4 ms·

From OP: > Apple said in a statement that the case “has always been about more than money.” > “We believe deeply in the value of design, and our teams work ti

From OP: > Apple said in a statement that the case “has always been about more than money.” > “We believe deeply in the value of design, and our teams work tirelessly to create innovative products that delight our customers,” the company said. > After the 2012 jury sided with Apple, Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook said the lawsuit was about values, and that the company “chose legal action very reluctantly and only after repeatedly asking Samsung to stop copying” its work. From an old Samsung filing on Groklaw:[1] (seen via kregasaurusrex's comment) > For its part, Apple‘s "revolutionary" iPhone design was derived from the designs of a competitor—Sony. In February 2006, before the claimed iPhone design was conceived of, Apple executive Tony Fadell circulated a news article to Steve Jobs, Jonathan Ive and others. In the article, a Sony designer discussed Sony designs for portable electronic devices that lacked buttons and other "excessive ornamentation," fit in the hand, were "square with a screen" and had "corners [which] have been rounded out." Ex. 18 (DX 649). Right after this article was circulated internally, Apple industrial designer Shin Nishibori was directed to prepare a [redacted] design for an Apple phone and then had CAD drawings and a three-dimensional model prepared. See Exs. 1-3 (DX 623; DX 690; DX 562). Confirming the origin of the design, these internal Apple CAD drawings prepared at Mr. Nishibori‘s direction even had [redacted] on the phone design, as the below images from Apple‘s internal documents show: [redacted image] Soon afterward, on March 8, 2006, Apple designer Richard Howarth reported that, in contrast to another internal design that was then under consideration, Mr. Nishibori‘s [redacted] design enabled [redacted] As Mr. Nishibori has confirmed in deposition testimony, this [redacted] design he prepared changed the course of the project that yielded the final iPhone design. > Design was not the only thing Apple took from other companies in developing the iPhone. While Apple touts itself in the popular press as a company of "firsts," it recognizes the opposite internally. As Apple admitted in internal emails, Apple was not the first [redacted] [1] http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20120726121512518 http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20120726121512...

dep_b 8y ago
That Groklaw article is quite biased. I see a lot of talk about the rounded rectangle while the case was never just about that. Many other vendors had rounded rectangles and weren’t sued because the phones were clearly different from the iPhone. It’s about a series of elements that were really close and made it confusing to distinguish them. Also it states Apple was brand new in the mobile space but that was dead wrong. The Newton wasn’t a runaway hit like the iPhone but did quite ok. It was the first device to be coined pda (appeared a few months later than the Palm though). Also it was the first device with an ARM chip which was built in a joint venture with Acorn.
- tooltalk 8y ago
  What bias? That came straight out of Apple's own testimony/court doc's. No, Apple doesn't have to go after every single mobile device makers and Apple went only after the major players. Initially it was HTC, which angered Steve Jobs so much that he declared a thermonuclear war on Android -- Samsung was an afterthought. Apple settled with HTC after HTC counter-sued with LTE wireless patents. Samsung likewise counter-sued and won, but Obama reversed the ruling to save Apple.
  - dep_b 8y ago
    Apple sued HTC over the features in the OS it was using, it was simply the first player to use Android. iOS had a ton of great ideas that simply weren't available in the older version of Android or any other mobile OS until that time. It was never about rounded rectangles. The lawsuit was settled at a point in time HTC was struggling to survive at all and it's still bleeding money. And yes you can select facts and build a biased story around that, no doubt.
    - tooltalk 8y ago
      If you are implying that Apple sued HTC for utility patents alone, you are definitely wrong there. Further contrary to your claims, the originality wasn't what iOS was going for. One main reason Apple's patents never gained traction beyond their hometown is because of prior arts -- meaning most of Apple's designs/utility claims were "thrown out" on the ground that there were already invented or readily available in other phones. What iOS did differently was their different implementation and integration, but nothing beyond 'non-obviousness" to warrant a exclusive right. Further, this design case is precisely about rounded corners with a circular button in the middle. HTC was still the king of smartphones in those day, albeit slowly dwindling market share, and but what stopped Apple's abuse was HTC's newly acquired LTE patents. Apple decided to settle only when ITC ALJ warned that Apple'd better have really convincing argument that those patents were invalid, or would have to face import ban. Your revisionism isn't really that funny.
      - 8y ago

dep_b 8y ago

That Groklaw article is quite biased. I see a lot of talk about the rounded rectangle while the case was never just about that. Many other vendors had rounded rectangles and weren’t sued because the phones were clearly different from the iPhone. It’s about a series of elements that were really close and made it confusing to distinguish them. Also it states Apple was brand new in the mobile space but that was dead wrong. The Newton wasn’t a runaway hit like the iPhone but did quite ok. It was the first device to be coined pda (appeared a few months later than the Palm though). Also it was the first device with an ARM chip which was built in a joint venture with Acorn.

tooltalk 8y ago
What bias? That came straight out of Apple's own testimony/court doc's. No, Apple doesn't have to go after every single mobile device makers and Apple went only after the major players. Initially it was HTC, which angered Steve Jobs so much that he declared a thermonuclear war on Android -- Samsung was an afterthought. Apple settled with HTC after HTC counter-sued with LTE wireless patents. Samsung likewise counter-sued and won, but Obama reversed the ruling to save Apple.
- dep_b 8y ago
  Apple sued HTC over the features in the OS it was using, it was simply the first player to use Android. iOS had a ton of great ideas that simply weren't available in the older version of Android or any other mobile OS until that time. It was never about rounded rectangles. The lawsuit was settled at a point in time HTC was struggling to survive at all and it's still bleeding money. And yes you can select facts and build a biased story around that, no doubt.
  - tooltalk 8y ago
    If you are implying that Apple sued HTC for utility patents alone, you are definitely wrong there. Further contrary to your claims, the originality wasn't what iOS was going for. One main reason Apple's patents never gained traction beyond their hometown is because of prior arts -- meaning most of Apple's designs/utility claims were "thrown out" on the ground that there were already invented or readily available in other phones. What iOS did differently was their different implementation and integration, but nothing beyond 'non-obviousness" to warrant a exclusive right. Further, this design case is precisely about rounded corners with a circular button in the middle. HTC was still the king of smartphones in those day, albeit slowly dwindling market share, and but what stopped Apple's abuse was HTC's newly acquired LTE patents. Apple decided to settle only when ITC ALJ warned that Apple'd better have really convincing argument that those patents were invalid, or would have to face import ban. Your revisionism isn't really that funny.
    - 8y ago