back to article Android engineer: We didn't copy Apple or follow Samsung's orders

Samsung brought in heavyweight champion Google to fight in its corner in its latest patent bout with Apple in the US on Friday. In the latest instalment of the ongoing patent wars, current veep of engineering for Android, Hiroshi Lockheimer, testified that Android was all Google's idea. Much as Apple engineers did in their …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. dogged

    Isn't the WSJ a Murdoch mouthpiece these days?

    If so, we could just ask them what voicemails the Android team were leaving.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Oh god really? Are we still doing this one? Move on man!

      1. Les Matthew

        Well, the court case is still ongoing.

  2. Trollslayer Silver badge

    Bullies

    That is Apple these days.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bullies

      These days?! They've been trying to bully people and organisations since the 70s at least (Apple Corp vs Apple Inc is a perfect example and started in 1971)

      1. DougS Silver badge

        Apple Corp vs Apple Inc

        Started in 1971? Starting lawsuits a half decade before a company is founded is an aggressive strategy, I agree!

        Keep it mind it was Apple Corp (i.e. Beatles) who sued Apple, not the other way around. Claiming the name Apple in all markets when they were only a record label is as bad as the abuses over rounded corners.

        1. Chet Mannly

          Re: Apple Corp vs Apple Inc

          Apple corp did not claim the Apple name in all markets. They had an agreement with Jobsian Apple that as long as they stayed out if the music biz they were fine. Then Jobsian Apple entered the music biz where Apple corp were clearly already established.

          Apple corp sued Jobsian Apple because they were trying to use the same name in the same industry which is perfectly rational - nothing at all like the rounded corners BS.

          1. DougS Silver badge

            Re: Apple Corp vs Apple Inc

            The lawsuit started in the early 80s, and they claimed a trademark on the Apple name extending to anything in the "entertainment" realm, which they figured included home computers. Apple eventually settled and paid them $80K to go away.

            Then in the late 80s they came back at Apple because people were making MIDI boards for Apple computers, and they did another settlement, which this time expressly forbid Apple from entering into the market for physical music media.

            Then after the iPod/iTunes came out they went after Apple a third time, and even though Apple offered them $1 million to settle they took Apple to court, but they lost and got nothing - because the judge ruled that digital files are not PHYSICAL music media.

            Presumably at some point after that they buried the hatchet for good and Beatles music finally become available on iTunes. Maybe Apple paid them off to make that happen or maybe they (well Michael Jackson, since he owned the Beatles music by that time) decided fighting Apple and staying off iTunes was costing money in the modern digital world.

            1. I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

              Good Grief!!!

              What on earth is physical musical media?

              A vynil record only make a noise when you drop it. It needs electronic circuitry of fabulous sophistication to get it to produce music.

              1. Phil W

                Re: Good Grief!!!

                "A vynil record only make a noise when you drop it. It needs electronic circuitry of fabulous sophistication to get it to produce music."

                Technically not. 33/45 RPM vinyl records are, from a physical point of view, much the same technology as a gramophone which could be operated by a hand crank and contains no electronics at all.

                I don't believe such a thing exists, but there's no reason you couldn't build an entirely mechanical gramophone type device for playing 33/45 RPM LPs and Singles.

                With sufficient engineering, a clockwork type mechanism could be constructed allowing it to be wound up and play at the correct RPM.

              2. Boothy
                WTF?

                Re: Good Grief!!! @ I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

                Electronics? None needed at all.

                Something to stick through the hole in the middle so the record can be spun (wood dowel, with a point on the bottom end, for example), a cone of paper or thin card, and a needle stuck through the narrow end of the cone.

                Stick needle on record, and spin = Noise/Music

                1. DougS Silver badge

                  Re: Good Grief!!! @ I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

                  Physical media doesn't mean "no electronics", it means it isn't bits. Apple was smart to insure the agreement went that way, and Apple Corp apparently didn't have people looking far enough ahead to realize that physical media would largely disappear within two decades of that agreement.

                  1. Philip Lewis

                    Re: Good Grief!!! @ I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

                    "didn't have people looking far enough ahead to realize "

                    Prediction is really hard, especially when we are talking about the future.

        2. Craigness

          Re: Apple Corp vs Apple Inc

          "Claiming the name Apple in all markets..."

          http://www.telepolis.pl/wiadomosci/apple-uaktywnia-sie-w-polsce-chce-uniewaznienia-znaku-a-pl,2,3,26273.html

    2. g e

      Apple make nothing that I want

      Though I bet they don't believe me and I bet they think it's someone else's fault in any case.

      If hubris had mass One Infinite Loop (or whatever their address is) would contain a black hole.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bullies

      When anybody mentions Apple I often think of the Evil Queen from Snow White.

      http://www.theguardian.com/film/gallery/2009/aug/28/threatening-food-film

  3. MrXavia

    Over $1billion Lost profits? I call bull...

    You can wipe off any 'profits' they expected to get from my Android purchases, I would not have purchased iDevices instead, it would have been a pure linux device instead (before buying my first android phone there was a linux based phone I almost brought) or at worst a windows device...

    I expect that equates to over £1000 they would claim in lost profit from my android purchases...

    (in actual fact I expect Apple products would have been more expensive and had higher profit margins)

    1. Jason Terando
      WTF?

      Apple seems to be overstating their case. First, Apple has basically eschewed the low end market until their recent half-heated attempts with the 5C, which still isn't that cheap if you buy it unsubsidized. That's a big chunk of money to leave to Android, WinPhone and the like.

      Less significantly, there are some, like me, who can't stand the whole iTunes infrastructure. I realize I'm in the minority here, but walled gardens why I will never spend money on an iDevice, nor an Amazon phone, or any other device that tries to lock me to down to any given "ecosystem".

      1. big_D Silver badge

        Yeah, I was looking for a entry level phone recently to replace an aging iPhone 3GS. Given a range of decent Android and Windows Phone devices at the 100 - 150€ range, why would I pay an extra 400€ for an iPhone 5c?

      2. Chet Mannly

        You're not the only itunes hater out there. While there's still a degree of lock in with android apps, at least I can get my music, movies et al from wherever I please. Plus I can drag and drop any media files I want without having to wait for conversion or any ither itunes sync bs.

        Obviously there are enough people that do like it or tolerate it enough to use ithings, but you're not alone.

        Choice is a good thing. This way everyone gets what they want.

        1. Robert Grant

          I have a friend who won't convert because he says the Android music system isn't as seamless as the Apple one. Is it possible to keep all iTunes purchases and have all devices synced without an iPhone? Scope this question as broadly as you like :)

          1. Craigness

            Android music

            "The" Android music system includes Pandora, Spotify and others as well as Google Play Music and mp3 files. If you want to move to GPM from Itunes then you can use their sync tool on your desktop to upload your itunes library and mp3 files into the Google cloud (with the matching service it won't be a big deal). You can pin music to a device, share playlists across devices and the web, download all your purchased/uploaded music. Everything is available everywhere and it's really easy to use. You can buy a track on your phone and instantly listen on your tablet, which is as seamless as you can expect.

      3. Martin-73 Silver badge

        Hardly a minority. Those who are technologically literate are less likely* to buy an idevice at all, and those who are technologically illiterate but not rich won't buy one either.

        *Note I said LESS likely, that's not an insult to those who are technologically literate and have made the decision to accept the idevice's limitations in return for 'just works'

        1. DougS Silver badge

          I'm sorry

          But you're not allowed in an Apple/Android thread because you're entirely too reasonable and level headed when you're going around making statements like this:

          *Note I said LESS likely, that's not an insult to those who are technologically literate and have made the decision to accept the idevice's limitations in return for 'just works'

          Count me among the technologically literate who prefer "just works" to something I can tweak to death. I have a Linux desktop PC if I feel the urge to tweak. I can understand those who feel differently, or who chafe under the restraints (real or imagined) of the iTunes walled garden, but I think it is ridiculous that people feel the need to fling insults at those who choose differently.

          I guess some people are so narrow minded they can't accept that others can be as smart or smarter than they are but arrive at a different choice than they did.

          1. elaar

            Re: I'm sorry

            "Count me among the technologically literate who prefer "just works" to something I can tweak to death. I have a Linux desktop PC if I feel the urge to tweak"

            I don't think you can regard yourself as technologically literate if you still have the naive belief that your Apple phone "just works", whilst others don't. I recommend you actually try other phone OS's, they're quite mature now dontcha know. I can make phone calls, email, and even run apps without banging my Android against the wall or rubbing it in the right way.

            Sure some people have issues/bugs, but search the interweb and you'll find the same for IOS users, the reason being that the OS's are coded by us human, and humans are fallible.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      You can wipe off any 'profits' they expected to get from my Android purchases, I would not have purchased iDevices instead, it would have been a pure linux device instead

      Not even that, Apple hasn't sued other Android vendors, they're just fixated on Samsung because it happens to have been successful. So you'd probably have bought an Android device from someone else who hasn't been sued by Apple, including Google itself which has of course shifted a lot of self-branded hardware.

      1. Euchrid

        @ cap'n

        "Not even that, Apple hasn't sued other Android vendors, they're just fixated on Samsung because it happens to have been successful. So you'd probably have bought an Android device from someone else who hasn't been sued by Apple, including Google itself which has of course shifted a lot of self-branded hardware."

        Although I would say you’re on the money about Apple being focused on Samsung, it has sued other Android mobile phone manufacturers. Off the top of my head, Motorola and HTC (those might be the only ones though) – in the case of the latter, Google allowed it to use patents that it had recently bought in its legal battles against Apple (it might have been in a case HTC brought against Apple, I can’t recall), which garnered even more media attention.

        Pretty sure that one of the HTC lawsuits was over the Nexus One but am going from memory. So although it hasn’t sued Google, it has sued over Google-branded products.

  4. zb

    In the words of mandy Rice-Davies

    Well he would, wouldn't he?

    1. James Hughes 1

      Re: In the words of mandy Rice-Davies

      Same applies to Apple witnesses of course....

  5. Bullseyed

    Interesting Point I Suppose

    How has Samsung EVER been held responsible for the "slide to unlock patent"? I mean, everyone knows it isn't a valid patent, but nothing Samsung does has anything to do with the unlock functions of Android.

    If I was going to sell cars and I called up GM to buy some engines and it turned out Ford had a patent on the engine, that isn't my fault.

    1. John Molloy

      Re: Interesting Point I Suppose

      In 2010 Samsung created an internal document that basically said, we've tried working around slide to unlock, but honestly? Apple does it better so we'll go with that.

      Pretty damning evidence.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Interesting Point I Suppose

        All it means is that slide to unlock is obvious. Patents are not supposed to be granted for the obvious.

      2. Jay 11

        Re: Interesting Point I Suppose

        It may be pretty damning evidence but it is also quite probably irrelevant.

        Take a look at the underside of virtually every laptop and there is a slide to unlock release on the battery so aiui this is an example of prior art.

        1. Pookietoo

          Re: this is an example of prior art

          ... until you add the magic phrase "on a mobile device", then it's totally different and original.

          1. Jay 11

            Re: this is an example of prior art

            You mean Laptops with internal batteries so they can be used in a mobile fashion ie not tied to a desk in an office environment aren't mobile?

            Again aiui new applications of a prior used idea aren't generally considered original, unique and patentable otherwise every time someone put a zip on a newly designed item of clothing for example they could sue anyone who used a zip at a later date, clearly nonsense.

          2. Les Matthew

            Re: this is an example of prior art

            Like my old Sony Walkman from the eighties that has a slide to lock/unlock. :)

          3. Dan Paul

            Re: this is an example of prior art

            My Palm had "Slide to unlock" before Apple patented it. THAT is prior art!

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Interesting Point I Suppose

        Yea, it took 400 phd's and a trillion dollar research budget to develop the idea of the slide to unlock. I know 3 year olds who are at least that creative. Shame on the US patent system for letting that simple stupid idea become a patent.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Interesting Point I Suppose

        The Neonode N1 used slide to unlock - yes, they patented it before apple - yes, samsung legal (after research on the patent) licensed it from Neonode - the fact that Neonode never sued Apple has nothing to do with it.

        1. wowfood

          Re: Interesting Point I Suppose

          I had a casette player with a mechanical slide to lock, so you didn't accidentally hit rewind in your pocket.

          In the future I had the same thing on a CD player, slide to lock so I couldn't skip tracks accidentally.

          When I bought my first MP3 player it had a digital slide to lock, swipe your finger over it, light turned red and you couldn't accidently skip tracks etc... This one didn't work too well though, had to slide several times at varying speeds to get it to work. I can't remember who made the mp3. the casette was JVC can't remember who made the CD player either. (possibly JVC again)

  6. Yugguy

    What a load of bollocks.

    Big, hairy, elephants bollocks.

    Apple, I have NEVER bought any of your products. I probably NEVER will. You have NEVER lost any money to Samsung because of me.

    The only gesture I want to do towards an Apple product is raise my middle finger.

    1. james 68

      careful... they've probably patented that under "gestures:mobile device, subcatagory - human v1.0, proviso:emoji"

      could lead to financial ruin

    2. El_Fev

      Yes your right..

      When making his caculations about lost profit, he obviously meant you...YOU COMPLETE AND UTTER F**KWIT

      1. Martin-73 Silver badge

        Re: Yes your right..

        Dear god, calm down

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Me Neither

      "Apple, I have NEVER bought any of your products. I probably NEVER will. You have NEVER lost any money to Samsung because of me."

      Coincidentally, Apple also NEVER lost any money to Samsung because of me. I buy only Apple. Because of Apple, now every phones sport the same clean, minimalist design. Good influence. No more flips, slides, buttons everywhere, cheap plastic feel, pressing numeric buttons for text.

      Of course, Apple copied Samsung in everything. The design was stolen from Samsung when Samsung was looking the other way. The Appstore concept was stolen from Samsung when Samsung was close to hitting upon the idea. The iTunes concept that made folks pay for music was stolen from Samsung when Samsung was busy downloading music. The Apple retail concept was stolen from Samsung and now they looked identical. And the stupid software design was stolen from someone's 3-year-old. Man, I love paying more for stolen goods. It made me feel good.

  7. DoctorNine

    Getting back to the real problem...

    Well, as long as the current patent system is left to fester, then the deepest pockets will continue to run roughshod over the little guy with new ideas. Rather than each of us simply running our pro/anti-Apple script in this thread, perhaps we should all instead focus on altering this environmental condition, which is what allows such bullying in the first place.

  8. DavCrav Silver badge

    "Apple wrapped up its arguments on Friday with its damages expert Christopher Vellturo. The economist said that by his analysis, the alleged infringement of the five patents in the case had cost Apple $1.07bn in lost profits and it deserved the other $1.12bn as a "reasonable royalty"."

    Isn't that double counting? If Samsung hadn't "copied", assuming it has, Apple would get the $1.07bn. If Samsung licensed it, they get the $1.12bn. There's no situation in which you get both.

    1. James Micallef Silver badge

      "There's no situation in which you get both."

      If party X defrauds party Y of $100, being forced to just giving the $100 back is no disincentive to fraud. From a legal point of view, any judgement against party X has to include not only restitution of $100 but also an additional penalty.

      Having said that, Apple's figures are over the top by several orders of magnitude even IF the patents had any value. Which they don't.

      1. Adam 1 Silver badge

        Whilst you are right that the penalty of any offence is by design more costly than doing something the right way to begin with, the punishment is the job of the court not the plaintiff. Apple are free to mention damages due to lost licencing revenue or alternatively due to lost profit if they did not intend to licence it out. They can even do some sums and claim the higher of the two figures. But if the court finds Samsung guilty then the court will take such damages into account as well as any disincentives (including any disincentive to frivolous lawsuits that seem increasingly necessary).

  9. Joey

    Look at this and tell me that Samsung don't copy Apple...

    https://www.facebook.com/SamsungIreland/photos/pb.201797643167743.-2207520000.1397486606./818409858173182/?type=3&theater

    1. DavCrav Silver badge

      Massive copying. These shops have walls, a floor and a ceiling. There are tables on which goods to buy are placed. Lights hang from the ceiling. On the walls are advertisements and promotional material. I think it's so blatant.

      They'd better sue Bose as well:

      https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-S8TJAgCdsD8/UDc4HeDRFqI/AAAAAAAAC6k/OPAAwSd-Vwg/s690/image005.jpg

      All the same features.

    2. james 68

      i fail to see your point, it looks just like any other newly opened (past 8-9 years) store from various brands that are trying to be chic/hip/twattish.

      in fact, looks more like an O2 store as opposed to apple, besides nothing to do with phones, you know those things the lawsuits are all about?

    3. Moosh

      Looks like a bog standard phone shop to me. Just shinier.

      But please, look at this Windows XP tablet from 2002.

      http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/51a77ec56bb3f7ca70000000-620-465/windows-xp-tablet-1.png

      Fujitsu came up with the "square with a glass screen you can touch and do things on".

      Before even the iPhone.

      But they're not being ridiculous bell ends and suing everyone else because of similarities that are inherent in the devices.

      1. james 68

        you can take that date back to 1994

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1381528/Knight-Ridder-tablet-looks-just-like-iPad-17-YEARS-OLD.html

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          One year earlier:

          http://oldcomputers.net/pics/newton-pen.jpg

          Not to mention that the Newton development started in 1987!

          1. Wilseus

            1967...

            http://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/rapny-1.jpeg

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        1993:

        http://oldcomputers.net/pics/newton-pen.jpg

        1. james 68

          aaaaaaand the issue with that is that the newton looks nothing like an ipad, whereas the ipad is identical to the knight-ritter tablet. a lot more so than any samsung product look like an apple one, and since apple is being all pissy about "design patents" thats a pretty bloody big thing.

    4. Micky 1

      "Look at this and tell me that Samsung don't copy Apple..."

      I thought that the corners of the Apple store tables weren't rounded like the Samsung ones in that pic.

    5. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Look at this and try telling anyone Samsung copied Apple

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/02/apple_uk_samsung_apology/

    6. tom dial Silver badge

      Re: Look at this and tell me that Samsung don't copy Apple...

      OK, did that.

      Samsung don't copy Apple.

      And for the things Apple whines about it shouldn't matter if they did. It isn't as if they were counterfeiting Apple's productts.

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Doesn't look much like an Apple store to me.

    8. madmalc

      Carphone Warehouse / Samsung Experience store

      I have to say it does rather look like the cheapest, nastiest Apple Store knock off I've ever seen - and this is from someone who would gladly take an axe to an Apple Store

      1. Intractable Potsherd

        Re: Carphone Warehouse / Samsung Experience store

        Just another "boutique"-style modern shop to me. No friendliness, just a means to rip money out of people's accounts without them cluttering up the place for too long. Nothing unique to Apple.

  10. Moosh

    I wish I were one of these lawyers. I could spend like Nicholas Cage and still not become destitute.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    1.07billion in lost profits??

    These must be the same guys who say that piracy is causing billions of dollars worth of lost sales and destroying the "free" market

    1. Steve Todd
      Stop

      Re: 1.07billion in lost profits??

      How much profit has Samsung made selling smart phones over the last few years? It doesn't take a big percentage moving from Samsung to Apple for that figure to be valid.

    2. Adam 1 Silver badge

      Re: 1.07billion in lost profits??

      Look, no one ever claimed that unenlightened folk can understand © math. You wouldn't try brain surgery at home so what makes you think you are remotely qualified to look at this stuff?

  12. Pahhh

    Without Bias, I think Apple is despicable

    Without Bias, I think Apple is despicable

    I say without bias because actually I like a lot of the products and own a lot. I've got an iMac, Macbook Air, iPod, iPod Touch, iPhone(s), several iPads, Airport Express(s), Airport Extreme and the Apple TV (that is actually shite).

    But I think the way Apple behaves and has always behaved is despicable. They amazing at productising other people's ideas but really there has been little in the way of innovation. I could excuse them for that if it weren't for the fact they immediately try to stomp on anyone that has anything vaguely like their stuff.

    I should vote with my wallet and stop getting anything more of theirs wares but I like their stuff and its hardly a fight for a cure for cancer or world hunger.....

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Without Bias, I think Apple is despicable

      If you don't defend your IP then it becomes worthless and you let everyone walk all over you.

  13. Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse Silver badge

    @ 1.07billion in lost profits??

    "These must be the same guys who say that piracy is causing billions of dollars worth of lost sales and destroying the "free" market"

    And to add, that they also totally failed to justify how they reached the figure of "billions" as quoted.

  14. Tyrion
    WTF?

    Farcical

    The ability to patent a finger gesture says all that needs to be said about software intellectual property - it's a complete farce. It's no different than trying to patent genes.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Farcical

      You mean like Craig Venter?

      It's a pity there was no mobile phone equivalent of the Wellcome Institute, to whom civilisation owes an enormous debt (and I'll save that middle finger for Venter, who deserves it far more than Apple ever could.)

  15. Lockwood

    Why can't Samsung just give the reply given in the case of Arkall v Pressdram?

  16. nsld
    Facepalm

    Nice to see

    That Apple have borrowed the same magic elephant that the RIAA and MPAA use to pull numbers out of its arse.

  17. Zot

    I was wondering.

    Who first did the little blobs at the bottom of the screen to tell you what swipe-page you're current on?

    Who did that first?

  18. airbrush

    Bad advice

    I know quite a few people moving away from apple mainly because of battery life and screen size but I suspect that these court cases are seen as unjust. Buying apple might once have made people envious, now its disgust at their tax affairs and throwing their weight around.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bad advice

      "now its disgust at their tax affairs"

      Didn't I just read that Apple paid the most tax of any company in Silicon Valley?

      Maybe I imagined it.

  19. Raphael

    People estimating dollar values have a nasty habit of assuming if you didn't buy their product you would have bought mine.

    The problem is I could have just as easily bought someone-elses product.

    For example I am one of the few weird people who was happy with my WinMo2003SE to WinMo 6.1 phones....I only moved to Android after the WinPho7 cock-up....for me Apple was never an option worth considering.

    The fact that I went with a Samsung Galaxy S was because it was better than the offerings that Sony Ericsson and HTC had at the time, likewise with my S3.

    And now when my contract is coming up for renewal again, I'm looking to decide if I want the HTCOne, the S5 or if I'm willing put up with WinPho8 for one of those awesome cameras the Nokia engineers managed to squeeze into the Lumia 1020.

  20. Clive Harris

    Another stupid obvious patent

    Nothing to do with the Apple/Samsung lawsuit, but this morning I stumbled upon another equally stupid patent: http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Electronics/Resources/product-notices/bus-elx-powerstor-active-balance-royalty-note.pdf

    Apparently, someone has patented the idea of using an op amp and divider chain to split a power rail. They're patenting the idea of putting big capacitors on the output. But it's OK, you don't have to pay royalties if you only use their brand of capacitors.

  21. Hans 1 Silver badge

    I am not an Apple fanboy, I have a few Apple products around here, but still ...

    I invite the loonies around here to look at the Galaxy phones from Sammy, mostly their design, and you will see that in 2010 they brought out a copy of an iPhone, which looked NOTHING like the previous garbage they were trying to sell and that thing sold like hot cakes - it was the iPhone killer.

    Apple have high margins, lost a quite a bit from that, Sammy has to cough up and come up with its own design - which they still have not managed to this date. The entire Galaxy line looks like first generation iPhones. It was soo bad back then that I heard a youth say: "Shit, he has a real iPhone!" - as in iPhone := touch phone.

    Look at the BB10 Z* phones, different design, although heavily "influenced" by the iPhone as well - at least they do not have a physical button at the bottom.

    I love my z30!

    1. Intractable Potsherd

      It is still an utter mystery to me how anyone can confuse an iPhone with *any* Samsung model in the last 4-5 years. Even leaving aside the huge logos on Apple stuff (a bit of a giveaway to my mind), the materials, build quality, shape, size (especially thickness) all make it clear what is, and what isn't an iPhone. Part of the reason I like Samsung phones is that they *don't* look like iPhones, which I think are ugly and difficult to hold.

  22. geoffbeaumont

    "Lockheimer described how hard a small bunch of engineers and devs worked to build Android, outlining a "gruelling" schedule of 60- to 80-hour working weeks.

    "We'd work really late at work ... all hours," he said, according to The Verge."

    That explains a lot...

  23. cr8383942

    Google internal docs say otherwise...

    These internal docs make it hard to believe that the iPhone didn't change Google's plans (and having personally worked major companies, I can say, it affected ALL of them in a huge way).

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/04/14/exclusive-android-docs-reveal-before-iphone-googles-plan-was-a-java-button-phone

  24. PGregg

    All Prior Art?

    #Apple sues #Samsung again over #Android phones.

    Apple #patents:

    - Data Tapping. Ability to dial a phone number from a number in a text message? My Sony Ericsson T39 from 2001 could do that.

    - Unified Search. Search several sources, like contacts, email, etc from one search box. Google Desktop had that in 2004.

    - Asynchronous Data syncing. Woo - take two well established technologies (Database async replication ['90s], and user interaction, e.g. JSON/Web [2001]) and glue them together and patent it.

    - Slide to unlock? I thought this was already sufficiently debunked and invalidated??? http://news.techeye.net/mobile/apple-did-not-invent-slide-to-unlock

  25. jubtastic1
    WTF?

    Amazing

    I've often remarked to my kids that one thing that's changed since the internet is stupid arguments, I'd explain that when I was their age it was common for people to hold wildly opposing views about a subject and argue the point relentlessly whenever they met because checking a fact involved bumping into an expert / authority on the subject or going to a library to research it yourself (which was never going to happen).

    These days of course checking a fact is easy, pull out your nearest connected device and there it is, argument over.

    And yet, here's a comments section of an IT website, filled with presumably computer literate people, a number of which apparently still believe Apple sued Samsung over 'rounded corners'. wtf.

    1. james 68

      Re: Amazing

      this is an apple patent filing (please forgive the huge address) http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=D0618678&homeurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO2%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-bool.html%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526co1%3DAND%2526d%3DPTXT%2526s1%3DD618,678.PN.%2526OS%3DPN%2FD618,678%2526RS%3DPN%2FD618,678&PageNum=&Rtype=&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page

      note the patent is only for the part of the image with solid lines.

      which is rectangle with rounded corners.

      a plain old rectangle, with rounded corners.

      so yeah. believe it.

      1. jubtastic1
        Facepalm

        Re: Amazing

        Design patent, did you miss that? do you know what it means?

        Design patents cover the details of designs, they're intended to prevent someone else copying the trade dress of your product and packaging to cash in on your goodwill, R&D, Marketing etc.

        Design Patents are why you can't sell overly similar wheel designs to those made by Ford etc, it's not because they've patented the wheel*.

        Apple sued Samsung because they ripped off their trade dress:

        http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--BqnlKS1Z--/18kyi1lip9a6pjpg.jpg

        Using the same corner radius was just an element in extensive list of infringements.

        *YFR

        1. Dan Paul

          Re: Amazing (You are STILL rehashing rounded corners)

          I really don't know or care what kind of stupid you are promulgating but rounded corners of ANY kind or radius cannot stand cogent patent scrutiny because they pre date the advent of electronics.

          That whiskey flask in your great grandad's hip pocket had rounded corners! THAT is prior art and should settle this stupid arguement forever if heard by someone who was not in the pay of Apple.

  26. <shakes head>

    just a thought

    is this a cunning plan, to get the infringment established in court then use the president to go after all android. so get sammy to prove it was not them and in doing so validate that the patent was infringed.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019