Samsung: Whether or not we ripped off Apple’s tech, Apple stole it to begin with
18 replies, posted
[quote]As the end of the epic soap opera that is the Apple (AAPL) v. Samsung (005930) trial draws near, Samsung’s turn at the plate kicked off on Monday evening with some interesting events. Apple had gone straight for the jugular with its arguments, stating that Samsung knowingly stole its technology and designs by meticulously examining each key element of the iPhone’s UI and ripping it off in its own products. Rather than get right to denying any wrongdoing, Samsung on Monday decided to take a different approach — prove Apple’s technology patents are not valid because they’re stolen to begin with.
To start things off, Samsung targeted Apple’s pinch-to-zoom patent, which the Cupertino, California-based company claims is being infringed upon by a number of Samsung smartphones and tablets. Via Fortune, live coverage of the trial from San Jose Mercury News describes the courtroom events surrounding one of Samsung’s first key pieces of evidence: A giant table.
Dubbed “Diamond Touch,” Samsung’s legal team presented a massive touchscreen table built by Mitsubishi to the jury in an effort to show that Apple’s patent on pinch-to-zoom technology should not be valid because it already existed for years before the first iPhone launched. What’s more, Samsung suggested that Apple knowingly stole the technology when its witness, Mitsubishi engineer Adam Bogue, testified that he showed the Diamond Touch to Apple engineers back in 2003.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwRjb4fNWAI&feature=player_embedded[/media]
The Diamond Touch consists of a projector and a massive touch-sensitive surface with multi-touch support, on which users can draw and perform a variety of other functions. The device also supports technology that is strikingly similar to the pinch-to-zoom function in iOS, allowing Diamond Touch users to manipulate objects by grabbing the corners of an image or window and dragging.
Since Samsung says technology similar to Apple’s pinch-to-zoom function already existed when Apple was granted its patent, the company is arguing that Prior Art should render Apple’s patent invalid.[/quote]
[url]http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/14/apple-samsung-patent-trial-rebuttal-diamond-touch/[/url]
Heh, Xerox comes to mind.
Apple bought fingerworks in 2005 which already had this tech well before Mitsubishi demoed diamond touch.
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/24/technology/no-press-no-stress-when-fingers-fly.html[/url] "The TouchStream technology also replaces computer mouse movements with gestures across the screen. To issue commands, the user runs various finger combinations over the pad. For ''cut,'' the thumb and middle finger are pulled together in a snipping motion, and for ''open,'' the thumb and next three fingers are drawn in a circle on the pad, as if they are opening a jar. (''Close'' is the opposite motion.) Because the software knows the difference between a typing movement and a mouse or command gesture, the user can give mouse commands anywhere on the pad, even right on top of the keyboard area."
[url]http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~westerma/main.pdf[/url] Fingerworks had this tech in 1999 and Apple owns the tech.
Also the patent in question is for a mobile device not a table with a projector.
[QUOTE=Van-man;37238948]Heh, Xerox comes to mind.[/QUOTE]
Only Xerox didn't do anything practical with what they had (assuming you're referring to the GUI OS). Apple at least marketed it and made it practical. Not standing up for Apple here, but at least them ripping off of Xerox put the computer market in the right direction.
It's about time Samsung is doing something about this.
[QUOTE=Silent-Bob;37239274]Only Xerox didn't do anything practical with what they had (assuming you're referring to the GUI OS). Apple at least marketed it and made it practical. Not standing up for Apple here, but at least them ripping off of Xerox put the computer market in the right direction.[/QUOTE]
Still copying.
And that could easily be used as a argument against many other patents.
This is a foggy slippery slope with the current patent system.
history repeats hm
[video=youtube;CBri-xgYvHQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBri-xgYvHQ[/video]
[sp]okay get your history boners away this might not be 100% accurate[/sp]
Doesn't matter if they did it first if they didn't patent it.
[QUOTE=Silent-Bob;37239274]Only Xerox didn't do anything practical with what they had (assuming you're referring to the GUI OS). Apple at least marketed it and made it practical. Not standing up for Apple here, but at least them ripping off of Xerox put the computer market in the right direction.[/QUOTE]
It was mentioned because microsoft then ripped off apple's rip off of xerox and apple complained. Its history repeating itself.
[QUOTE=Scot;37241489]Doesn't matter if they did it first if they didn't patent it.[/QUOTE]
so you support bloated, generic, unfair patents?
Seriously, both of these companies sound like a bunch of children fighting.
[QUOTE=Scot;37241489]Doesn't matter if they did it first if they didn't patent it.[/QUOTE]
From a legal point of view, yes. That's what's broken about it.
[QUOTE=Political Gamer;37239184]Apple bought fingerworks in 2005 which already had this tech well before Mitsubishi demoed diamond touch.
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/24/technology/no-press-no-stress-when-fingers-fly.html[/url] "The TouchStream technology also replaces computer mouse movements with gestures across the screen. To issue commands, the user runs various finger combinations over the pad. For ''cut,'' the thumb and middle finger are pulled together in a snipping motion, and for ''open,'' the thumb and next three fingers are drawn in a circle on the pad, as if they are opening a jar. (''Close'' is the opposite motion.) Because the software knows the difference between a typing movement and a mouse or command gesture, the user can give mouse commands anywhere on the pad, even right on top of the keyboard area."
[url]http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~westerma/main.pdf[/url] Fingerworks had this tech in 1999 and Apple owns the tech.
Also the patent in question is for a mobile device not a table with a projector.[/QUOTE]
This is what's so weak about Samsung's defense. If you say "yah maybe we did copy but they stole it too so their patents are invalid." and you're determined to be wrong that puts you in a very bad position.
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Van-man;37239567]Still copying.
And that could easily be used as a argument against many other patents.
This is a foggy slippery slope with the current patent system.[/QUOTE]
Y'know except it's not copying when you [url=http://www.mackido.com/Interface/ui_history.html]pay the company to use their invention.[/url] Who on the internet started the idea that Apple stole the GUI from Xerox, that's not what happened.
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
Also yes I'm aware that source is from a mac biased website, I just grabbed it from Google. You can just Google about the whole Xerox and Apple/Microsoft thing and get the same info from other sources.
Copyrighting pinch to zoom is like copyrighting turning on TVs with a remote
[QUOTE=latin_geek;37240480]history repeats hm
-vid-
[sp]okay get your history boners away this might not be 100% accurate[/sp][/QUOTE]
they did have better stuff
[IMG]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3229/2613294248_ce138d2fce.jpg[/IMG]
but a mac doesn't really cut it for me.
[QUOTE=Koenigsegg;37251344]they did have better stuff
[IMG]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3229/2613294248_ce138d2fce.jpg[/IMG]
but a mac doesn't really cut it for me.[/QUOTE]
??? I played lemmings on a windows xp computer back in 2005 when I bought it from a garage sale.
The first thing I thought of when I read the title:
"MOMMY SAMSUNG HIT MEEEE"
"Samsung, did you hit Apple?"
"HE DID IT FIRST!!!"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.