their competition in this way implies to me that they don;t have the ability to innovate, but instead wish to prevent others from doing so to maintain market share.
I got an iPad a year and 2 months ago. It looked good, and the other tablets cost as much. Just out of warranty, the screen now renders reds instead of blacks. The pixels on the lcd panel are fine, alpha blended colours for eg are correct. Googling tells me it has to do with the GPU solder joints. Maybe if I had abused the damn thing, it would have developed the fault whilst in warranty.
No one at the bar at my appointment time. 10 minutes into the 15 minute slot, arrives a bloke from the backoffice, could not be bothered less. No apology for delay. The ensuing hubris was surprising in this day and age. £200 for a refurbished replacement with 90 day warranty. Pay up or f*ck off. You have 3 minutes left.
They use fancy components to make it look good, but they are *not* built to last. I do not know if this is why other manufacturer are not pushing the edge as much. As a gadget geek, this is my first device failure of this magnitude. Absolutely THE worst value for money ever.
As a locked system, all my purchased apps are now useless. With the restrictions, I have no alternate avenue for repair. My ONLY option is to stump more cash to Apple and Apple alone. Every 90 days.
I was naive.. not anymore. They may make a lot of money, but it is not honest money. Even the mafia has their admirers...
Anonymous, cause they may sue me, and I don't have *any* patents.
>> I got an iPad a year and 2 months ago
>> The ensuing hubris was surprising in this day and age. £200 for a refurbished replacement with 90 day warranty. Pay up or f*ck off.
If this was in the UK, then go back and demand a repair for a faulty product. The manufacturers warranty is completely irrelevant - you have LEGAL RIGHTS which no vendor can take away from you. Note that your claim is against the retailer that sold it to you if you didn't buy it direct from Apple.
The key words are "not reasonably durable", and the fact that this comes up as a known problem supports the view that this is a design/manufacturing defect. Note that the law does *NOT* set any upper limit, but effectively it is 6 years in the UK as that is the limit for bringing any action in this sort of case.
Look up The Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982
Once you know your rights, then I suggest you go back to Apple (or whoever you bought it from) and politely request a repair for this obvious manufacture/design defect. If they aren't accommodating, then point out that the above acts impose an implied term that the goods are fit for purpose and reasonably durable. 14 months for a "premium price" is not a reasonable life and therefore it has not proved to be "reasonably durable".
If they still won't play, then I suggest you get out the forms which you downloaded beforehand and start filling in their details. This is pretty well guaranteed to get the matter escalated and will probably result in a "goodwill" repair.
Whether you choose to go to the next level is up to you. Your legal rights are to have your iPad repaired (or replaced if repair isn't possible) and to claim the cost off the retailer. Any retailer with two brain cells to rub together will know that it will cost them more to defend such an action even if you lose (they won't get their costs back) and will not let it reach court. Apple in particular would not want such a case to happen - the bad PR would hurt when they claimed that an ipad is only good for 14 months or less !
More information at http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/ManagingDebt/Makingacourtclaimformoney/index.htm
Businesses only get away with s**t like this because too few people know their rights.
Thanks Simon. I am actually pursuing this under both the Sales of Goods Act as well as EU Directive 1999/44, where the burden of proof is less, it simply must last at least two years.
http://ec.europa.eu/publications/booklets/move/64/en.pdf
Page 7
The "Genius" said they were not trained to handle anything except the replacement. So much for their moniker lol.
I then called Customer Support who said that the warranty is only for a year.
I explained that this may be the case in the US and so I asked them to read out the Apple Warranty statement, which said Local Consumer Rights will apply additionally, and subsequently pointed them to the website. They were stumped, it did seem like I was among the first to question the Sacred Temple of the Apple. I suppose not being a fan boy helped! :)
Customer Relations will contact me on Monday, as Customer Support also were not trained to handle this.
"I got an iPad a year and 2 months ago..."
Your product was out of warranty, it wasn't replaced, and this is no different to the reaction you'd get from 99% of all other companies.
It's worth noting, however, that I've have had an iPhone replaced out of warranty for nothing, and an idiot friend of mine who dropped and cracked his iPad 2 a month after buying it got the unit replaced for nothing. Equally a woman was next to me in the Apple store describing how she took regular, hot showers with her iPhone which had subsequently gone wrong. She explained this, the moisture sensors were off the hook and they told her to piss off. Some get lucky, others don't. You didn't.
"As a locked system, all my purchased apps are now useless."
As a gadget geek you should have known that when you were buying each and every one of your apps. Would you throw a shit-fit at Adobe if your Dell PC exploded 2 months out of warranty and your copy of Photoshop wouldn't work because Dell refused to replace it?
Your problem isn't with Apple, my friend.
Actually with other manufacturers, if the problem is visibly internal, I have always had them escalate the issue, as it is a one off. And issues are resolved amicably even outside warranty. Of course wear and tear is not included - eg fascia or keys for eg. I do relatively speaking buy a lot of gadgets.
Luck is nice to hope for, but in my case, should not have to play a part in it. If the solder joints are coming apart in 14 months, it was and is a fault from day 1. I want to see the QA data for my iPad. The actual fault that has developed should be factored in, not a simple (faultdate < warranty_expire_date). Anyway all those dropped and cracked ones are what I pay £200 to get.
As for your photoshop example, I can buy another PC (with better build and manufacturing) and install it again. The whole point of an open, competitive system. I have options like backing up my data. QED?
Also, by your argument, it is ok for a Dell PC to explode 2 months out of warranty?
Seriously I'm glad this happened to me. I don't want to become this blinded by a brand!!
I would not expect a company to replace my product if it went out of warranty. I do expect companies to provide warranty service that lasts a reasonable amount of time.
On a sidebar, my Samsung TV developed a fault just after the end of its manufacturer warranty. Samsung arranged for it to be picked up, taken to the nearest call centre 80 miles away, repaired and returned, all free of charge.
-Your product was out of warranty, it wasn't replaced, and this is no different to the reaction you'd get from 99% of all other companies.
All of whom would be (legally) wrong to react in such a way.
I'm actually surprised that Apple would replace a cracked iPad under warranty, if it was dropped and broken in the way you mention. They are under no legal obligation to do so, so I find myself in the rare position of saying kudos to them. They are also quite right to tell someone who has broken their phone by taking it in the shower to piss off. This isn't a matter of luck, it is a matter of not using the device under the conditions it was designed and specified to operate. I would imagine that the warrantyu clearly states that water damage is not covered, as one would expect for an electronic device that isn't designed to be waterproof.
As to your Photoshop analogy, if I had photoshop on my pc and the pc died, I believe the procedure is to go online and deregister that copy of photoshop, which can then be installed on a different pc. I know Adobe have this facility, but not being a photoshop user, I have to confess to being a little fuzzy on the details. From what I gather from the other poster, this is not possible with the iPad.
I woudl contend, therefore, that since the other poster bought the device from Apple, it subsequently stopped working, and that there is consumer law in place stating that this is Apple's problem, then his problem is with Apple.
Registering an iPad or iPhone is no longer required with iOS5 which may be released tomorrow.
Are you completely blind to how Samsung is copying Apple? even Samsung's TV adverts are mimicking Apple with "Sequences shortened" at the bottom of the screen.
Microsoft's court case about IE was to do with Microsoft using it's dominance in the desktop OS market (90+%) to kill off Netscape. Once Microsoft started shipping Windows with IE the market share of Netscape declined. Okay, Netscape was awful and clunky, but Microsoft knew that many users are too dumb to switch.
Apple don't have anything like 90% market share in any market. Their highest market share is probably in iPods and around 60%. You can't say that Apple is abusing a monopoly as they don't have one.
I belive the 'sequences shortened' in teh Apple adverts is there because they were ordered to put it there by the courts because they made a claim that installing apps was really simple but failed to show the four or five intermediate steps involved. I would imagine this is just a case of Samsung avoiding the same legal cosh. You can hardly claim that this constitutes a cornerstone of their marketing strategy.
RTFA - Samgung has capitulated by REMOVING features to get that contentious patent tally down, as a result buyers are receiving a crippled product.
I'm going to buy one anyway because the crippled version is very likely to work properly once the homebrewers get their hands on a complete version.
Observing how relentlessly Apple is trying to shut the Galaxy I decided to give it a try... :-)
And, for curious minds - yes, I played with them both. To be more precise I was looking at them both for more than a month, leaning toward iPad. Apple convinced me that Galaxy is on par or might be better than iPad. ;-)
Given the much wider and serious threat of a global patent Armageddon, these spats seems puzzling. Neither Samsung or Apple are stupid. They both know that allowing patent litigation to escalate will hurt both of them, as it has the potential to draw many other players in, in an uncontrolled and ultimately destructive manner. Success in any patent litigation also encourages the patent trolls, something no major player wants to see.
The seems to be something about this particular round as being born of spite, after a breakdown in the previously cordial relationship between Apple and Samsung, but no large player can allow such things to direct their operations. Or certainly should never do so.
However, Apple have been on the outside of the global patent cross licensing club for phones, and these rounds of litigation may turn out to be part of a longer game, aimed at securing a permanent place at the table. What is reasonably certain, the public face of these little arguments are little to do with the real game being played.
What would the rules be on Samsung releasing an Apple approved version of the Tab in Australia and hosting a FW update that will bring it back to the original on their servers in Korea?
After all this is all down to whether or not you can SELL a product that infringes patents. Once the product has been sold the end user can do whatever he likes with it. and given the fact that the offending FW will be stored in another country which is allowed to use it. It would be a free update so no money will change hands, therefore Apple can't claim that Samsung are getting rich off their apparent ideas.
So any legal minds know?
I'm either really Stupid or I've shortend the war by 5 years.
The issue isn't with selling an infringing product, if it were than Google would be home free against Oracle since they don't sell Android. The issue is with the infringement itself. If Samsung makes an agreement with Apple not to infringe in Australia, and then breaks it - then Apple will be able to go back to court, as well as to demand any damages stipulated in the agreement itself.
Samsung vs Apple, with Samsung taking out the supposed questionable functionality, reminds me of back in the day when GEM was released, a Mac-style UI which ran on PCs and Atari STs.
Apple took them to the clearners. GEM then had to get rid of the desktop and run with 2 open windows.
They tried the same with MS, back in the mid 90s. Until MS reminded them of what else it owned, and pledged to continue support for Office for Mac. (think it was the '97 keynote speech).
This is just Apple throwing it's toys out of the pram and Samsung should tell Apple to go fuck itself.
I got a galaxy s2 and it blows the iphone out of the water. I didn't get the original iphone because having 3G was important to me, yet Apple somehow had people think they were still innovative without that basic technology in the phone. The Galaxy tab is far superior to the ipad and I don't care what anyone says, put the 2 of them next to each other adn they are COMPLETELY different in terms of looks and usage (in a way that any tab can be). Lets not forget that Apple didn't invent the tablet device.
I want to be able to buy a product and use it how I like. I can just about do this with my imac, but refuse to buy software frmo the App store because I don't suddenly want Apple to decide whether I can use a piece of software I have brought or not. However, I am now in the market for a laptop and was thinkign about the Macboko Air, but after seeing the Samsung 9000 series I will buy that just because of the pure Arrogance of Apple.
I don't know how many techy customers Apple has lost with its childish rants at a manufacturer. Both HP and Dell could easily have sued apple for look and feel of the tablet because at the end of the day a table is a tablet. I know that I won't be buying the Macbook or the ipad and will send my money to Samsung instead, just because of Apple's behaviour. How many others have done the same?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
