Google, Facebook, Dell, HP, others take Samsung’s side in Apple patent fight

“A group of Silicon Valley’s biggest companies including Facebook, Google, Dell, HP, eBay and others joined the patent war between Apple and Samsung this month with a petition to a federal appeals court, asking the panel to review its decision ordering Samsung to turn over profits from a handful of Apple patent infringements,” Giuseppe Macri reports for InsiderSources.

“The coalition sided with Samsung in a ‘friend of the court’ briefing filed July 1, warning the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals that ordering Samsung turn over the full profits of certain devices over select design elements copied from Apple opens the entire industry up to mass patent infringement lawsuits,” Macri reports. “Industry giants and company trade groups argue upholding the ruling threatens to stifle innovation and limit consumer choice across the tech sector.”

“According to the companies, the nature of technology like smartphones and smart TVs, which contain thousands of individual components, working parts and software, is too complex to lump all of a products’ design and functionality elements into one convenient legal definition of patent infringement in cases when only select design elements appear to have been copied,” Macri reports. “After Facebook, Google and others submitted their opinion, Apple argued earlier this month they should be dismissed, as Google in particular has a direct stake in the battle as the designer behind the Android mobile platform installed on Samsung devices. ‘Google has a strong interest in this particular case, is not an impartial ‘friend of the court,’ and should not be permitted to expand Samsung’s word limit under the guise of an amicus brief,’ Apple told the court.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Why don’t we just abolish patents and products that are too revolutionary and therefore upend entire industries? The Dark Ages were much less contentious. Not much progress, but things went fairly smoothly for centuries, right? Renaissances are too hard. (pout)

Unsurprisingly, we oppose the tacit legalization of outright theft.

Why do Apple’s paradigm-destroying innovations never seem to be legally protected? Did/does Apple have incompetent lawyers (the jury’s out on that one in many cases, actually) or, more likely, are Apple’s innovations so dramatic that if they are not allowed to be stolen, they would threaten the very life of industries that are “too big to fail?”

We can’t wait for Apple Car. Neither can the thieves; salivating, we expect.

As with the Mac, the theft of the iPhone and the resulting parade of knockoffs, as poor as they are, is blatantly obvious to everyone with at least half a brain.

Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:
Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement

Here’s what Google’s Android looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:
Google Android before and after Apple iPhone

Here’s what cellphones looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:
cellphones before and after Apple iPhone

SEE ALSO:
U.S. federal court rules anyone can copy the iPhone’s design – May 18, 2015
Up to 40 percent of Apple’s $930 million verdict against Samsung must be reconsidered – May 18, 2015
US appeals court reverses part of Apple’s $930 million verdict vs. Samsung – May 18, 2015
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
What phones looked like before and after Apple’s revolutionary iPhone transformed the industry – February 8, 2012
Apple to ITC: Android started at Apple while Andy Rubin worked for us – September 2, 2011

[Attribution: AppleInsider. Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]

43 Comments

  1. Property rights are such a “white man’s privilege” concept. Get over it. This is the age of Obama. “You didn’t create that.” The government made Apple, not Steve Jobs. Quit the capitalist pig rule of law this is mine stuff. We own you. There is no law. Bitch. Shut up and be quiet or we will have the IRS do a colonoscopy on your shareholders. Tim might like it but most of you won’t. So, it’s over. We own you.

    BO

      1. Sadly, there are very few people that can do satire or be sarcastic with out the disclaimer /s. So I fully recommend, even for me, to use the /s for all to see.

        Just my thought. NO /s this time. 🙂

  2. Soooooo, If they don’t allow other companies to infringe on patents, it will ‘stifle innovation’. So a company that invents (innovates) can spend millions and have their product ideas stolen in the name of innovation. hmmmmmm.

    1. Thieves band together with thieves. Apple is so far ahead of the competition in terms of innovation, the only way to keep up is to steal. The only thing about Apple they refuse to steal, is their passionate dedication to innovate. That’s too hard to copy.

  3. It’s clearly a very complicated issue. Apple clearly came up with an idea and everyone copied them, but at the same time, the idea is to basically just make a screen with a bezel and very little else. When you strip down design as much as Apple do, you begin to get to a point as to how generalised can a design get before it effectively prevents anyone else from making any sort of remotely similar product. This is not to say that Apple haven’t been wronged, but I wouldn’t want to be the one to have to legislate for this sort of thing.

    1. If it were just about a screen with a bezel, I would agree. I always thought Apple was wrong to be going after Samsung. Google is the problem. Their IP theft goes waaaaay beyond a screen and a bezel. Everything under the hood is what makes an iPhone, and now Android.

      The only leg Apple has to stand on with the screen and bezel is that everyone else laughed at them for spending $50 on the screen of their phone when introduced. It is only obvious now in hindsight. And only to run every aspect of Android that Google stole from Apple.

      1. I agree. I’ve always wondered why Apple has gone after Samsung but not Google.

        The only explanation I’ve come up with is this: Google gives Android away for free. Samsung makes money on their products. The “penalty” portion of a lawsuit is often based on awarding a portion of the PROFITS for which the stolen feature/design is attributed.

        If there are no profits from stealing Apple’s design, it’s harder to determine appropriate penalties.

        That’s my guess, anyway. I’m no lawyer, so YMMV…

        And that’s why I want Apple to come out with iSearch.com. Hit Google in the moneymaker. THAT would be going thermonuclear on them.

        The day iSearch.com (or AppleSearch.com) debuts, switch all Macs, iPhones, iPads to default to iSearch.com.

        With that one action, Google loses 10-20% of their ad revenue (I’d guess).

        BOOM.

        Any Windows browser conversions to iSearch.com is simply gravy…taken directly from Google’s plate.

        1. so lets’ see…
          Apple provides hardware. OS, mandatory approval of software, and now…search? And MS was bad? (They were) This is worse. The saving grace is market share.

          With all this corporate cheerleading going on, remember that anti-trust laws were not established to protect companies, but to preserve competition and protect the consumer. Screw Google, but they may have a case.

          1. Google has about 80% of the search and Apple has none at the moment.

            Google has no case when it comes to search and you know it.

            On the side, how much does Google pay their shills?

  4. “…upholding the ruling threatens to stifle innovation and limit consumer choice across the tech sector.”

    No, stupid, upholding the ruling means you have to do your own innovating rather than stealing someone else’s innovation.

  5. So, the argument here seems to be “If you don’t allow us to steal from Apple, we can’t make a profit and the industry will shutdown because we can’t innovate without Apple”.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.