Share this Story

Monday Poll: Thoughts on the Initial Ruling in the Samsung Vs. Apple Trial?

According to a jury’s recent verdict, Samsung was found to have copied Apple’s designs and infringe on their patents, a ruling that could eventually lead to them ponying up some serious dough to the tune of roughly $1.05 billion. Seeing damning emails from their mobile Chief, slides comparing and contrasting every aspect of the iPhone to the Galaxy S, and being forced to withhold important info from the trial all appear to be enough to have given round 1 to Apple.

Without bringing the appeal process into the picture for now, how do you feel about the initial outcome and decision? Was it made clear enough that Samsung did in fact intend to infringe and copy Apple? Was the jury a bit harsh on a company only looking to make a successful product? Does Samsung stand a chance in an appeals court? Let us know your full thoughts down below.

Do you agree with the outcome of the Samsung vs. Apple trial?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • JP

    This is a site for Android users.. no fair 🙂 PS: I am apple hater.. I love my Android and that is all I have used!

  • wm snyder

    Ok I’ve read most comments here. Why is Samsung scared to terminate the Apple contract for parts they make? I would because I know Apple couldn’t them cheaper or in mass quantities or size or specs or in time for the next new release. Which leads to the next question. It seems to me Samsung could of made a iphone because they make the parts.! So maybe they were telling the truth they did not try to copy there no#1 customer phone. Now tell me why people bought Samsung instead of Apple? And I also think Apple had the patent Office or someone in there back pocket! How else could they get these ridiculous patents? Round corners the words app store non fancy. Face etc etc etc.! In a nutshell they collected technology we already had from other companies and put it in there phone and took sonys designed and made there phone and then sued the same companies they borrowed from as to not pay them there dues! This whole court deal is about competition plain and simple! The judge that threw them out saw the truth!

  • Sapko82

    Your options are lacking

  • Michael Lewis

    I agree with the verdict because the evidence is there. I don’t like the outcome but still, I agree with the verdict. I think most people here voted for what they wanted the outcome to be and not with if the verdict was made correctly 🙁

  • This whole thing is ridiculous. I am pretty sure that if apple was filing for claims based on actual innovations they made, Samsung or Google would have realized they made a mistake and they would have done this privately. But no, for some reason you can have a patent on ” simplicity” because that is really what all the patents the have lean towards. Apple did not invent round corners and rectangles, let alone make the parts that went into the IPhone. I love apple lovers that bash samsung, have fun with your half samsung phone. Also apple is biting the hands that feed them. They haven’t created anything since Woz left, they rely on buying other companies tech and then trying to exterminate the competition that uses it. i’ll leave with these two quotes:
    “Good artists copy, great artists steal”
    “We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas”
    – Steve Jobs.

    • kidheated

      Well said. +1

  • Come on people lets be real. Quit the bickering. Seems like everyone is for the copycat. You commit a crime, get charged and whine about the penalty.
    Samsung was aware of what they were doing. The have a strategy and it works. Copy Apple, sell it everywhere other than At&t, make a boat load of money, turn down licensing fees, hire a great lawyer and risk getting sued. Worst case scenario they lose and pay a portion of the boat load of money they made. That was their winning formular and it worked. They made way more than they would have if they paid licensing fees for it and way more than they would have if they came out with their on design.
    All they were sued for is 1 Billion, considering they made over 12 billion last year alone on smart phones world wide. Seems like they made out better than everyone thinks. Had they not had copied Apple like RIM and Nokia, they would have had a tenth of the success they have now. So you are asking if 1billion is a lot? I think not. They got off pretty easy.

  • Copythis

    Come on people lets be real. Quit the bickering. Seems like everyone is for the copycat. You commit a crime, get charged and whine about the penalty.
    Samsung was aware of what they were doing. The have a strategy and it works. Copy Apple, sell it everywhere other than At&t, make a boat load of money, turn down licensing fees, hire a great lawyer and risk getting sued. Worst case scenario they lose and pay a portion of the boat load of money they made. That was their winning formular and it worked. They made way more than they would have if they paid licensing fees for it and way more than they would have if they came out with their on design.
    All they where sued for is 1 Billion. As a friend of mines said that’s nothing to them, considering they made of 12 billion last year alone. Seems like they made out better than everyone thinks. Had they not had copied Apple like RIM and Nokia, they would have had a tenth of the success they have now. So you are asking if 1billion is a lot? I think not. They got off pretty easy.

  • I wonder how Android users keep glossing over this and Googles own admission.

    Asked to point to some of the more compelling evidence Ilagan said:
    “Well, there were several. The e-mails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, [Apple] showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea — I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn’t answer one of them. They didn’t help their cause.”

  • GF1 Fanatic

    This is a disastrous ruling! And what’s with Google? When are they going to fightback!? It’s timefor them to declare thermonuclear war against Apple.

    Yes, Samsung was influenced by Apple. That’s the way everything works and moves forward. One billion dollars plus in damages! Insane! They are the biggest, most powerful and most expensive company in the world.

    Apple was become the ultimate Big Brother using their clout to destroy any and all legitimate competition. The brainless automatons with their iPhones. Sad and depressing.

    It’s time for some serious anti-trust legislation to destroy Apple.

    I am very angry at our “legal” system to have allowed this.

  • frankandsimple

    awww… what a cute little effort to gin up public support for samsung.. even though it is completely baseless considering none of you have sat on the jury.. none of you have seen the evidence.. and none of you really have a fu c king clue of what is going on. .. But please, let that not stop you from imagining or trivializing the case against samsung. Droid life doesn’t have the balls to present the case in it’s entirety either that spells out the different patents and violations…
    and oh.. yes, let the thumbs down begin.

  • Total BS. The jury was completely biased and Apple’s patents are bull shizz. I feel as tho just because Samsung is from a different country, they are being treated unfairly and it isn’t right!

  • Wesley Laughlin

    Why are we fighting over color, shape, and size when we should be focusing our efforts on evolution of technology? Seems ridiculous to me…

  • iNfAMOUS70702

    Anyone who says the older galaxy phones didnt copy the iPhone is in pure denial..you can’t blame apple for taking advantage of the patent system…anyone else would’ve done the same thing…..Samsung is obsessed with apple and blatantly obvious…they should’ve took the licensing deal that apple offered some years back

  • Epell

    Samsung copied (or imitated). billion dollar is a bit steep though.
    Also jury seems to have made its decision hastily.

    • Fly_Dog

      There’s a long legal analysis of the verdict and jury performance at the site below. I’m no lawyer, but it seems to raise some good points on the jury’s performance:

      It quotes the Jury foreman saying “We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the
      wrist,” Hogan said. “We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to
      be painful, but not unreasonable.”

      The jury instructions were for compensation if granted to be an assessment of economic loss, not a punitive judgement. “The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent
      holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent
      holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had
      the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be
      less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the
      damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to
      punish an infringer.”

  • Marc

    In all other countries in which a ruling on this case has been made, Samsung has been found not guilty. But then, oh surprise, a Silicon Valley jury rules in favor of a Silicon Valley company. Not too different from a Chinese judge ruling in favor of Chinese company. Only that the Chinese at least would have the decency not to claim that they reached a fair decision based on their free will. The Silicon Valley jury, on the contrary, is pretending this is what it did.

  • Should be a choice for “Bad Outcome, but a need for Patent Reform is the real issue here”

  • Dane Carpenter

    I get it that Samsung made its icons look like iPhone. However, my Cingular 8525 (HTC TyTN) back in late 2005 had rounded corners and a center button below the touch screen. But it had a slide out keyboard and MMS messaging as well. *Sarcasm*

    • disastrousrainbow

      It’s too bad this is literally the the kind of thing people are having trouble wrapping their heads around and what’s even more distasteful is how Samsung is instigating it.

  • Bionicman

    some of the other things that come to mind are, did Apple’s sales actually suffer because of samsungs “infringments”? i mean aren’t they making record profits? isn’t that the whole freak’n reason why you would take someone to court and even allow it to go to trial? look i get the whole “its the principle of the thing” but if they are still selling their devices like hot cakes, wth then /rant

  • Ken Bosse

    I sort of agree. I would like to think that the people of the jury have a level head and could understand what was being said.

    That being said, it’s up to Samsung to make the case go in their favor, and they didn’t help them selves from the start. They failed to present their biggest piece of evidence in time.

    With THAT being said..I think a lot of the patents that were in question are pretty lame to begin with.

    This could inturn help Samsung, if people now see them as “equal” then if they have half a brain they would go the cheaper, just as good if not better, Samsung route.

  • umgoblue80

    So is this Apple’s new strategy for anything they do? Should they start suing Amazon since Amazon has an “App Store?”
    IBM, IBM makes computers, what do they do that’s similar to Apple’s products? Let’s find out, then file a lawsuit.
    Is Apple also saying that everything in the Iphone was an original idea from their company? I’m just wondering.

  • kidheated

    I am not sure what the California courts were thinking. You cannot have a trial/decision of this magnitude and leave it to the whim of many ultra biased, regular citizens. It is just asinine. That’s like Apple being judged by the community of Droid-Life. It should just be a panel of judges or people who actually know what is going on, on the technical side of things. This trial was just a drawn out execution by firing squad. Absolutely ridiculous. Also, the trial should have been held in D.C. or NY. If it was, I think the outcome might have been a bit different. Apple “won,” good for them(Sarcasm)… but then again, their opponent was blindfolded and tied to a post.

  • While Samsung absolutely copied far too many design elements from Apple, I think those patents should have all been invalidated.

  • Davros

    I think this sums it up.

  • Inquizitor

    Come on, Tim. Give us a more reasonable poll. I obviously am not happy that Apple won so hugely, and wish a lot of its patents were found to be invalid, but Samsung still copied Apple a lot. We need some shades of gray, polls on this site lately have been far too binary.

  • RW-1

    Samsung blatently did copy aspects, however the patent crap all needs to go away – no more SW patents, and existing ones should be null and void (I patented that last week, anyone caught saying null and void without licensing it from me owes me big time, do you hear me lawyers everywhere?)

  • Southrncomfortjm

    Glad I already own my GNEX with JB custom rom. I was actually thinking of picking up a second one as a replacement in case things get really bad.

  • Sankyou

    Most popular answer not available:
    Samsung infringed – but not to the tune of $1 billion

    It was a sad day for innovation.

    • EC8CH

      Yep, I care, I don’t agree with it, but I do agree with some parts of it.

      Basically Galaxy S and Touchwiz should be punished, but it should end there.

    • tehjoker

      Its also too bad when the head of the jurors is being paid for a patent apple is using too… can you say mis-trial?

  • I don’t disagree that the Galaxy S and Galaxy SII look way too much like iPhones. I don’t disagree that Touchwiz feels a bit like using iOS. I disagree with most of the patents being granted in the first place and therefore agreed “Not at all” with the outcome. The patent office needs to catch up with technology.

  • The US Patent Office is also at fault here and Apple is abusing the system to a point where I no longer want anything to do with them as a company. To patent previous art and sue using those patents is one of the lowest forms of patent trolling around. Samsung did copy the iPhone look with Touchwiz and should of left well enough alone on Android in the first place. This bounce-back garbage and the rest of the patents, no, that’s total BS because Apple should never of been granted that in the first place. What if Ford decided to patent a steering wheel and then sue every other car maker out there? Im sure the US Patent Office would grant it too. Software look should only be restricted to trade-dress looks. If I can write code into my software that will “bounce-back” in the same way but using a different coding method then Apple shouldn’t be able to touch it. What we really need is someone to sue Apple for the validity of ALL their patents as well as naming the issuer of those patents in the suit. I’m all for innovation and Samsung needs to stop shadowing Apple, but the only innovations coming from Apple the past few years are new ways to screw everyone over in court or twist numbers in their marketing presentations.

  • Alan Paone

    Nobody wins when one choice is a copy of another. If Android is better than iOS, it can be better than a copy of iOS. I’m a huge android/google fanboy, but I jumped for joy when I found out Samsung lost.

  • Problem isnt Apple.. Its the Patent system itself. Why doesn’t “Palm” sue “Apple” over this?

  • BroRob

    What would cars look like today if Chrysler was able to patent anti-lock brakes, or Honda was able to stop everyone from adding nav? What if Sony was the only LED TV you had to choose from or IBM was able to sue anyone that tried to sell their version of a laptop? All of those companies were the “first” to sell a product with those technologies. In every industry out there companies copy each other to stay competitive and give the customer what they want. The companies that evolve and innovate stay on top of the game longer.

    • Doan

      Not anymore. Nowadays, the company with the best lawyers stays on top of the game longer.

    • Alan Paone

      Every other automaker pays Chrysler so they can put antilock brakes in their cars

    • manny

      The only diffrence here is that samsung made phones with the same parts and the same look as the iphone. They basically made no effort on their part and make whole lot of money with the android iphone.

  • Pegleg

    Who cares,,,Samsung has some nice features but from the hardware standpoint their phones are pure junk…cheaply made with flimsy construction!

  • EvanTheGamer

    Not. At. All.

    Also, this doesn’t affect Android as a whole in the least. But it does suck for Samsung. Also, the giant men in black suits will have to pry my Galaxy Nexus from my cold, lifeless hands.

  • This whole thing is so stupid. I dont understand really. How can one company sue another and WIN over products that do almost the exact functions (yes i know there are differences). Can GE sue Hotpoint for copying microwave designs? How about Ford suing every other automobile company for using his mass production car model. Its lawsuits like these that prohibit progression. I understand and respect protecting your work but this has gone WAAAAY past that.

    • NexusPhan69

      Hotpoint is GE. Its similar to Lexus and Toyota. Hotpoint is made by GE but with a different logo on the front to reach a different market. Your point is still very valid. The push to start button on a car is a great example. Its just natural and obvious and there are a million other ways car companies could have used to start a car. But they all used the push button.

  • If that stuff about them purposely copying Apple was never presented then I would care. They got what they deserved even if it is a bit ridiculous.

    • LionStone

      Those emails you’re talking about never revealed definitive wording that said to deliberately copy apple design. All it showed is they recognize apples design as a competitor…big difference.

  • I hope this means Samsung will finally get rid of that ugly home button from their Galaxy S phones.

  • Good_Ole_Pinocchio

    Forget the results. I have a HUGE PROBLEM… with the average non techy person being on a Jury that judges a case about software patents, and trade dress… If you put all of us in a room together we’d have hard time breaking it down.

    There should only be a judge ruling in cases like this. a PATENT judge should have the only say. This was just ridiculous

    • Sathariel

      Maybe so but it doesn’t take a guru in patent law to see that Samsung did copy Apple. I think the bigger problem is that asinine patents like “bouncy effect” gets issued in the first place.

      • Good_Ole_Pinocchio

        It’s not about just “Copying” there were very specific issues asked about… trade dress is one thing but software patents are a hole n’other monster…

      • Robert Jakiel

        They got nailed for TRADE DRESS! Which means ANYTHING with a glass screen that has bezels that is flat, black, rectangular with rounded corners is PATENTED. This is a pure farce and this patent should be thrown out post haste. For anyone to believe for a moment that this is a valid patent should be shot. Tablets that were introduced prior to the iPad but not nearly as popular were just that. Flat, black and rectangular with rounded edges. Just because theirs is popular doesn’t mean it was first nor patentable. Especially considering prior art.

    • Alan Paone

      This definitely should’ve been figured out by suits who work for Sammy and apple, but a huge parr of a trial is explaining to the jury what they need to know to make a sound judgement

      • Sathariel

        As a software engineer who just graduated college, one of the first things I learned was that if you can’t explain your system to an average person in terms they understand, it’s too complicated.

  • Manny

    I believe Sammy copied the apple. Even with the galaxy players they prove that they are moving in apple’s shadow. It’s good for us as consumers for Samsung to try to dethrone apple but at what expense. Wouldn’t it make sense for them to go at it the same as Motorola and Htc yes they might not be as succesful but Blur and Sense have nothing in common with Ios. We may not agree or even understand the patent system but how else does Samsung get punished for their copying…Pay out the A@##$

  • InyRules

    I don’t agree with much of it. I don’t agree that Apple should have been awarded half the patents it has. Did no one in there inform the jury that a lot of the technology (and rectangular shape of phones) have been around BEFORE Apple got a patent for them? If they did, they did a sorry job. Is Samsung guilty of somewhat aesthetically copying Apple? Yes. Is it worth a billion dollars? Hell. No.

  • Answer2K1

    I guess the more information that comes out about the actual deliberations of the jury, the more confused I get about it. Like why a jury is deciding this instead of a judge.
    Most sites did a pretty good job of providing trial info but it seems the most telling info is coming from the jurors.
    The jury foreman gave an interview where he was talking about punishing Samsung but the jury instructions say not to. Other jurors say that they stop considering certain aspects as to not get “bogged down” deliberating on designs and prior art. Also that they awarded money for devices that were’t infringed upon. Or that obvious infringements were overlooked for ones that were sketchy.
    If anything, it gives us alot to debate on for both sides.

    • New_Guy

      They were literally quotes saying that they simply went down the list and if the phone had a bezel and a flat screen, then it was a “Yes”. Only three of the nine actually have ever owned smartphone period. And only one of the nine ever owned a patent on anything. I believe it was juror nine that said they had their minds made up about the case after the first day. That’s why the verdict was decided only thre days (really 2 1/2) after diliberations.

    • Answer2K1

      Another thing that I noticed in the juror interviews was that once they figured out that the foreman held a patent and he walked them through the process that everything was easier to figure out and that basically the foreman guided the deliberations because he held a patent. Does patent holder = patent expert?
      After that was determined, could he have led them in any direction he chose? Including speeding up the deliberations when most jury experts had the deliberations lasting into this week, because of the sheer volume of paperwork and questions that had to be answered?

  • S_T_R

    I DO think that Samsung copied Apple’s style. LG did too, to a lesser extent, but they weren’t on trial.
    I do NOT think that pinch to zoom or sliding gestures should be patentable. They are merely real-life gestures given digital form. That is obvious and not unique. There is also prior art that was thrown out by the Judge.

  • pepe

    Neither of those answers. I’ve always said that the Galaxy S was like the Iphone 3gs and the SII was a lot like the iphone 4. So, I agree that Samsung copyied Apple but that doesn’t mean I agree with patent trolling. I hate that rotten system, where farting can be patented.

    • normmcgarry

      It is so true. I had to do a project for a major brand not too long ago, and there is actually a company out there that has a patent on uploading an image and placing some type of overlay on top (for example, overlaying fake clothing or a mustache) and saving out the image. Major brands have to pay $30,000 in licensing fees to do this online now.

  • Strange to see the results so far in the poll above (majority “Not at all” at time of posting). Do people not understand what this trial was about?

    • KleenDroid

      Yes I’d like to see an option somewhere in between…

    • Justin

      Yes, we understand what it was about, but Apple was granted patents that it shouldn’t have been, and most of those are what they are suing upon. Yes, they are being copied by Samsung, no they shouldn’t pay a billion dollars in damages. If we can’t select an in between, we are going to select no.

  • Samsung clearly copied a lot of touchwiz and their phone design straight from the iphone…so yeah, while I don’t agree with the crazy legal battle about it, they definitely tried to make their phones look similar to the iphone.

  • normmcgarry

    Samsung stole the iPhone design and I have looked down upon them for that since the beginning. TouchWiz is a rip-off. The old Galaxy phones (pre Nexus) were rip-offs. They are stealing the Apple Store ideas. They deserve this. What I don’t like is the use of horrible patents. They deserved to be sued on the design, not for some of this usability crap.

    • TouchWiz and what not, yes Samsung deserves to be slapped across the face with a large trout.

      However, for Apple to be granted patents on geometric shapes and old technology that was applied to a new device (pinch and zoom on a capacitive device) is just pure crap and that type of a blatant patent trolling needs to be stopped.

      • normmcgarry

        Absolutely agree.

      • New_Guy

        Oh yes, when I read the patents include a device with an “edge to edge bezel” and “uniformly rounded corners” I can’t help but wonder how asinine our patent system can get. Their trade dress includes a “unornamented” flat face. They literally patented “NOT” having things… -_-…No wonder they are losing in just about every other country not named the United States…

        • michael arazan

          My computer monitor is rectangular with rounded edges and a bezel, with a screen. I’ve had it before the 1st iphone came out, but don’t see HP suing apple about it.

          • New_Guy

            I wonder if I can patent “Not” having tires on a car so I can sue Ford for inventing the Hover car one day…By Apple’s standards, it could work…I could be filthy rich one day =)!!!

      • Glen

        Claiming the grid arrangement of icons as patentable should lead to some interesting cases: vs the abacus for arranging number representation in rows and columns; vs libraries and bookshelf makers for arranging books in a grid; vs waffle makers; vs accountants and spreadsheet programs; vs TV Guide; vs most written material using rows and columns (especially the Bible with its table of contents); ad nauseum. Patents are supposed to be granted for things that are INNOVATIONS (new) and NOT OBVIOUS. The grid layout was NOT an INNOVATION and EXTREMELY OBVIOUS. It is the most logical way to maximize display space. Any other way to display icons will either waste precious screen real estate or require redundant requests to view the same information. The consumer is the big loser here.

    • Nicholas Tino

      they deserve anything they got for copying… but most of apple’s patents and trade dress claims should be invaldiated for prior art or obviousness.

      • normmcgarry

        They should be invalidated, but more so, you shouldn’t be able to get patents like these and force your competition to spend MILLIONS on getting them invalidated. That’s just monopolistic. Samsung is really the only player (besides Google) that is big enough to handle these lawsuits.

        • Nicholas Tino


        • Manny

          I agree with you on this but that’s not apple’s fault it’s basically the us patent system. Other companies have patent disputes like this but I believe samsung took it way to far with their older products. They’re even trying to copy the Apple store..That’s just shameful

          • normmcgarry

            Apple suing every single company that is in competition with them with bogus patents is their fault.

          • Manny

            @Norm Let’s get serious here. Let’s not take sides Do you really think Apple see’s Samsung, Moto or HTC as competition. Apple is a company where most of their sales and or revenue come from a mobile platform. Sammy HTC and Moto. Release up to 4 or 5 devices a year. Which one device actually out sells or even comes close to an Ios device. That’s where most people who like android i think get it twisted. Android may hold a bigger slice of the pie but consider how many devices it takes android to do this

          • Copythis


          • Manny

            The fact that the patent system works the way it does is not apple’s fault just blame the moto companies for not doing the same and taking advantage.

          • normmcgarry

            Actually it is like the verbatim definition for monopoly in my eyes. Trying to use your size and power and to force competition out of the market with lawsuits.

          • Manny

            I see your point, but that’s the USA. That also reminds me of Microsoft in in the early days of the internet with internet explorer.Look at it thru Apple’s eyes. Whether the software or what ever existed before Nobody used it, Nobody did anything with it. The best phone on the market before the iphone was a motorola razr.. a flip phone.. after the iphone every company looked around and couldnt believe what just happened. This is what apple is trying to protect the fact that they made something that everybody wanted before any other company realized what happened.

          • GF1 Fanatic

            Good for Apple. But it stops there. Their attempt to stop competition is monopolistic.

          • So wrong it isn’t even funny. First IE wasn’t a monopoly they just didn’t offer an option to “not” have it. Second the Moto Razr did not predeed the iphone as the “it” phone, The BlackBerry did.

          • Manny

            Sony for one are trying to beat apple with their own designs and their own ideas.. That’s inovation

          • GF1 Fanatic

            Amen! You are right on!

          • EC8CH

            The fact that apple is abusing the problems with the patent system does indeed make it their fault. They are not solely responsible, but they are part of the problem.

    • Jon Gee

      But let’s call out the obvious irony of Apple accusing ANYONE of stealing ideas.

    • Jarred Sutherland

      The design of the iPhone? It’s the form factor of a slim brick with a button.

      • Alan Paone

        Its a slim brick with a button that everyone recognizes. its a simplistic design, but its one that consumers associate with the “best”. other phones look different, Samsung tried to capitalize on that recognition.

        • pretty sure the Samsung logo on the front and back, lack of glass on the back, no Apple logo, and a number of other things makes it easy to tell it is not an IPhone. Simplicity was not created by apple, therefore how can they even attempt to patent squares and corners? Should Samsung make phones in the shape of a sword and make it pink?…..

          • Alan Paone

            No, they should make phones that don’t look like the iphone.

          • You act as if the iPhones design was ground breaking and on a new level of electronic device engineering. No it’s a slab of metal with black bezel and a screen. Any 10 year old could come up with that. You wanna know why? Because its SIMPLE. I’m beginning to wonder if any of you sheep ever even read the patents apple has. You shouldn’t be able to patent SHAPES AND COLORS

          • Alan Paone

            Absolutely, a ten year old monkey could design it. I’m not saying its ground breaking or special or anything other than *recognizable*. That recognizability was extremely valuable to Apple, and it also would up being pretty valuable to samsung. They didn’t patent colours and shapes, they patented the sum of those colours and shapes: the iphone. Samsung would’ve been fine making a black, rectangular phone that looked like anything else, htc and motorola have been doing it for *years*. making a phone that looks exactly like the iphone was a *choice*, a calculated and deliberate one at that, not a consequence of using a rectangular touchscreen. I’m not an isheep, hell, I even have a samsung phone: a galaxy nexus, partly because its the only way to get an Amoled screen without implicitly telling samsung its cool to copy the iphone.

          • tehjoker

            Walks like one… talks like one….

    • Luuuke

      I am a software developer. The ability to sue for stuff like this is one of the biggest problems digital innovation faces. Imagine Mozart trying to compose a symphony without basic musical components (like a rounded rectangle, or the ‘bounce’ animation is to the smart phone).

      This should be under COPYRIGHT, not patent. In music, people remix, or make an arrangement of an original all the time, and it’s legal. In fact I’ll bet some of your favorite songs are remakes of originals. Same should be allowed for software and innovation would EXPLODE.

    • EC8CH

      Apple’s design patents are very general and broad, but taken as a whole, it’s hard to argue that Samsung wasn’t trying very hard to copy apple. The original Galaxy S design along with Touchwiz together is just too much. Apples use of their design patents is justified in this case at least to me.

      Other phones like the G-Nex, GS III, One-X, or pretty much any of the higher end Android phones that have come out recently I think are different enough even if they are rectangles with rounded corners. If apple tries to block them using their design patents I think that would be too much.

      The biggest issue I have with the jury’s ruling is the fact that none of apple’s patent claims were ruled to be invalid. Some one explain to me how the prior art shown during the trial is not grounds to invalidate many of apples patents (especially pinch to zoom). The amount of time the jury actually spend deliberating was not enough time to properly deal with these questions.

    • znewman

      It’s funny because TouchWiz is a terrible ripoff of iOS and looks like a piece of junk. I just wish that everyone put out stock Android phones.

      Side-note: The U.S. patent office is F**king crazy for giving Apple patents for generic design elements that basically sum up what smartphones and tablets are.

      • Whats crazier is people say ” glad the American company won this one, its good for the hard workers of our country that are employed in their factories.” I just sit there like….are you serious or trolling?….. Lol.

  • blah

    all i know is that the apple logo above is crooked.

    • New_Guy

      Sure is =D! Not quite as crooked as Apple actually is though

      • EvanTheGamer


      • Blah

        @blah LMAO!!!

    • EvanTheGamer


    • ericsorensen

      It’s perfect! Just cock-eyed enough to be noticeable. Think DL will get a C&D letter?

    • I think its meant to convey a message that Apple is a crooked company that is taking advantage of a broken patent system.

  • Sathariel

    Personally I was hoping/expecting for a double loss with both sides being found guilty.

    • New_Guy

      …Like in Korea. That was pretty awesome =)

      • Sathariel

        Yup. If I had my way, both companies would’ve be fined the same amount and their CEOs are forced to exchanged checks in a public press conference.

        • Answer2K1

          …And made to shake hands and use Windows phones as their daily drivers for the next 31 days. Time starts over if either party falters at any point.

          • New_Guy

            And they can only visit Facebook if they use the Android app. That’s enough to make anyone want to punch a baby.

  • Knlegend1

    Samsung needs to do better period. Its obvious they copied. Even the galaxy players are indication that they want be like apple. However the stuff apple has patented is ridiculous.

    • So because Apple has the iPod Touch on the market people aren’t allowed to make competing devices? Samsung doesn’t want to be apple. They want to beat apple. Just like they want to/are the leading company in a billion different markets. TVs, Refrigerators, Washers and Dryers… Samsung wants to be the best at everything.

      • normmcgarry

        I didn’t want Apple to win this because I love Android, but to say Samsung doesn’t want to be Apple? Really? What world have you been living in? Have you used TouchWiz? Have you seen their old phones/tablets? Have you seen their new Samsung stores launching? How can you even argue they don’t want to be Apple?

      • Knlegend1

        Yes because iPod exist the galaxy player does too. Don’t be naive you know that’s why the new ones look exactly like the S3. That’s an apple trademark to me. Nothing wrong with making mp3 players or striving to be the best but its too similar.

      • copythis

        Samsung is a copy cat company. I guess people who make knock off gucci bags should be given props too. They look just as good and save you a whole lot of money just like samsung products. Face it. Samsung needs to learn how to innovate and not imitate. Apple did what any other company would have.

    • Sathariel

      Agreed. It’s too bad Samsung couldn’t be more like Sony. It sucks seeing Samsung as the top Android manufacturer when, IMO, the Sony Xperia S is the best looking Android out right now. Can’t wait for the day when Google works with Sony on an Xperia Nexus.

    • paul_cus

      Yeah, Samsung designers need to step up their game.

  • Abhijeet Mishra

    @DroidLife: You have tagged the t of “their” in the first para with links to Apple articles instead of the word “Apple” instead 🙂

  • bob

    please post some memes about this!!!