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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
Niche not Ubiquitous? You can't have both & that's why Apple will FAIL... AGAIN! | 188 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Niche not Ubiquitous? You can't have both & that's why Apple will FAIL... AGAIN!
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 03:35 PM EDT
If you charge more money, then you'll sell less market share
over time. Offer more CHOICES and you'll create a more
Ubiquitous Market Share able to offer price differentials
that include customers from each end from poor to wealthy.
Apple has only successfully created another Niche market,
that although it can create Wealth, it can also turn into
just a fad gone bad too.

Every Louis Vuitton knows that his designs can never be so
Ubiquitous as to be bought and seen being worn by literally
everyone, by their very nature. There is a distinct between
being Copied and merely imitated. Imitation may be the
sincerest form of flattery, but it's not illegal, so long as
it doesn't cross the boundary of being a literal COPY!

I can say my phone is in the iPhone styled as if Apple had
created it, but that's where Samsung's attempts to bring the
Apple Jony Phone design failed. It's ok to be inspired by
another designer as long as you don't clone their design.

And that's exactly what this trial will prove and if not in
this courtroom and jury, on appeal. That Samsung may have
been inspired to imitate it's devices in the Apple iPhone
style, but they never took it to the point that they copied
or cloned them in any way.

Remember... all Samsung really has to do is prove they took
steps to insure that it's their Brand and Design features
that make their Smartphone unique to them. Having SAMSUNG
clearly printed on the box and device is only one way they
do that! ....it's all about a "Where's Waldo" game to be
played by the jurors and remember it only takes one to see
the differences that make Samsung's phones as unique to them
as iPhones are to Apple!

[ 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 )