This news seemed to have totally slipped under the radar (at least for me it did), but Apple are suing Samsung over their Galaxy phones and tablets, claiming it infringes on patents that Apple has on the "look and feel" of their products, which sounds like vague bulls*** to me.

Anyway, that original article is from a few months ago, and is in the US. The latest though (and the reason I found out about it just now) is I was talking to my brother who was meant to be getting one of the new Samsung Galaxy tablets through work as a company thing. They still haven't got them and he rang the supplier today to ask where the f*** they were, and was told that they have them, but they aren't allowed to sell them, because Apple have gone to federal court in Australia and got an injunction against Samsung advertising or selling their new tablets. I didn't believe him at first, but turns out its true

This just seems like some REALLY dodgy s*** to be pulling on Apple's behalf. I mean, how do you even quantify "look and feel". From those pictures the Samsung tablets don't look much at all like an Ipad, and they run completely different operating systems and software to an ipad, the only thing they have in common is they're a tablet with a touch screen, technology that was already around years before the Ipad ever showed up.

Second that, f*** 'em.

***EDIT: WARNING SARCASM***
Don't forget apple invented/revolutionised the front facing camera, the mobile gps, the touchscreen, the wifis, the internetz, etc. I am surprised this hasn't happened sooner. :S

I mean, how do you even quantify "look and feel".

There is also no doubt that some of Samsungs recent products look a lot like the apple counterparts. But how do you quantify/argue that. who knows.

I hope that Samsung smashes them up. Apple need some competition.

If apple had not brought out the iPad, woud samsung / blackberry / hp / etc etc etc be working their asses off trying to bring them out?

jussayin'

Typical apple fanboism bulls***.

Yeah pretty sure I was being sarcastic. Invented the internetz?

You did say revolutionised as well though, which god knows I've heard all sorts of s*** come from apple 'enthusiasts'.

If apple had not brought out the iPad, woud samsung / blackberry / hp / etc etc etc be working their asses off trying to bring them out?

jussayin'

And I'm jussayin' that's completely irrelevant.

Apple are f***wits.

If apple had not brought out the iPad, woud samsung / blackberry / hp / etc etc etc be working their asses off trying to bring them out? jussayin'

Nokia released the 770 in 2005, Samsung's Q1 was released in 2006 and that's just a couple of examples I can think of easily. Apple found the formula that worked, doesn't mean other companies weren't trying.

Samsung phone in 2006:
http://www.mobilegazette.com/images/samsung/samsung-p200.jpg

Apple phone in 2007:
http://www.techdigest.tv/iphone-2007.jpg

Samsung phone in 2008:
http://www.smartphonesoftoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/samsung-instinct.jpg

Just sayin'

Doesn't look too similar to me, apart from the fact it has a big touch screen on it, which any number of other phones also do. I mean, the menu on my old Nokia looked pretty much like that menu, it just wasn't a touch screen. So where do you draw the line?

Besides, that Samsung phone could send MMS messages and take video using its camera, so they obviously weren't copying the iphone.

Don't forget apple invented/revolutionised the front facing camera, the mobile gps, the touchscreen, the wifis, the internetz, etc. I am surprised this hasn't happened sooner. :S

haha yeah they sure revolutionised the front facing camera, they start advertsing it as something BRAND NEW AND EXCITING years after it was on every phone and apple noobs ate that s*** up like steve job's semen

If I were Samsung, I'd rename the tablets to Samsung Orange and then go into court and say they are comparing Apples to Oranges!

I just came here to be smug

Apple are the best, I love all of my apple things that just work together so beautifully

WTF!! apple did none of that!, all it did was target it to a bunch of hipsters

derpa derp...

Yeah pretty sure I was being sarcastic. Invented the internetz?

patents r dum

Haha, I love how the reporter spends a whole paragraph just explaining how fat that guy is

ichardson, 49, has a friendly, round face, dark-rimmed glasses and blue eyes. Friends and colleagues speak in awe of his prodigious intelligence but the sheer size of him is what you notice first - his nimble brain is trapped inside a lumbering body that tips the scales at close to 180 kilograms. When we meet at a smart Byron Bay resort, he is wearing a navy T-shirt so enormous it could probably accommodate Bill Gates and the entire Microsoft board. While he talks, he perches on the edge of his seat, as if afraid his full weight might be too much for it. Though gregarious and good-humoured, he has the slightly apologetic air of one who knows he takes up more space than he should.

LOL

haha, in the next paragraph he describes the awkward "YOU GOT MY COFFEE WRONG PUNY HUMAN!" conversation with the wait staff - wtf! word quota perhaps?

How many people in this thread hating on Apple own iPhones or other Apple products?

I've never owned 1 apple product. The closest thing i've been to apple is at the grocery store and even then i feel dirty.

I'm at complete polar opposites to teq, which only reinforces the fact that I'm right.

My very first impression of the Samsung Galaxy S2 was that it looked too much like an iphone even the UI looks iphoney.

ahh It looks nothing like an iphone if you ask me. The "smart phone" design is just the current mobile phone standard. Every single mobile phone out there is a small pocket tab with a touch screen that does everything.

Remember when nokia brought out the 5110?, alcatel brought a phone called a one touch easy that looked similar. Then after that we saw the Nokia 3210, 3310 etc etc. As time progressed each company's designs were based on the current expected size of a mobile phone. This is nothing new. I think this law suit is bogus, hope it gets thrown out.

*Posts pictures of the first Plasma TV screen, and then posts pictures of rival manufacturers plasma TV Screen*

The back of a S1 has a carbon fiber look, with the samsung 'wave' shape which is on a lot of their products.

The iPhone has no standout features, and considers all rivals without a standout feature to be a copy.

The only point of this is to hold samsung out of releasing a product for long enough for that product to be out of date. Delaying a product launch for even a few months pretty much renders the product dead. Think about it, how many other tablet's are positioned to launch soon which are coming out better than the tab?

If the tab is delayed, then the tab fails. Even if apple loses the case, they've held off the predator and the next one is lining up to take it's place.

This is why copyright law is being reviewed in countries such as england.

haha yeah they sure revolutionised the front facing camera, they start advertsing it as something BRAND NEW AND EXCITING years after it was on every phone and apple noobs ate that s*** up like steve job's semen

Haha pave proving his ability for sarcasm again.

**** GIANT SARCASM WARNING ****

pretty good going there champ

**** GIANT SARCASM WARNING END ****

the first "tablets" (by apple definition) that hit the market were actually windows based laptops with out the keyboard. from memory Hp released one the the first ones.. they were released imo way before their time and the technology just didn't exist to make them practical. (if i remember correctly Microsoft was trying to market them as an extention tot he desktop almost like a remote monitor where nothing is really stored on the tablet its self)

all apple did is almost copy the Hp version, change the colour and use current day tech such as flash memory, which in the old days just wasn't cost effective. apple also learnt a lesson from Microsoft's mistakes, they made the UI far more suited to the keyboardless environment ..

it just s**** me when people think / say apple invented the tablet.. all apple did was copy something then make a boatload of patents.

last edited by TufNuT at 00:02:56 16/Aug/11

last edited by TufNuT at 00:04:06 16/Aug/11

Also, don't samsung make some of the parts in apple products anyway?

the screens. but Apple are looking for new suppliers.. lol..

Also, don't samsung make some of the parts in apple products anyway?

the screens. but Apple are looking for new suppliers.. lol..

Nah, Apple just moved more screens from LG to Samsung:
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/10/apple-shifts-ipad-2-display-orders-from-lg-to-samsung-due-to-quality-issues/

The industry has been screwed up for ages, patent and IP law is a joke:

Sony sues sony - http://slashdot.org/story/03/01/24/1446217/Sony-Case-of-Right-vs-Left-Hand


http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2011/07/mpeg-la-12-companies-own-patents-essential-to-googles-vp8-codec.ars
This ones a bit harder to grok but basically:
MPEGLA is a patent pool which a large party is MS
MS buys Skype
Skype just switched to WebM
MPEGLA is about to sue Google over WebM
MS essentially suing itself

And of course the classic whose suing who
http://cdn.mashable.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/whos_suing_whom.png

I read MacRumors.com news regularly, and almost every day there's a new post about a patent lawsuit between the big companies. It seems to be the way these big companies do business, and if you think Apple is the root of all evil because they do it, you'd better keep your head buried in the sand.

trolololol

Any actual point here?

I'm saying I don't care enough about the legal wranglings between multi-bazillion dollar companies over a broken patent system to base purchasing a phone solely around it.

Apple didn't create the legal world, they just live in it like every other corporate citizen.

I prefer "I just dont care about that s***", but then I'm not a fancy pants cog neuro skeptic dude.

"I hate you, I hate everything about you, but I want you."

I still don't get you, but no matter.

imitation is the greatest form of flattery.

I think the "I just don't give a f***" is Hogs resolution. Billy is hung up on it, hence the need to change his opinion (to be more like a Man and less like a little girl.)

Hehe pretty much every time you say to yourself "oh well who cares" you're doing what I described :)

Also, relevant:

FOSS Patents reports on news out of Germany that Apple has been granted a preliminary injunction barring Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 anywhere in the European Union with the exception of the Netherlands.

Also:

Last week, Samsung agreed to delay the launch of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia in response to Apple's request for a preliminary injunction in that country. Samsung argues that Apple's case in Australia addresses the U.S. version of its tablet device and that it plans to release a version specific for the Australian market, but the company has agreed to provide Apple with samples of the Australian version and has pushed back the device's debut there as the dispute continues to play out.

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/09/apple-granted-injunction-barring-sale-of-samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-in-european-union/

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/08/ipad_galaxy_tab_aspect_comparison.jpg

anyone who truly hated a company would simply not buy their products, I think Hoggy is just a typical anti Apple bandwagon type because it's "cool"

i reckon you're pretty s*** at reading comprehension.

he hasn't said once that he hates them. he's said he isn't super keen on their corporate/legal shenanigans but not so much so that it would prevent him from buying a bit of their kit that he likes.

The reason I chose not to post thermite's image myself is cause if you read the whole article you'll have seen that it's probably irrelevant:

irrelevant to the court case maybe, but its going to hurt PR with apple. (as Hoggy shows, that doesn't actually matter though)

And i would have thought that submitting deliberately misleading documents to the court would have a big effect.

last edited by lateral at 12:21:56 16/Aug/11

If i don't like the way a company operates because it goes against my own values and ethics then you could bet i'd boycott the s*** out of it no matter how s*** hot the product is. But hey what can I say i'm a man of principles.

Anyone up for some Max Brenner?

If i don't like the way a company operates because it goes against my own values and ethics then you could bet i'd boycott the s*** out of it no matter how s*** hot the product is. But hey what can I say i'm a man of principles.

Bulls***.

What phone, computer and operating system do you use?

The patent system on software is flat out broken.
If we're into boycotting big tech companies over misuse of patents, why stop at Apple though?
You'd better also boycott Microsoft, IBM, Google, Oracle, Amazon, Nokia...etc etc

you don't see Apple going after the Openmoko project though even though it's also vaguely similar in design

when apple where the underdog innovator and not a company with more cash than the US government, it was ok for them to move and shake the big guys. now that they're the company with phat stacks they need to have a go at the innovator with Google's Android.

so it's more than just a poke with a big pointy stick at the emotional technology 'look and feel' thing

similarly you could notice that a Great Wall ute 'looks and feels' like a Toyota Hilux

this kind of thing helps market both products, even if Apple have a win with the patent technicalities

or make them exponentially more expensive to apply for, which would solve this problem?

Got shell company? That would be easily circumvented.

Yup, and our very own CSIRO can take all the 802.11 casholas.

Until all patents are void after 20 years from filing.

^ yeah

Other turntable manufacturers are now able to copy the legendary Technics SL1200. This turntable was developed back in the late 70's/Early 80's and has been the turntable of choice for a very long time since it was brought to market.

The patent recently (in the last few years) lapsed and now other manufacturers make near identical copies (of the actual workings of the turntable rather than asthetics).

Last year Technics, now owned by Panasonic, annouced the discontinuation of the SL1200 range :(

Oh it's not that I don't like apple only for their legal uncompetitive practices

It's not being uncompetitive if your competitor is copying your product, the very product (or component of a product) that gives you your competitive advantage over them.

See my post above - Technics developed a turntable that was superior to all others at the time. They protected this by obtaining a patent. They enjoyed the fruits of their labour for years, and deservedly so.

You could argue that patents encourage competition and innovation by forcing competitors, such as Samsung, to develop alternative products/ideas to compete with Apple, rather than just copy and bring nothing new to the market.

I just came here to be smug

Apple are the best, I love all of my apple things that just work together so beautifully

my wife has been using apples for the last 5 years or so and has always had issues with syncing things between them, stuff breaking and needing to spend hours on the phone with apple, having them log in remotely and fix things.
Until a fortnight ago, I left her apple stuff alone because I didn't want to interfere with the appleness of it all and cause issues, so prior to then there's been no meddling on my part.

why did I finally step in after all this time?

because the hard disk in her macbook failed so she decided to buy a new macbook since the old one was getting a bit worn out in the keyboard and monitor department as well.

but no probs, she has an overpriced time capsule and has been running time machine backups regularly. she can just restore all her stuff into the new macbook and be on her merry way, right? she has all her passwords stored externally including the filevault master password, so it should be a breeze, apple style right?

nah.

filevault had apparently f***ed up the backups and due to several idiotic design issues (nice bastardisation of the underlying unix system btw) apple can't help her. behind the scenes, setup assistant can't make sense of the filevault sparsebundle, and s**** itself, dumping all the non-encrypted files into the top level root partition and refusing to create /Users/herusername

meanwhile in everything-is-shiny-land, the nice new login screen beckons, then presents the awesomely detailed error message "You cannot log into the filevault account 'herusername' at this time, an error occured". google that one for thousands of ppl basking in their smugness

I've spent days worth of time trying to jiggle this stuff into restoring her backups after apple washed their hands of it, and in the end had no choice but to manually rebuild her user account by bypassing all the idiotic apple utils that can't even provide plain access to the filesystem in the time capsule and hooking it up to a linux VM and repairing the sparsebundle from an earlier backup dir, mounting that and pulling her files out of there manually.

she loved being told "oooh yeh nasty, you shouldn't really use filevault it's a real pain for backups" by apple support people when the only warning that osx gave her when enabling it, was that she should make sure she keeps a note of the passwords in order to access the filevault in the event something goes wrong. so she did that, and still got reamed

When you find yourself defending the corporation and not the product I think you should really assess just why it is you feel the need to do that.

how is listening to media in regards to the company practices of apple basing your arguments on ignorance? It's about the best information he is likely to get.

Because he's probably using good and services of businesses that don't align with his beleifs/ideals/morals as he doesn't know that they partake in such activities.

Therefore if you're going to take the moral high ground and avoid products/services provided by companies that do xyz, you really shouldn't just rely on the media, but rather take a pro-active approach and research everything you use/buy - otherwise, why bother?

Hi Jim, why didn't you ask google or QGL?

You'll then see a package called username.sparsebundle. Double-click it, enter your login password, and a copy of your home directory will mount. You can drag files off of this copy -- just don't drag any files onto it or delete any files! After you are done, eject the mounted home directory to avoid confusion. There isn't any reason that Apple couldn't automate the restore process; apparently they ran out of time when releasing version 10.5.

Good luck. Also definitely upgrade to 10.7 Lion, FileVault 2 is much improved.



Oh, and

I just came here to be smug

Apple are the best, I love all of my apple things that just work together so beautifully

I did ask google as mentioned. I didn't ask qgl because I didn't want to duplicate the same question yet again when it's already being asked all over the internet

the text you've pasted isn't relevant, since the sparsebundle files were corrupt, also mentioned =]
once I'd used external tools to repair the sparesebundle (from an earlier backup dir), osx was able to mount the backup file as per your paste, which is how I ended up manually restoring individual files

however, the sparsebundle from the 'Latest' backup dir wasn't recoverable and setup assistant doesn't give you the option of choosing an earlier backup to restore from. also, migration assistant can't be used on user accounts that were timevault'd, and finally, restore mode, while allowing you to choose which backup you'd like to restore from, tells us that we can't use those backups because they were created on an older macbook. useless utils

Don't you think it'd be too impractical to research every single product before purchase? What you're saying is if I don't conduct extensive research about a company's corporate and strategic direction, supply chain and logistics management, operations management, public relations practice etc then I simply should not buy products from that company. The "all or nothing" stance that you take is just ridiculous.

Well the flip side is that you only take note of what happens in the media and base your decisions on that, which is just as ridiculous.

If you need a pair of shoes, you need a pair of shoes. Nike got in the media about sweat shops, so you cross them off. You still need shoes. You buy Puma instead, however you have no idea if they fit your ideals, but you haven't heard anything, so you assume they are a role model coroporate citizen. (when in fact their upper leather is actually rare himalayan monkey hide)

So does that make buying Puma ok because you haven't seen them in the media doing something 'wrong'? For all you know they are worse than Nike, they just haven't been exposed to you.

All I'm saying is that boycotting a company because it gets some media time that goes against your beleifs/morals etc is silly if you just blindly buy a competitors item instead.

Big business is extremely competitive so it's highly likely that most products/services you buy won't align with your beliefs/morals as business look to cut costs, take advantage of cheap labour etc etc.


last edited by mission at 15:06:42 16/Aug/11

Nice story Jim. Substantiates my long-held view that Apple devices and those like them are all great until you want to do anything that's even slightly out of the bounds of their design. When that's because of a malfunction, that's even s***tier.

I'll glady use Apple hardware for as long as people are still able to crack the software to enable lower level access. If they ever do succeed in making that impossible or too much of a hassle to be worth it, that's the day I stop.

Where do you guys get your monkeys from? Does matchy do some sort of group buy?

Of all the patent crap (hi Lodsys), this one to me is the most valid. Samsung ripped off Apple's look and feel - if you're being honest it's as simple as that.

not even nearly, you're talking about a copyright violation, not a patent violation. (you can't patent the way something looks, otherwise we wouldn't be able to have common interfaces on different vendors, and think of how hard that would make learning to drive a new car!), at best, they have a trademark or copyright case on their hands.

Well the flip side is that you only take note of what happens in the media and base your decisions on that, which is just as ridiculous.

Like I said, I don't always base my opinions on the media, but if that's all I got then that's what I'm going to use to make my decision.

If you need a pair of shoes, you need a pair of shoes. Nike got in the media about sweat shops, so you cross them off. You still need shoes. You buy Puma instead, however you have no idea if they fit your ideals, but you haven't heard anything, so you assume they are a role model coroporate citizen. (when in fact their upper leather is actually rare himalayan monkey hide)

You see, i didn't know that. Last time I checked you weren't part of any media corporation but I still managed to learn something. I may or may not take rare himalayan monkey hide as a factor into my decision making process when buying shoes, but if the issue is of concern to me then I'll investigate it further and then base my decision on that.

So does that make buying Puma ok because you haven't seen them in the media doing something 'wrong'? For all you know they are worse than Nike, they just haven't been exposed to you.

Until I find out that Puma is made from rare himalayan monkey hide (on the account that rare himalayan monkey hide is of concern to me) then yes I will continue to buy Puma as an alternative to Nike. Nothing has changed for me really, I'm still buying/not buying based on what I know and I won't feel guilty about doing the wrong thing if I'm oblivious to it. If i have any doubt, then I will investigate further, from multiple resources if I'm keen.

Big business is extremely competitive so it's highly likely that most products/services you buy won't align with your beliefs/morals as business look to cut costs, take advantage of cheap labour etc etc.

Yeah i agree, but sometimes you have to do the best that you can given what you got.

Again i'll go back to the Max Brenner example. I walked into MB last year and had a banana split. Super. I later told my friends about it who then informed me that MB give financial support to the Israeli army. I also heard about it in the media basically saying the same thing. So I thought before I go for another banana split I'll do a bit of basic desktop research. What do you know, the Strauss group has 100% ownership of MB and is in fact involved explicit support of the Israeli military. Given my personal reservations about the Israeli Army I decided not to eat at MB any more. Had I not known that I would've continued to eat at MB, but now that I know, I don't and I might eat at Wendy's instead. If my research proved otherwise, I would've dismissed media attention and continued to eat MB.

I'm acting on the knowledge that I have based on various sources, be it word of mouth, media, personal experience etc and adjusting it through seeking alternatives. I think i've made my point clear and so with those words i'll be signing out. Peace.

The Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 infringes 10 Apple patents, including the “look and feel,” and touchscreen technology of the iPad, Steven Burley, a lawyer for Apple, told Federal Court Justice Annabelle Bennett in Sydney yesterday.

Doesn't make the patents valid, it probably won't go to court because apple may lose a lot of patents in the process.

the look and feel "infringments".

Hardware and software trade dress claims

1) a rectangular product shape with all four corners uniformly rounded;
the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders;
2) as to the iPhone and iPod touch products, substantial black borders above and below the screen having roughly equal width and narrower black borders on either side of the screen having roughly equal width;
3) as to the iPad product, substantial black borders on all sides being roughly equal in width;
4) a metallic surround framing the perimeter of the top surface;
5) a display of a grid of colorful square icons with uniformly rounded corners; 6) and
7) a bottom row of square icons (the “Springboard”) set off from the other icons and that do not change as the other pages of the user interface are viewed.

Packaging trade dress claims
1) a rectangular box with minimal metallic silver lettering and a large front-view picture of the product prominently on the top surface of the box;
a two-piece box wherein the bottom piece is completely nested in the top piece; and
2) use of a tray that cradles products to make them immediately visible upon opening the box.

All Apple wanted was to delay Samsungs release, and thats what they got because they throw more lawyers at the courts. It's not about "intellectual property", it's about market share, and doing anything to f*** up the oposition. The real problem is our courts are being jammed up by this s***, and real cases are having delays. Apples products are fine, but they are just d*******s.

I bought an iphone. I wanted a Galaxy, but they weren't in Australia at the time. I hate my iphone. Terrible, terrible battery life and completely over rated. I won't deny I got one because 'everyone else was getting them', but as soon as my contract runs out, I'll actually buy a decent phone.

In Vietnam at the moment, saw on the news here that HTC are suing Apple over iPhone 4 stuff.. Can't find any more info though..

tablet pcs were around long before the iPad, at least 3 years prior

in fact, samsung had a tablet early 1990s.

http://www.androidtabletfanatic.com/android-tablet-news/16-old-skool-tablets-rocking-it-before-the-ipad/

Endorsing the same practice with another company will not change the nature of the industry. You'd have to change to a company who actually had different practices to make any standing. It's not like nike will stop using slave labour because their sales have gone down because their rival, who contracts the same slave company is getting more sales.

Though if you changed your habit to buying shoes from a real shoemaker locally, and others too, nike can make a demographic judgement that to remain competitive, the market demands the shoes be made locally.

Of course, what happens to the slaves when they have no work? If they could earn more elsewhere, they would be.

You seem to get my point, and you've responded to it quite well... I'm kinda being swayed by your argument. I definitely agree that pragmatically it's unrealistic to have all the info about everything at any time, and it's probably inevitable we'll have to make decisions without all the facts. I'm really taking issue with the idea of someone taking the moral high ground by choosing product Y instead of product X, only because of negative media about product X. More specifically:

Whoever he chooses to buy his shoes from is irrelevant, it's who he chooses not to buy from that is based on knowledge and personal moral choice.

I disagree if we're talking about the morality of the decision to buy one product over another, which I *think* was the original example. Obviously I can choose not to buy from Nike because I don't like their exploitation of cheap labor, but at the same time I could choose to buy from Puma (let's pretend they have the same dodgy factories as Nike), which would contradict my moral choice of avoiding Nike. To make this example more similar to the one you're talking about, I might only have information about Nike, but not about Puma. So, I choose NOT to buy Nike because I've heard they are dodgy, and instead I shop at Puma because I haven't heard anything about them. I don't think you can claim to make moral decisions based on selective information - it almost defeats the purpose of morals. If you do rely on stuff that's presented to you in the media (which I actually agree is fairly reasonable), all you can say about your morals is that you rely on the portrayal of brands in the media, which, like I said, I don't think is really "moral" and obviously open to all sorts of bias (eg. Apple's case).

Apple are just s***ting dacks because samsung have made a unit that is totally f*****g cool.

Lightweight, big screen, dual core blah blah as ur all well aware.

Apple now have to pull something magical out of the hat to compete.

They have lost the market if they can't do so, due to the f***** stupid charger size, not being able to blue tooth non apple products etc.

F*** you apple.

The iphone4/ipad etc are awesome devices, but because their head is up their asses they are going backwards.

Sorry for the bump, but relevant Prior art dating back to 1968. Proof Apple stole the design in the first place.

Take that, apple fans.

LOL that's awesome. I was hoping he would use swipe gestures to change the channel though :(

that will be exhibit E, a clip from minority report.

haha will be hilarious if samsung wins with that defence.

that would be awesome.

lol that reminds me, rodney mckay + others were always walking around with tablets in stargate atlantis.

Is that clip all there is to it? Because it isn't even lifted off the table. Who's to say its a tablet device at all but table with screens built in / on top. I'd argue that thing isn't portable at all from the evidence shown.

lol I liked this in response to Samsung using the 2001 clip:

Now, I’m no lawyer but Samsung would probably be better served to use their own prior art, perhaps something like this Photoframe from 2006. What do you think?

http://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/samsung-photoframe.jpg?w=425&h=328
http://9to5mac.com/2011/08/23/samsungs-prior-art-argument-against-ipad-design-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/

I wasn't aware that Apple were falling behind or that the iphone 5 was delayed.

Apple are falling behind and are looking for anyway to get infront.

lol, way to just spout s*** - They are now THE most valuable firm in the US. Hardly 'falling behind'...

btw, I don't like apple, don't own any of their products, and doubt I ever will, but I can recognise that they know what they're doing.

last edited by bargain at 18:26:36 24/Aug/11