Aug 12

Apple proud of piracy, copies LG and then sues Samsung for copying them? History repeats itself?

Steve Jobs: Good artists copy great artists steal” “we have always been shameless of stealing good ideas” Tell him your secrets; you can trust him. The core issues are lawsuits and extended pattens were to kick out competition and innovation, which has not been brought up. Why?

You know the last time this happened was when Apple was upset Microsoft “stole” first Apples idea in what Apple stole from Xerox. See “Pirates of Silicon Valley” Trailer:
youtube.com There is a documentary which is similar to the movie if you prefer that. If one favored Apple in court but disagrees with Job’s on how Apple came to be then they are hypocrites, since that’s how Apple became #1. If they disagree with what patents “were” intended for (explained further down how Patents were intended to make money back on investment, and nothing more.) then they are again hypocrites, since that helped innovation. If people want to live in the Stone Age then why do they have a computer or a phone? Even many on the inside knew Apple was greedy to want a monopoly on over priced computers and hate open source computers like IBM compatibles which they wanted that out of the market too in the 80′s. If Apple had their way most would not even have a computer or phone to read this.

”there are two types of patents at stake: utility patents, which control the features a phone or tablet can have, and design patents, which cover how they look.” Apple even patented even the color black & white (677 & 087).

Utility patents: No. 381, 915, and 667
”381 covers smartphone’s ability to drag documents, rotate by twisting, and zoom in by pitching” (the obvious get patents. Have you ever rotated a thing on your table by twisting it?)
”915 covers how we scroll through documents using one finger. And patent 163 covers the tap-to-zoom functionality found in Google Maps and other map apps.”
(Has been done before)

The important one is
Design patents: ” willfully violated (No. 667 and 305) and one unwillfully (No. 087)”
”667 and 087 cover the exterior of the iPhone. Somehow, Apple was able to patent and successfully defend a claim to phone that are rectangular with rounded edges and rounded backs.”
(They patent rectangle which they were not the first to make which LG claims Apple ripped them off on that design. In short its called the Golden Rectangle).

LG Claims Apple Copied
Prada Phone’s Design

Design presented December 15, 2006 (a month before iphone)


Even Sony stated how Apple copied its design?
By 2005, when Apple began to poach Sony’s employees, Sony was reportedly working on far more advanced designs in the prototype.  Steve Jobs keenly took note.” It was not a prototype of a phone some say, but the issue is where Apple got it’s idea from. Some say Apple helped make it for Sony. dailytech.com


Galaxy S3,

iPhone 4S

LG Prada 3.0,

Samsung did presented them in court, but Samgung did not address the core issue which was patent in how LG came out with a similar design since its natural, and not that Sony had it first in what they stated since they didn’t copy form Sony. The judge barred some key information as some reports say that the technology was around in the 1980′s.techradar.com Judge also barred Samsung from showing how unoriginal Apples pattens are even from 1960′stechradar.com Some points were valid and some were a stretch.
Apple has idea men or even spies looking for ideas, which is not uncommon for Apple to steal designs, which even Steve Jobs admitted when he stole form Xerox despite taking credit for it. (Steve Jobs: “we have always been shameless of stealing good ideas”)  Apple was new in phones and needed to combine the latest cell phone technology. But to be fair it’s a normal and natural design for a phone to be a Rectangle, especially in proportions of a Golden Rectangle, with rounded edges when touch screens technology was increasing. Is it no wonder why LG came out with a phone that looked like Apple a month before them. Most people had the idea of a computer with the touchscreen keyboard, but the race for who has the money to patent an obvious design is silly which will only hurt innovation and design. It does not matter who stole when most come to the same conclusion. It’s usually not allowed to patent something obvious.

Apple  has always been arrogant and greedy to want a monopoly, and even Jack Tramiel the founder of the Commodore 64 the #1 computer of all time said about them verse Apple “We need to build computers for the masses, not the classes.” For Apple to have the court in it’s home turf in California it should have been obvious that they had the advantage. Apple even lost to Samsung outside of the US court system on the same issues. People can disagree, but if you are American and your are going against a Korean company in Korea, which side would the Korean jury most likely lean towards or who would have the advantage, and would that be justice?

Samsung is probably guilty in copying other simple silly thing but these reasons should not be the big issues. If anything here are “10 features that iPhone copied from Android
10. Voice control, 9. Multiple carriers, 8. LED flash, 7. Front camera, 6. Wireless updates, 5. Customisable wallpapers, 4. Apps on the lock screen, 3. Wireless Synchronisation, 2. Bar notifications, 1. Multitasking  rediff.com

MAX KEISER states how Apple got government subsidies in the form of oppressive intellectual property and copyright laws, which Apple pushes for thing that kill innovation and would not be #1 without government help.


On a side note “US government investment and subsidies played a major role in making it possible for a company like Apple to exist in the first place.” rooseveltinstitute.org
Even the “Chinese government had agreed to underwrite costs for numerous industries” Apple “had a warehouse filled with glass samples available to Apple, free of charge.” nytimes.com

So what does this all mean regarding the patent? Well despite Apple knew its patents were unrealistic, but it’s playing by the “law” despite the law messed up which Apple is taking advantage of destroying innovation. If some people feel it is right, then people seem to ignore how Apple does what they do not want others to do. The law changed to help big corporations kick out competition to help big corporations get bigger.  If Apple was in the business of making homes they would patent the roof and ask people to pay them even though it was made before they made it. Some companies patent everything and not allow it on the market. Even Apple is getting sued by a university for stealing their which Apple does not mind since its use to defending itself for stealing while suing others for what they have stolen or patent the obvious. If you go to a Apple site many will defend Apple out of blind dedication than reason, which even Steve Jobs knew that and took advantage of it as stated in the documentary.

On a similar issue, ask yourself “if modern copyright is only 121 years old, how on earth did Bach, Beethoven & Brahms survive and thrive without it?” Trenchpress.com/?p=15951

Some assume that the only one with an iphone in the jury was the foreman which helped sway the rest of the jury”If this were my patent, could I defend it?“, which was the turning point. Some assume that the foreman was upset he could not patent a thing that that was made before he tried to patent it.

Also the jury was “not supposed to punish, merely to compensate for losses” Foreman said he wanted to punish Samsung and set an example?? (Steve jobs “we have always been shameless of stealing good ideas”) Apple put a patent on the color Black and white as stated before, and others should be punished? The case was a mess “In another they awarded a couple of hundred thousand for a device they’d ruled didn’t infringe at all.” “Apple lawyers plan to formally demand Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market. They also can ask the judge to triple the damages from $1.05 billion to $3 billion.” Many other problems happened which the jury and court was a sloppy mess. More mess ups pointed out at: groklaw.net

No wonder California is bankrupt and companies are leaving people like that. The jury missed the point entirely if that was only the case. As stated before how you can not patent something obvious or something that has been done before. The laws have changed which has made the patents last for 14-20 years. Patents/Copyrights was intended to give inventors the time to get back what they invested and a bit of profit before it went to public domain to benefit society.  The laws have changed since corporations have given a lot of money to politicians to change the laws to benefit them more. For a socialist leaning person like Steve Jobs in what he wanted others to be he sure did not practice what he preached by giving but taking as much as he can while complaining about it.  Another example how patents have gone wrong. niederfamily.blogspot.com

Plenty of stupid patent laws which if they were enforced you would again not be online due to the thousands of restrictions.
Why Real Programmers Don’t Take The USPTO Seriously: Doubly-Linked List Patented
“Another day, another reason to question why software is patentable at all — and to question who approves these kinds of patents.” techdirt.com

USPTO’s New Stupidity Record (Apple 7,657,849 & 8,046,721)
* You can’t patent an idea—only things and systems can be patented
* You can’t patent something obvious or non-unique
* You can’t patent something that has been done before (“prior art”)

Other issues were presented on the previous post Trenchpress.com/?p=17717

No comments yet, be the first.

Leave a Reply