Court scrutinizes email from Steve Jobs

8/3/2012 8:22 PM EDT

Am I alone in thinking that these squabbles over who copied what from whom is getting a tad out of hand?

8/3/2012 11:24 PM EDT

I feel both Apple and Samsung are wasting precious courts time. I can't imagine how Apple can patent a shape.

8/4/2012 6:39 PM EDT

This is silliness. Especially becaue by now everyone knows that Apple adopts plenty of ideas from others, and most of their success comes in the execution amd the tweaking. Not the original concept itself.

This level of litigious greed is so unbecoming.

8/4/2012 8:07 PM EDT

Both companies hope to keep the other competitors out from a region, a country. The patent might help to effort. Speaking of the GUI example in the article, I can't agree more it is a total waste of effort. The direction just cannot lead Apple to the winning goal. GUI - on screen icon and double click - is not even originally developed by Apple. Microsoft might be in better position to claim it. Yet, just as said by Gates, both Apple and Microsoft had a rich neighbor named Xerox. Microsoft went over to steal their TV, realizing it was stolen earlier by Apple.

Instead of putting resource and effort into keeping competitors out, they'd better focus on making their product better in terms of both technology and human machine interface. These are indeed the primary reason consumer choose one from the other.

8/4/2012 8:17 PM EDT

Regarding copying a competitor:

If after products announced/released_no issue.

If before products announced/released_an issue.

It's all about the timeline.

8/5/2012 4:48 PM EDT

I think too that the innovations talked about aren't real patents. They seem more like copyright material. Like the work of an artist.
But if this were copyright... would there be a difference in demands?
Perhaps in the fight to make the better product, is quite difficult not to make something similar to what others have made already.

8/5/2012 8:41 PM EDT

The Apple testimony about users being confused and buying a Samsung phone instead of an iPhone is an insult to anyone shelling out so much on a phone anyway. Whether right or wrong, people turn against this type of nonsense. MIPS had 64-bits and multicore long before ARM, but the headlines are ARM vs Intel, with no mention of MIPS. Why? My guess is people avoid them due to the past patent nonsense about unaligned instruction access. Apple's iSheep (me included there) will think twice about another Apple purchase as the products are really much of a muchness. Being locked into the iTunes ecochain also needs a rethink if you care to read the agreement about Apple being able to use your technology in light of their appetite for court time.

8/5/2012 10:45 PM EDT

This is just a waste of time and money for both companies.

8/6/2012 7:24 AM EDT

I think the fight will go on for next 10 years till both companies realize they are unnecessarily wasting money to spend on lawyers.

8/6/2012 10:04 AM EDT

Well lawyers need to make a living right and with companies like Apple, Samsung and the likes willing to spend big bucks on such trivial pointless cases, I would say lawyers take the opportunity to send their kids to great schools. One man's foolishness tends to benefit others now, doesn't it?!

8/6/2012 2:29 PM EDT

Many of you seem to be missing the point. Stealing is illegal. Just as you can't drive somebody's car around when they are at work and not using it, and you can't live in their house when they are on vacation, you can't use somebody's intellectual property. AND, if Samsung really believed any of Apple's patents were invalid, they could ask to have them reexamined by the Patent Office. The cost of a reexamination is a lot less than they pay their lawyers for the preparation and appearance in just one hour of court time. Rather than taking their invalidity arguments to the Patent Office which has the necessary technical and legal experience to decide validity their lawyers are hoping to hoodwink a jury that doesn't have those skills.