

Apple goes after Galaxy S3, Note in new court filing - option_greek
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57504756-37/apple-goes-after-galaxy-s3-note-in-new-court-filing/

======
neya
Apple supporters - Please understand that this is a clear abuse of patents by
Apple more than anything else. Why? Because, the phones they are suing right
now (Galaxy S3, Galaxy Note) are phones that have been designed to NOT look
like the iPhone (as Apple had alleged earlier) nor use any of their
technologies. This is clearly to stiffle innovation and competition by
unethical means, by abusing the patent system. What's disheartening is that
Samsung actually spent considerable effort to make these phones look different
(Heck, one of them even has a stylus, something Steve Jobs himself was
against) and yet they still find Apple suing them.

 _What are the patents that Apple is using to sue Samsung against?_

The four new patents Apple is leveraging against Samsung include the '647
"Data Detectors" patent, the '721 "Slide-to-unlock" property, the '172 "Word
completion" invention and the '604 "Universal search" patent.

All of them Bullshit.

Understand this, my fellow HN'ers, make no mistake, this is a threat for the
entire Start-up community. Tomorrow you might be sued for the same BS reasons
if you started a phone company as well (Sorry for repeating this, but I feel
it's important). This is one of the primary reasons why we don't see hardware-
based start-ups - Because of the fear of being sued by monopolies like Apple.
If you would like to show your support, please consider boycotting Apple.
There is strength in numbers. Please show your support.

And my only message to Apple is - Fuck you, Apple. Its only a matter of time
until you will collapse for all the unfair BS you have done to us, as a
community.

Thanks for reading.

~~~
v0cab
I agree about patents, but Samsung have some terrible business practices too.

We need to get rid of these kinds of patents and find new ways to protect US
(or European, whatever) companies so that we don't keep getting screwed over
by Asian countries blocking our products/services/companies and cloning them.

~~~
creamyhorror
I sympathise with the need to protect your market, but I'd say US web/tech
companies have generally been more successful than European or Asian companies
in dominating global markets. Google, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Microsoft,
Groupon, eBay/Paypal - all are the big boys on the world stage. US tech
companies are so dominant that competitors in most small countries get
swallowed up (not unfairly). The exception is consumer electronics, but US
firms haven't competed in that industry in a long while.

Don't paint the US as the poor, screwed victim when it's the largest, most
profitable market in the world, and companies from other countries stand next
to no chance of taking a lead there. The rest of the world generally does
little to block US companies (China excepted). All we can do is try to
establish ourselves in our own markets and hope we're acquired by foreign/US
firms for a good price when they arrive on our shores.

~~~
v0cab
Why do companies from other countries stand little chance of being successful
in the US?

Developed Asian countries _do_ do as much as they can to block US companies;
that's the problem. South Korea is being protected by the US, but they are a
prime offender. Obama was quite vocal about this before he started running for
president.

------
josteink
I'll repeat my statement from when the 1 billion dollar verdict was made,
since it seems like little will change before people vote with their wallets:

Today Apple went down in history as the biggest patent-troll of all time,
stiffling innovation and competition like nobody has ever done before.

If you are a software-developer you should recognize the fundamental threat
which Apple represents to your profession.

Boycott Apple if you want to be able to stay in business in the long term
future. Throw away your Macbooks, iPhones and iPads. Ditch your iTunes and
iTunes account. Get rid of everything Apple. All of it.

Be vocal about your code of ethical software conduct and how that prohibits
involving anything made by Apple into anything you ever do.

~~~
ThePherocity
Apple is a company compelled to be greedy. It's actually the law for Apple to
make as much money as possible given any legal and ethical way it can. Suing
another giant tech company over legitimate patents is ethical. The system is
designed so that a trial determines if the patents are legit. This is what
happened. If you don't like that, then fix the fucking patent system. Quit
whining that your favourite tech company lost.

Companies are not teams, they are simply the manufacturer of a product that
you either bought or chose not to buy. If you don't like the way a company is
legally and ethically running it's business, then change the law. Don't
boycott the company who is succeeding best at working within the framework
provided.

~~~
mistercow
>It's actually the law for Apple to make as much money as possible given any
legal and ethical way it can.

A corporation has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of its
shareholders, but I think this fact is greatly overstated. Since "best
interest" is such a flexible and uncertain concept, most cases where people
bring this up are not really the "legal imperative to be assholes" that they
believe. By suing Samsung over this, Apple has risked triggering an all out
patent war between the major players in the mobile market which could end up
costing them tremendous legal fees and may wound them grievously if any of the
ensuing lawsuits were not decided in their favor. Suppose Apple had not taken
to Samsung to court over these patents. Does it really seem plausible to you
that the shareholders would sue Apple's board of directors, and win?

But assuming that corporations are legally expected to perfectly predict the
future and optimize for their shareholders' interests, a boycott would _still_
be warranted. If we let companies see that acting like a bully will hurt their
bottom line, then those companies will be legally compelled to act in the
interest of their shareholders by not being bullies.

~~~
gregsq
Speaking from the UK perspective, the false idea that maximisation of profit
is inferred in any way by corporation law is sometimes more easily seen when
examining the case of 'Private' companies. These are companies still limited
by shares, or stocks, but where the director, the single shareholder, and the
employee are all one and the same person.

It can be a valuable example because it is easy to show how a director making
decisions that maximise benefits to the shareholder are not necessarily in the
best interests of the company entity, and in fact are viewed with suspicion by
regulating bodies.

The best interests of the company include many other considerations besides
shareholder return. One of those has to be long term viability for a long
lived corporate entity. Eroding goodwill and reputational or brand damage go
directly to the heart of the concept of director responsibility.

------
josteink
I just had a realization that at this point Apple is actually seeking to ban
an _order of magnitude_ more devices than they actually make them-selves.

I know the term "patent-troll" is often preserved for non-practising entities,
but at this rate Apple is clearly doing its best to qualify for the badge none
the less.

~~~
bane
IMHO, this is worse than any existing patent-troll. Patent trolls seek to
force license agreements with practicing entities through litigation. They
are, at worse, a serious _annoyance_.

Apple is seeking to entirely _kill off_ an industry competitor from the
marketplace (and their claims at being willing to license are disingenuous at
best as the suggested publicly known license fees show). They are now a
serious and terminal _problem_ for the entire industry.

There was a brief moment a few months ago where I thought about buying some
new Apple hardware, the new rMBP look delish. But now? Never mind. I'll wait
till Samsung brings out a decent ultrabook with a high res display and give
them my money directly.

~~~
v0cab
> Apple is seeking to entirely kill off an industry competitor from the
> marketplace

Samsung had the South Korean government block the iPhone from South Korea for
two years when it was released.

------
chollida1
Oh oh. This is going to get ugly very quickly.

The Galaxy S3 is the first phone I've seen in 5 years that people I know
actually prefer over the iPhone.

At the fund I work at, of the 14 employees, 9 have switched from iPhones to
the S3 and only 1 has gotten a new iPhone.

------
mark_l_watson
Apple management are becoming real assholes.

I had planned on buying a new rMBP but have permanently taken that off of my
shopping list because I don't like where Apple is heading. A few months ago I
bought my stepson an iPad 3 for his birthday and that might be my last Apple
purchase.

I recently bought Galaxy S III phones for my wife and I and I don't see so
much similarity with the iPhones, not even getting into prior art issues.

Apple has the legal right to peruse any legal proceedings they want but as
consumers we can vote with our wallets.

And, there are now some very sweet non-Apple laptops :-)

~~~
v0cab
You can hardly take the ethical high-ground if you've been buying Samsung
products.

------
adrinavarro
The S3 is probably the first Samsung phone 'designed by lawyers', as someone
posted here a few weeks/months ago.

Samsung really made an effort to avoid infringing 'trade dress' and other
claims made by Apple. Most patents they're going after this time shouldn't
exist at all (or, at least, many other manufacturers would be affected).

------
esolyt
Galaxy S3 is specifically designed not to look like the iPhone. Galaxy Note is
a completely different type of product. It has a stylus and a giant 720p
screen.

It seems unlikely that anyone would confuse these products with an iPhone.
They are not trying to be like iPhone.

I honestly don't understand what Apple is trying to do. There must be a
logical explanation.

~~~
orangecat
_I honestly don't understand what Apple is trying to do._

"I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to
go thermonuclear war on this."

------
NameNickHN
I wonder if Apple and Samsung have some kind of deal where they sue each other
for marketing purposes. It keeps them in the news, in blogs and in discussion
forums. Few other products receive this magnitude of in-depth feature and
style comparison. Samsung may have to pay one billion to Apple, but maybe they
saved much more money that it otherwise would have had to spend on marketing.

