tech

Apple asks U.S. court to ban Samsung phones, tablets

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

As an American I hope Apple does not prevail. The only thing American about them is their name. As a matter of fact they are one of the most un-American companies around. Besides Samsung products seem to be better.

7 ( +17 / -10 )

Let the best product prevail in the marketplace, whether it be Korean, Chinese, Japanese or US designed.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

I find this total nonsense, first off Samsung had filed a suit and won that said APPLE had stolen product tech from their products, and what the courts said they could not sell APPLE products anymore, and what did APPLE do, run to obama which overruled the courts........yet obama did nothing when Samsaung lost..........

Apple is losing ground and attempting to manipulate the system to gain power on things they don't own rights to. just last week apple patented heart rate cellphone censor camera that detects heart rate via camera, which many android apps have already had on the market.

Apple must be truly american, after all its making me sick just thinking of them

7 ( +12 / -5 )

I have owned both android and apple products. Apple are overrated and do not work as well as their hypnotised yuppie followers make them out to be. Apple can have my android samsung galaxy when they rip it from my cold dead hands

8 ( +12 / -4 )

As an American as well, I hope it does not prevail. Not because I dislike apple, (I'm typing this comment using an iPhone5). It's just that competition is healthy and the more variety, the better. More choices, means multiple companies will thrive instead of just one.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Here we go again... Apple gunning for a monopoly on tablets and smartphones, given that the competition is now clearly much much more innovative and eating up its once prominent market share. Hope the courts laugh it up and throw the case out the window, or better yet, fine Apple for continuing to waste their time.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Just want to say that I've owned Apple products since 1989. I've always hated the way Microsoft pushed their way of doing things and did their best to destroy their competition. What I've noticed in the recent past is that Apple has pretty much become everything that I used to hate about Microsoft. I still used iTunes 10 because I cannot accept the idea that reduced functionality is better (something that is happening more and more these days).

I've been listening to some interesting podcasts about human physiology, computer programming and the concept that people are merely automatons that work best when given set instructions of how to do things. This seems to be the way that industry has embraced the design of IT systems, without understanding at all the concepts of functionality and use. As a former computer programmer/analyst, trainer and adviser to some very large corporations, I can't tell you how wrong the attitude of companies like Apple is and how it will, over the long run, see them lose all consumer respect and, as a result, market share. They're listening too much to their own PR and not enough to common sense.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

man Apple is getting desperate, with world market share dropping with the Iphone looks like theyll stop at nothing to protect there strongest market.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Sure Apple, let's allow only one manufacturer for each product

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Sad to see Apple resort to this extreme tactic. I have been a loyal Apple user but I really think having a rival like Samsung will push them to innovate and become stronger. Let the market decide.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Mar044 wrote:

... and what did APPLE do, run to obama which overruled the courts

Obama? Really? "Overruled the courts?" I get two things from this comment: (1) You have no idea whatsoever how the US government in general and the US court system in particular works (Hint: the courts can overrule the president but not vice-versa) and (2) You are one of these deluded people whose hatred of Obama compels them to blame Obama for every problem no matter how tenuous or ludicrous the connection may be. Back under your rock, please.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

" Apple added that 'money damages are not an adequate remedy for Samsung’s infringement of these patents'. "

Airbus through its illegal EU subsidies and price warfare had wiped out a big chunk of US aviation industries, except Boeing.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Screw Apple!

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Mar044: You're seriously blaming this on Obama? Geez, no subjectivity in your argument, I guess.

Anyway, despite the fact that Apple is correct, they would never win such a lawsuit. Waste of time and money.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I hope Samsung are not still infringing Apple's patent on the iphone shape (a rectangle with rounded corners). Or its patent on the black look and the white look.

It's amazing what Apple has found to patent!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Well, a lot of hating on Apple here and most of the posters above think the market should decide presumably by disregarding copyright laws.

I agree that market forces are important and a free market is a good idea. I also believe that in general copyright laws are completely out of control and should be dialed back.

That said, the copyright laws are what they are and companies have a legal right to ask the courts for protection and that is what Apple is doing. If they are incorrect, the court will let them know.

Meanwhile, the market is making decisions. Recall that when the iPhone was released, there were two primary types of phones being offered. One was the Nokia type which has small screen with a physical full keyboard. The other was the flip-phone type which had a small screen and a keypad and which was being sold by Samsung and several other companies.

The iPhone was very different from either of those types--a large touch screen and no physical keyboard or keypad. It also had a user interface that was much better than anything on the market at that time. It used a number of gestures (swiping, pinching, etc.) and on-screen tap-buttons. It was nothing like the flip-phones which mainly made choices by going to menus then using a ring of keys where the user would click up or down and left of right to make choices. Choosing something took between five and 20 clicks compared to a couple taps and a swipe or two on the iPhone.

No other company had been selling phones with touch screens but within a year or two after the release of the iPhone, all the flip-phone makers were selling phones that looked and worked very much like the iPhone.

Why did the other companies start selling phones that looked and worked like the iPhone? Obviously, the market decided that the iPhone design was better. Very few people now want flip-phones or Nokia style phones.

Samsung and the other companies could have asked Apple to license designs and technologies but, for the most part, they didn't. They just jumped into the market with copy-cat phones. Sure, some of the copy-cat phones have added design features that improve on the Apple design but basically they are copies.

So, now that the Apple design (large touch screen) has already won the approval of the market, is it proper to say that the market should be further allowed to choose between the original (Apple) and the copies (Samsung and others)?

Apple's position is simply that Samsung should be selling their own design (a flip phone with a keypad) and stop selling copies of the iPhone. And let the market decide.

As for you folks hating on Apple, may we presume that you're using flip-phones? Or are you using a copy-cat phone that works just like an iPhone but without the Apple logo (e.g., Android)?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

[ "Well, a lot of hating on Apple here and most of the posters above think the market should decide presumably by disregarding copyright laws" ].

If the following is true, Samsung does not entirely let the market decide:

[[ "Samsung Taiwan has been fined by the regulatory body at least three times already – once for false advertising related to the camera unit on the Samsung Galaxy- - - and now for hiring college students to lead a defamation campaign against local HTC. Today, the Fair Trade Commision came out with a statement alleging that the South Korea-based manufacturer has organized an Internet campaign that is in strict violation with the rules of fair trade. Said campaign was staged with the aim of defaming the products of local rival HTC, while praising Samsung's own products at the same time". - - Pone Arena. Com ]]

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Moondog, obviously no one denies that Apple is one of the trail blazers who influenced an industry. And they got rewarded for it plenty. That's how technological evolution works, everyone gets influenced by somebody. But if Apple had their way, then they should be sued by Blackberry for not licensing the ideal of having emails and internet connections on phones. They should be sued by Motorola for having text messenger service. They should be sued by LG for having touch screens on phones. Why does only Apple think they came up with all these great ideals on their own when they have taken other's ideals all the time, but won't accept that others are doing exactly what Apple has done?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

@chucky3176DEC. 31, 2013 - 08:42AM JST ----In patent, devil is in the detail, copying others or not depends on if a patent law is being violated, which is decided by a judge, not by you (probably not a judge) or me. In many cases idea alone is not patentable. Let’s say you put a spring in a ball pen that pushes the ink toward the ball all the time so that you can write on the ceiling with the pen, others uses compressed air to do the job, in that case you cannot sue him for copying your “upside-down writable ball pen”.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Apple's position is simply that Samsung should be selling their own design (a flip phone with a keypad) and stop selling copies of the iPhone. And let the market decide.

Do you really believe that's their position? That other companies should have to pretend that a market for smartphones doesn't exist because Apple was the first to popularize them? How would stance that be consistent with Apple selling desktop computers, all-in-ones, and notebooks? They weren't even close to being first to market with any of them.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

tmtmsnb, no judge decided that the patent law was violated. It was a California jury in Apple's home city who decided that a patent law was violated. Everywhere else in the world, the cases were thrown out eventually.

In patent, devil is in the detail, copying others or not depends on if a patent law is being violated, which is decided by a judge, not by you (probably not a judge) or me.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

" if Apple had their way, then they should be sued by Blackberry for not licensing the ideal of having emails and internet connections on phones. They should be sued by Motorola for having text messenger service. They should be sued by LG for having touch screens on phones. Why does only Apple think they came up with all these great ideals on their own when they have taken other's ideals all the time, but won't accept that others are doing exactly what Apple has done?"

chucky3176, my understanding about your "Apple should be sued by- - sued by- - sued by- - " indicates your conviction that Apple is guilty of infringement. If not, what is the function of your "should be"? My post was to tell you that you better leave the judgement to the judge, because you are not authorized to, it had nothing to do with Samsung being convicted or not. My ball pen story was to tell you that those "ideals" you mentioned are not patentable, or are expired.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Oh, so my ideals are not patentable, but Apple can patent a square device with rounded edges and a touch screen. Right. Leave the judgement up to the judge? The US ITC judges ruled that Apple violated Samsung's 3G technology and ordered that Apple devices to be banned in the US. These were the only judgements by a judge that you talk about (the Apple $1 billion victory over Samsung were by a jury). Guess who over ruled the ITC judges and over turned their decision? President Obama. Is he a judge too? What does he know about technology and patents?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@chucky3176, ---having emails and internet connections on phones. having text messenger service. having touch screens on phones, are patentable. How about having GPS (enormously patentable and is horribly hugely patented) on your pajamas so that when you sleepwalk you don't get lost.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

chunky3176,

Your "ideals" are the principles or values that you seek (presumably) to maintain proper ethics.

Your ideas may or may not be something that can be patented. The Patent Office decides that. Sending email from a phone might not be patentable but how it's sent might be. (This is what the patent office decides in accordance with complicated rules and laws.)

Once a patent is granted, if requested, courts (using judges and, in some cased, juries) decide on violations. When there is a violation, the court may impose a fine and/or block sales.

As for the ITC, that is not a court. It's a commission that, in effect, works for the President. They advise him and while their advice is usually followed, it does not have to be. The Apple case was not the first time a president overruled the ITC.

If Samsung wants to take Apple to court, that is their right. The president will not be able to overrule the court.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Apple needs to stop with this "it was my idea first" and "not sharing my toys" attitude. It's childish and kind of pathetic for a company to be that way.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

wipeout wrote:

Do you really believe [that] other companies should have to pretend that a market for smartphones doesn't exist because Apple was the first to popularize them?

No, and I didn't say that. The Nokias I mentioned were smart phones and so were many of the flip phones (i.e., they could do email, display web pages and had apps available for download). I was referring to Apple's vastly superior design: they could display web pages that were actually readable, downloading apps was not more trouble than it was worth, and using them in general was not a pain in the butt.

The first "smart phone" I ever saw, by the way, was a Nokia 9000 Communicator being used by Val Kilmer in the 1997 movie, The Saint. It was a clam shell design with a full keyboard inside. (I wanted to jump up in the theater and yell "Gimme gimme!") Sadly, it was not available in Japan.

How would stance that be consistent with Apple selling desktop computers, all-in-ones, and notebooks? They weren't even close to being first to market with any of them.

Well, since that wan't a point I made, I don't see that there is a need for consistency.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites