“If Google is the company that copied Apple’s technology — and in the case of Apple’s data detectors, it would seem they are — why is Apple suing Samsung?” Philip Elmer-DeWitt wonders for Fortune. “Samsung’s lawyers raised this question in their opening statement two weeks ago, and it’s an argument that could resonate for the jury. I took a crack at it in August 2012, right after the first Apple v. Samsung trial ended in Apple’s favor to the tune of $1 billion.”
In retrospect, [suing Samsung, not Google] was smart move. As Apple laid out its narrative for the jury in its closing arguments, the Samsung story was an easy one to tell. Not only had the Korean manufacturer imitated Apple’s designs down to the boxes the devices came in, but it left a paper trail that showed the company scrutinizing every aspect of the iPhone touchscreen for ways Apple’s design decisions could improve Samsung’s products. “The mountain of evidence presented during the trial,” Apple CEO Tim Cook told employees after the verdict, “showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than we knew.”
Whether Google left a similar paper trail remains to be seen. Moreover, Google can claim, as it did when it was sued by Oracle, that Android doesn’t produce any direct revenue for the company, so there can be zero damages. Android may generate billions of ad dollars, but that’s a harder story to sell a jury.
Full article here.
Related articles:
Prior to Steve Jobs unveiling of Apple’s iPhone, Google’s Android didn’t support touchscreen input – April 14, 2014
Before iPhone, Google’s plan was a Java button phone, Android docs reveal – April 14, 2014
How Google reacted when Steve Jobs revealed the revolutionary iPhone – December 19, 2013
Apple to ITC: Android started at Apple while Andy Rubin worked for us – September 2, 2011
Clearly, google had to redo everything after iPhone was introduced. You really think they did all by themselves?
Chris DeSalvo’s reaction to the iPhone was immediate and visceral. “As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought ‘We’re going to have to start over.’”
“What we had suddenly looked just so . . . nineties,” DeSalvo said. “It’s just one of those things that are obvious when you see it.”
See the original article here.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-google-had-to-start-over-on-android/282479/
In the fullness of time Grasshopper.
Such obvious, blatant in your face knockoffs by google and samdung.
Yet look at how hard it is for spple to defend itself.
Tells a lot about the system we call justice!
It is a joke !
Samsung has profited from Android in a major way by selling Android handsets and tablets. The Samsung hardware incorporates Apple’s patented IP. This is a clear and easily demonstrable relationship for a jury trial.
Google profits from Android users, but “gives away” Android for “free.” This infringement/profit relationship is far more nebulous in terms of convincing a layman jury. In addition, Google’s Android amounts to nothing without the hardware from the Android vendors, primarily Samsung. Google is the origin of most of the infringement, but Samsung is the largest and most demonstrable offender. If the hardware vendors lose, then Google loses, too.
Microsoft took a similar approach in attacking Android. As I recall, at least one Android handset vendor (HTC?) pays royalties to Microsoft for every Android device sold.
First Samsung. Then Google.
Reminds me of a (translated) line from Voltaire’s play, _The Imaginary Invalid_:
Firstem, purge ’em .
Nextem, bleed ’em .
Thenna, enema !
Uh, Moliere.
It’s VERY clear to me why Apple sues Samsung (and other companies that use Android), but does not go after the creator of Android directly.
Apple WANTS Android to be the “other” choice for smartphone platform. Android is like a “hit man” that does Apple’s dirty work, without any involvement from Apple. Android helps Apple marginalizes other established or emerging smartphone platforms. Android keeps the ultra low end of the market closed. Android is the “rock” to Apple’s “hard place.”
For proof, look at what actually happened… In 2007, when iPhone was released, the major smartphone platforms were RIM’s BlackBerry, Palm (before Palm OS), Windows Mobile (before Windows Phone 7), and Nokia’s Symbian. For the first few years of iPhone, iPhone was only on ONE wireless carrier for most markets. Yet, most of Apple’s iPhone competitors were eliminated or decimated by the time Apple expanded to secondary carriers (like Verizon in the U.S.). How did this happen?
It was Android. RIM is a shadow of its former self. Palm – gone. Windows Phone never took the place of Windows Mobile. Nokia replaced Symbian with Windows Phone. More importantly, every iPhone competitor that creates their own OS AND hardware is gone (or mostly gone). The one remaining “integrated” smartphone is iPhone. The “other” choices are essentially all Android, commoditized like Windows PCs.
In an iPhone versus the Android world, Apple makes most of the available profit. Apple knows how to win that game, and Apple holds all the cards this time around. Android makes Apple’s competitors lazy and NOT innovative, because they are burdened with using the same OS as everyone else (except Apple). It makes Apple’s competition in smartphones utterly predictable.
THAT is why Google is never the target of Android-related legal action. Apple does not want to hurt Android as a platform. But when any one competitor (Samsung) becomes too successful at using (abusing) Android to copy Apple’s hard work, THAT is when Apple’s lawyers take aim.
Samsung is the largest company on the Android platform. Google, HTC, etc. all make up the rest.
If and when Samsung moves off Android and over to Tizen, it could become the second largest platform, after Apple.
I should get real interesting to see which way current Samsung customers will move; switch over to Tizen or move to Google and Android?
It should be a real SNAFU, either way.
Does Moto fit in to this scheme? Do they use android? Wait, they were sold so gaggle could stay free. Humm!
They fell into the etc., category. I was only referring to those who actually make money selling phones.
Samsung is the largest Android platform and their expansion came at the expense of Apple’s marketshare. Every Samsung customer who thought they were getting an experience equal to iPhone, was a missed sale for Apple. I wonder what else they’ve stolen from us besides cellular IP?
If Samsung hadn’t stolen the look and feel of iPhone, Apple might have sold a hundred-million more iPhones, but now we’ll never know.
Samsung needs to be taught a lesson, and not by Apple, but by the Federal Trade Commission.
If you steal American IP, don’t expect to export it to America without fear of reprisals.
Apple sues Samsung first simply because Apple had a partnership with them not Google. Furthermore, offering iOS exclusively to Samsung; which Samsung declined and choose to wait for Googles Android instead – clearly shows Google’s dirty backstabbing techniques to attempt to compete with Apple. Hence, Apple focuses on real damages first – Samsung seen as the master copy cats – and later will prove Googles dirty finger prints in manipulating markets and software and cloning the great windows – apple war all over again.