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
iPhone 5, Samsung Galaxy S III Comparison: 10 Features They Will Share | 481 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Post-‘pinch’? Apple patent-case win could point to new digital age for smartphones
Authored by: soronlin on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 11:26 AM EDT
Post-‘pinch’? Apple patent-case win could point to new digital age for smartphones
“I don’t know what you do about ‘pinch and zoom,’ ” said Tim Wu, a Columbia University law professor critical of the ruling. “That’s the cost of this decision. All the phones have to use less-efficient tools.” -
Personally I have never found pinch-to-zoom particularly efficient. Granted it is obvious, but I always get my fingers in a twist when I use it. Maybe I need more practice. My Galaxy S3 also offers two-fingers-and-tilt to zoom. That's just as fiddly.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple v. Samsung: The legal aftershocks
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 11:39 AM EDT
"since it is much more often a defendant in patent infringement cases, than
a plaintiff."

Isn't that true of every company that actually makes things?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why the Apple-Samsung verdict is GOOD for YOU, your KIDS and TECH
Authored by: stan_qaz on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 12:04 PM EDT
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/28/patent_system_bruised_or_borked/

From the article:

"Analysis Relax, everyone. While the patent system is far from perfect, a
remarkably common-sense jury decision last week in the Apple-Samsung trial has
clarified that patents are the "lifeblood of business", as inventor
James Dyson calls it.

Putting powerful short-term legal protections under inventions is overwhelmingly
more convincing than any mooted alternative. We're all richer for it. And the
verdict has also been good news in an unexpected way: it's a fillip for the jury
system too. Much to the distress of intellectual property "experts",
this is a small victory for democracy over technocracy, and against the
administration of justice by self-selecting elites.

When ordinary citizens gather to assess an intellectual property decision, they
don't let us down. The clarity of the jury foreman's thinking here is
particularly impressive. Velvin Hogan, a 67-year-old engineer, told the San Jose
Mercury that, essentially, Samsung had nobody to blame but itself."

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The Apple/Samsung Judgment And Our Broken Patent System
Authored by: hAckz0r on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 01:42 PM EDT
Electronic Design on The Apple/Samsung Judgment And Our Broken Patent System

---
The Investors IP Law: The future health of a Corporation is measured as the inverse of the number of IP lawsuits they are currently litigating.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The jury foreman speaks on Bloomburg
Authored by: squib on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 01:58 PM EDT
Whoops: I posted first in the wrong place.

Apple vs. Samsung jury foreman: 'the evidence was overwhelming'

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple's rot starts with its Samsung lawsuit win @ The Guardian
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 04:44 PM EDT
Apple's rot starts with its Samsung lawsuit win
Patents are, arguably, no longer a system of protection; they are a system of litigation. Great numbers of patents are now filed, in an over-burdened system, to protect not innovations but the right to litigate over innovations. Indeed, any patent of value will ultimately be litigated.
Apple, and its rotten phone, have a ways to go. But karma should not be underestimated as a factor in this game.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Are Apple's innovations inside us now?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 07:20 PM EDT
Are Apple's innovations inside us now?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Re: Who Really Lost the Apple vs. Samsung Case? You Did.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 08:16 PM EDT

I see Mr. Yglesias references five companies in his article: Microsoft, Nokia, Samsung, RIM, and Apple. He then adds "But a more realistic view is that technology companies are generally trying their best to innovate and it’s simply difficult. In that view, jury rulings in favor of incumbents will simply reduce competition and raise prices for consumers."

Please remember December 2006 and tell me if all five of those companies were in the phone business at the time. Yep. That's right. Apple was the one not making phones or phone oses. They were the new kid in the block who hit it big.

Also, he neglects to mention — in the excerpt — that Nokia has already sued Apple and they settled with Apple giving Nokia money. I suspect that Kodak and/or Nokia sued Apple before Apple sued any one else, but I may be wrong and it probably doesn't matter.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

iPhone 5, Samsung Galaxy S III Comparison: 10 Features They Will Share
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 09:37 PM EDT
So, let me get this right ...

The Apple iPhone 5, due next month, will be a
copy of the Samsung Galaxy SIII?

Will Samsung be asking Apple to pay two or
three billion for that?

Just asking.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

New York Times leading group defense in patent suit over mobile texts containing Web links
Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 09:51 PM EDT
Am I missing something here? Web links are just a string of characters, text.
They're suing because someone is using texting to send text? Isn't this about
the same as suing over texting sentences?


---
The following program contains immature subject matter. Viewer discretion is
advised.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple Jury Foreman: Here's How We Reached a Verdict
Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 11:04 PM EDT
"The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on
the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That
changed everything right there."

"They don't count as prior art because you can't run Apple software on
them?"

I guess those guys have never been in a computer programming class where pseudo
code is used. Also, if written in a high level language, it's easily compiled
for different systems. That's why Linux is so easily ported to new hardware.
Don't these guys understand that it's the method, not the actual nut & bolts
of something that make it an invention? In the mechanical world, it would mean
using different thread sizes etc. would prevent infringing. Of course, to
follow their logic, Samsung didn't infringe at all because IOS stuff won't run
on Android and Samsung also used different hardware bits to build their phones
and tablets.

---
The following program contains immature subject matter. Viewer discretion is
advised.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Could a 'Defensive Patent License' Fix the U.S. Patent System
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 29 2012 @ 01:40 AM EDT
a simpler solution,:

all one needs to do is to publish your invention idea on the net,once this is
done then it become prior art ,no patent application of the said invention /
idea will be valid (assuming the patent office is working competently!!! over
the prior art )

[ 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 )