Hmm you sure? I suggest we set up a research facility.

they can patent a way to make it work, but if someone else finds another way to reach the same goal they can also patent that and also use it

i'd suggest if anyone has any geniune interest in the case that you do a bit of reseach online as there's plenty of interesting reading out there, but little facts or knowledge about it on this thread, and there's too much to go into to even begin to start here

In a perfect world this is what should happen. Unfortunately the current setup has been exploited far too easily by experienced IP attorneys.

Absolutely ridiculous!

- Every TV looks the same.
- Every laptop looks the same.
- Every DVD player looks the same.
- Every washing machine looks the same.
- Every dishwasher looks the same.
- Every X looks the same
.
Why does Apple get special privilege to patent a form factor that they didn't even invent? Tablets have been around way before the iPad! Thank god Apple weren't around when tv's, etc were invented.

Found this link on another forum

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/s...-movies-music/

Dated 2006

that is ridiculous, yes

those items don't look the same as each other typically, but the current crop of tablets bear a striking similarity to the ipad




have you seen any of the pre ipad tablets? if you have you will notice they don't look much like the ipad. yet almost all the current tablets look like the ipad

can you see the point?

before ipad, tablets looked different to each other. now after the ipad they all look similar

do you understand now?

before the ipad the buttons etc were all in different places. after the ipad they all seem to have a single button on the front and the rest on the side. why would that be? why not 2 or 3 or more buttons on the front? why have a button on the front or a touch screen device at all?

get the picture now?

it's just a digital photo frame. no touchscreen, no internet. there were a ton of digital photo frames around a few years ago. no bottons on the front either. it's an entirely different device

btw, the ipad was originally developed before the iphone, the iphone being announced officially in january 2007 after months of speculation. before it was announced, many people thought it would look closer to an ipad classic if you remember the many mockups that were around at the time

Well I've got a Motorola Xoom, and it doesn't look anything like an iPad.
It's a different size screen, no physical buttons on the front, different colour on the back.............

apples blocked the sale of that in europe too as part of the same injunction

I am sorry but you are completely ignoring one basic point in that the paying public are slaves to fashion. So Apple started a design fad and got the ergonomics right, got no problems with that. People love the general design so it makes sense to appeal to this aesthetic strength. But dont go thinking Apple have the god given right to take ownership of this aesthetic appeal because it as been proven before, gadgets from different manufacturers rarely differ in form factor or colour and they all follow the same fashion rules. One year black is in, the next year all devices are silver. This look and feel issue has been criticised with ample justification. It is design evolution in progress.

In any case, I am typing this on a Galaxy Tab 7" with four soft buttons along the bottom. Different enough from iPad's single physical button.

Apple are moral cowards and this will backfire on them. I despise them as a company even more now. In this day of healthy competition, they are a cancer. Samsung were not even aware of the hearing. I seriously hope the Dutch hearing brings some much vaunted sanity back to proceedings.

I read a brief post by a German IP attorney who says this German court cannot enforce the injunction in Europe and both items will remain on sale.

The argument that that competing tablets should be banned because they look like an iPad is spurious and frankly, ridiculous.

The iPad is a good piece of kit and, historically all such things spawn imitations (and usually improvements) and were such imitations to be prevented technological development in all fields would be slowed.

After all if the first manufacturer to make a motor car with a wheel at each corner and the engine at the front had been able to prevent anyone else imitating the design motor cars wouldn't be what they are today.

Apple will maintain their market position by producing premium products and marketing them effectively as they do now.

And as for comments such as,

Can you see the point?

Do you understand now?

Get the picture now?

Arrogant?

The reason I posted the link was that it looks like the ipad! I know what it is.

Unlike your name there is nothing unique about apples products

Thats all they need to do is keep on designing and building products which appeal to people. This lawsuit business has sent out the wrong signals completely. It makes them look like they are scared of the competitor when it should be nothing more than a damn good motive to beat the competition.

i can't think of anything apple has done that hasn't been done before

what they are good at is taking an idea and improving on it and making it popular. typically something that has been a good idea but not previously implemented well. apple then do the research and development and make it work

thus ipod wasn't the first HD based mp3 player, but they popularised it and people copied apple, rather than the previous manufacturers. with ipods though, the copies didn't usually look like ipods so there wasn't much apple could do about it

the iphone wasn't the first smartphone or first touch screen phone, but apple created a design that popularised it and other people copied it. android handsets are basically copying the iphone. some of them look so similar that apple is taking legal action againgst them

the ipad wasn't the first tablet, but previous tablets weren't particularly great. apple created a neat design and popularised it. now people are copying apple. they aren't copying the tablets before ipad. the problem is that unlike the ipod copies, the ipad copies are so similar that they infringe apples rights so they are taking legal action

whilst many people may think they understand the situation, they simply don't. little has been released on the subject for even those who are knowledgeable about these things to be able to do much more than guess. thus as a result people on forums across the world jump to conclusions

as far as we can reasonably tell, the issue isn't about a rectangular shaped tablet, but more about a single button on the front and/or side buttons. thus some tablets more than others infringe those rights. the galaxy tab in particular is so similar in looks to the ipad they've been targetted

to put things simply, whilst apple didn't make the first tablet, they spent a lot of time and money on creating a table that people actually want, and now other companies are copying apples ideas to make money. these are all massive companies that make millions. so for normal punters to make sides to and for these global companies is ridiculous in the first place, especially when little is known about the subject. and as it's a matter of litigation we will need to wait until the hearings to find out more details

so analogies of comparing cars or laptops doesn't apply here. apple can't stop people making rectanguar tablet computers, but they can stop people copying the patents they have. afer all why should someone spend so much time and money developing something for someone else to copy it without spending the time and money? why should a company bother spending so much money researching and developing products for others to benefit from them without any financial input? if there was no protection for companies against this it could severely restrict development and slow down technological progress, yet some people's opinion of this situation appears to be the opposite, that it's apple restriction progress. but the reality is that all they are doing is trying to stop other people sell clones and copies of the ipad. if samsung spent the same time and money on development on a tablet computer it might perform differently and be better than the ipad, but all they have done is clearly copy it. if it was half the price of the ipad that would be one thing, but they are aiming for the same market as the ipad with a device that's a close copy, so can you blame apple for taking action?

Would all of this mean if I brought a Samsung Galaxy Tab thingy from a non-EU country whilst on holiday and brought it back with me to the UK, customs at the airport would consfiscate it and say that it is a prohibited item that cannot be brought into the UK?

no. cuz samsung is banned from stopping them. no-one else is. thus any retailer that has them in stock can sell them. so you can buy one in dixons or pc world. any wholesalers that had them can buy them too

if samsung ignore the order and continue selling them they can get huge fines. likewise if apple lost the case they would have to give a lot of money to samsung. thus for apple to go through with this in the first place they would need to be very certain they would win the case, plus convince the court they would win the case, as it's a preliminary injunction

so buy one now if you want, but if apple win the case you might be stuck with something that's not going to be easily upgradable. so do you really want to splash £400 out on that?

Well here's a photograph of the Samsung Galaxy tab 10.1 - http://www.mobilegazette.com/samsung...1-11x02x14.htm

It looks identical to my Xoom, and there is no physical Home button on the front, so I don't know where all the nonsense about that is coming from?

Looks like Apple are likely to lose their shirts over this, as well as a lot of customers. But in the meantime they've stopped their competitors selling for a few months until this ridiculous lawsuit is thrown out.

I don't think anybody here is taking sides for one company or the other? I don't care wether Samsung or Motorola lose out financially particularly, but it's all about being in favour of consumer choice, and being against a company trying to dictate to consumers.

it's not quite about that. apple don't dictate anything. you either buy or you don't. it's more about the rights of companies who invest time and money to develop products for other people to copy them. for technology to advance more and more money needs to be spent on research, but companies won't do that if other companies will benefit without spending money developing themselves. if the rights weren't protected then companies would just wait for other companies to invent something instead, and then copy it. so less development, less innovation, thus that's when the consumers loose out

Appearance doesn't have much to do with technology progressing.

Funnily enough Apple probably owe companies like samsung a lot more than the other way round as they are the companies that have developed memory chips, harddrives, eproms, batteries, etc.

Technologically there was nothing new about the ipod, they just took off the shelf tech(prob some from samsung) and put it together in the most desirable package while companies like Creative(the people who made the first HD mp3 player) were putting out plasticy geeky stuff.

Rich yes, but still a wank£r

But I can't see what that has to do with this case?
Earlier in this thread you were suggesting it was because the other tablets had Home buttons in the same location as the iPad. It only took a simple google for me to find that the Samsung and the Xoom don't, so I can only assume it's all about the rectangular shape and the black surround?
Well Apple can't possibly expect to patent those, because so many other devices share that look, and Apple certainly didn't use it first, so it shouldn't take long for the judge to throw the case out.

So Apple is trying to stop companies copying them? Talk about hypocritical after what Steve Jobs said in 1994 about 'good artists copy, great artists steal'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

the point about the ipod is what i've been saying, but the advances are when apple take an idea that isn't popular, make it work better and make it popular. i doubt you would have android phones and tablets if it wasn't for iphone and ipad

i think it's more to do with side buttons actually. until the case is heard we won't know, but as they got a preliminary injunction it's likely apple will win. you only get those if the judge thinks you will win your case. if apple lose it will cost them a lot of money to samsung, so they must be sure they will win the case too