3 ms·
I'm interested in why you thought the bar was set low? From all my reading, it sounded like Samsung had to go out of their way to emulate the Apple processes,
by ghshephard 14y ago
I'm interested in why you thought the bar was set low? From all my reading, it sounded like Samsung had to go out of their way to emulate the Apple processes, it wasn't something they would have accidentally done.
I'm not saying I agree with the verdict, but a lot of people misrepresent this case as, "Apple has a patent on pinch-to-zoom" (not true), and Samsung was sued for building a rectangle-with-glass (not true) - instead of the actual, more complicated case.
In particular, which patent did you think was "ridiculous?"
- cma 14y agoPinch-to-zoom. Just because it is on a capacitive touch screen instead of some other type of touch screen, doesn't really change the implementation of it, and isn't worth patentability. It is like someone coming on the scene and seeing that windowed GUIs weren't patented, deciding that now if I plug my VGA cord into an LCD instead of a CRT I have suddenly invented a new device and can get all the old innovations protected as long as they appear on a "computing device with LCD display".
- zizee 14y agoHow about: 1. Rounded Square Icons on interface 2. Enlarging documents by tapping the screen http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-versus-samsung-2012-8?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-versus-samsung-2012-8?o...