decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
An early Windows release? | 126 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
An early Windows release?
Authored by: hardmath on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 12:12 AM EDT

Microsoft actually licensed specific elements for Windows 1.0 GUI from Apple, and Apple's complaint was failure to comply with the limitations of the license in Windows 2.0 resulting in copyright infringement of the Lisa/Macintosh "look and feel".

So that dispute was not exactly "baseless" as one might suspect of the current litigation. At trial Microsoft prevailed, but ultimately entered into a cross-licensing arrangement with Apple to settle the dispute.

---
"Prolog is an efficient programming language because it is a very stupid theorem prover." -- Richard O'Keefe

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

So You Say The Cart Came Before the Horse?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 02:09 AM EDT
Perhaps you read no further than the first sentence of what
PJ has written here then. Samsung came out with no fewer
than 3 Touchscreen Candy Bar Smartphone models prior to the
iPhone launch.

SGH-Z610 was introduced in January 2006. It was their first
effort at producing an intuitive gesture based Touchscreen
Multimedia Smartphone. It had a 3.5" screen, rounded
corners, horizontal speaker above the screen, and listen to
this.... a single ROUND PHYSICAL BUTTON beneath the screen,
flanked by to soft buttons. This was obviously preemptive
and proves this button style phone front layout, if anything
belonged to Samsung.

It was white (like many phones had been before it), had not
one, but two cameras. One on the front for Video Chat that
US carriers were not allowing to be used. None the less this
phone passed through the FCC's doors in August, 2006 going
on sale in September. Though it did not sell well, because
of expense, being a True 3G phone a year before was just
selling a 2G phone.

It had a metal bezel around the outside edge of the phone
and a 3mp camera on back a year before Apple theirs and both
cameras could be used/sent in emails and video chats per
it's own patents Apple still refuses to pay for, as stated
in the above documentation. The Round button what is
referred to as the Home button was then referred to and bear
the symbol for a "Play" button used since the 80's on
various devices as public domain, as is Apple's square
symbol being used for "Stop" function.

On the F700, they abandoned the round button style for the
square or rectangular shape that is still used to this day.
Everything they use in their phone's exterior design today
has it's roots in Samsung's designs that came before the
iPhone was even released or sold. So as I have stated
above.... exactly who copied who? Did Apple's Cart
(container) come before Samsung designed and built even the
original processors (horse)like they claim? Or did Samsung
not only help in designing and furnishing screens,
processors, memory, etc on top of being the first to use a
Single Round Physical Button on a Touchscreen Phone with
Designs patents applied for a month before iPhone was even
introduced???

Now to your ignorant contention that your Samsung phone is
somehow inferior because of button placement, isn't it
therefore logical that the iPhone is also logical inferior?
You make absolutely no sense and fail to recognize the whole
point of what PJ has posted here!!!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )