5 ms·

If you're like me and want to actually compare the listed devices and patents... Design patent '305: Icon interface and grid layout Design patent '677: iPh

If you're like me and want to actually compare the listed devices and patents... Design patent '305: Icon interface and grid layout Design patent '677: iPhone design, edge-to-edge glass and display borders, front speaker Utility patent '163: Tapping to zoom Utility patent '381: "Rubber-band effect," bouncing back when scrolling to end of a page Utility patent '915: "Pinch-to-zoom," distinguishing between single-touch and multitouch gestures 1. Galaxy S 4G (all): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-T959HABTMB http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-T959HABTMB 2. Galaxy S2 AT&T (677; all utility): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-I777ZKAATT http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-I777ZKAATT 3. Galaxy S2 Skyrocket (677): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-I727MSAATT http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-I727MSAATT 4. Galaxy S2 T-Mobile (677; 915, 163): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-T989ZKBTMB http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-T989ZKBTMB 5. Galaxy S2 Epic 4G (677): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SPH-D710ZKASPR http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SPH-D710ZKASPR 6. Galaxy Showcase (677, 305): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SCH-I500RKBXAR http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SCH-I500RKBXAR 7. Droid Charge (305; all utility): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SCH-I510RAAVZW http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SCH-I510RAAVZW 8. Galaxy Prevail (all utility): http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SPH-M820ZKABST http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SPH-M820ZKABST Regardless of my feelings on the lunacy in these being patents, a few takeaways from myself. Only the design patents are featured when selling a phone, by Samsung or Apple, and I'd argue the utility patents are not a selling point, even for those that try a phone before purchasing. If these features are offensive enough to outright ban and garnish earnings from, why aren't they, at all, a part of the buying process? Try it out; search for "zoom" on any of Apple's or Samsung's product pages. Someone help me out and find who has a patent on having a CD player in a car. As well, Samsung has been painted as stealing wholesale, but why are they so inconsistent in stealing the farm for every phone? And the S3, which is an even better seller?

iyulaev 14y ago
"Design patent '305: Icon interface and grid layout Design patent '677: iPhone design, edge-to-edge glass and display borders, front speaker" Some part of me just wants to scream.
- wtallis 14y ago
  Please keep in mind the difference between the title of a patent, and the claims of a patent. The title is inconsequential (and in fact, there's some incentive to make it as unhelpful as possible). The claims are the important part of a patent.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - gcr 14y ago
    Also, mind the difference between design and utility patents. You can hold a design patent for a certain style of mug, for example. The Coca-Cola company owns a design patent on the style of the iconic Coke bottle, for example, but it wouldn't be able to patent "System and method for containing carbonated beverages."
  - mdwrigh2 14y ago
    While true, I think looking at the quote from the jurors paints a different picture for their criteria: "Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents, it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products, because it was all the same. Like the trade dress -- once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flat screen with the bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel."
wmf 14y ago
I get the impression that Samsumg went through three phases in their response to the iPhone. 2007-2008: We need something like this iPhone thing. Let's use Android. 2009-2010: Hmm, Android isn't selling well enough. Let's make our phones look exactly like the iPhone. This is where the S and S2 came from. 2011 onward: Oh shit, Apple is suing us. Let's not be so obvious. Hence the S3.
- mladenkovacevic 14y ago
  Your timeline does not reflect the reality of a product development cycle. But to my untrained eye, the first Galaxy S looked most like the iPhone 3GS. The Galaxy S2 adopted a brand new design language (more business-y and kevlar-like, super thin, bump on the back for some models) and I believe it sold the most. I remember reading the specs for the S2 when it first came out and it just impressed me how significantly it outclassed all phones up to that date. It was a no-brainer phone to get at that time all on its own merits not as a cheap copy of something else.

iyulaev 14y ago

"Design patent '305: Icon interface and grid layout Design patent '677: iPhone design, edge-to-edge glass and display borders, front speaker" Some part of me just wants to scream.

wtallis 14y ago
Please keep in mind the difference between the title of a patent, and the claims of a patent. The title is inconsequential (and in fact, there's some incentive to make it as unhelpful as possible). The claims are the important part of a patent.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- gcr 14y ago
  Also, mind the difference between design and utility patents. You can hold a design patent for a certain style of mug, for example. The Coca-Cola company owns a design patent on the style of the iconic Coke bottle, for example, but it wouldn't be able to patent "System and method for containing carbonated beverages."
- mdwrigh2 14y ago
  While true, I think looking at the quote from the jurors paints a different picture for their criteria: "Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents, it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products, because it was all the same. Like the trade dress -- once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flat screen with the bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel."

wmf 14y ago

I get the impression that Samsumg went through three phases in their response to the iPhone. 2007-2008: We need something like this iPhone thing. Let's use Android. 2009-2010: Hmm, Android isn't selling well enough. Let's make our phones look exactly like the iPhone. This is where the S and S2 came from. 2011 onward: Oh shit, Apple is suing us. Let's not be so obvious. Hence the S3.

mladenkovacevic 14y ago
Your timeline does not reflect the reality of a product development cycle. But to my untrained eye, the first Galaxy S looked most like the iPhone 3GS. The Galaxy S2 adopted a brand new design language (more business-y and kevlar-like, super thin, bump on the back for some models) and I believe it sold the most. I remember reading the specs for the S2 when it first came out and it just impressed me how significantly it outclassed all phones up to that date. It was a no-brainer phone to get at that time all on its own merits not as a cheap copy of something else.