Samsung Galaxy Nexus

A day after a federal appeals court overturned the (long since already stayed) injunction against the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, the company released this statement via its "Samsung Tomorrow" blog:

Samsung welcomes this reversal by the Federal Circuut as yesterday’s decision confirms that the role of patent law is to protect innovation and not to unreasonably stifle competition and restrict consumer choice.  We will continue to take all appropriate measures to ensure the availability of our innovative products.

Read the full order here.

There are 29 comments

TauSigmaNova says:

the role of patent law is to protect innovation and not to unreasonably stifle competition and restrict consumer choice

Get it yet apple?

h20squirter says:


CountryDevil says:

I don't think this could have been said any better....

pianopoet says:

Are you sure you are talking about Apple and not Samsung. Competition and innovation should be consumers choice but everyone needs to play by the rules and patents are supposed to protect products from copying and infringement. we will have to wait to see how the appeals court makes their final rulings regarding samsung and apple

Yes, he is talking to Apple, because Apple is the one who (Primarily) sues looking for an injunction as a means to eliminate competition instead of monetary rewards and reaching an agreement like the (one time accused monopolitsitc Corporate Giant) Microsoft does.

Apple; such an appropriate name. They are the proverbial forbidden fruit from which mankind should never have partaken of . . . .

JobiWan144 says:

Haha nice Biblical reference

Yes, he is talking to Apple, because Apple is the one who (Primarily) sues looking for an injunction as a means to eliminate competition instead of monetary rewards and reaching an agreement like the (one time accused monopolistic Corporate Giant) Microsoft does.

Apple; such an appropriate name. They are the proverbial forbidden fruit from which mankind should never have partaken of . . . .

movielover76 says:

Patent law, especially when it comes to software is a very broken system. The patent office doesn't seem to be able to identify something that is obvious and allows apple and other companies to patent ridiculously obvious things that are in no way apples invention. Like clicking on a link and presenting the user with a list of programs to open that link with.
I'm pretty sure a list of programs for a file was in windows 95. Plus the patent system ignores a basic truth of software design, most software is built upon design concepts from software that came before it, every application does not build a completely novel interface. and things like opening a link, searching a device. These are obvious ideas that have existed in countless operating systems, it should in no way be patent-able.

moises1204 says:

Don't forget rectangle and rounded corner shapes!! like to know the moron that approved that one!!!

OrionAntares says:

I think they were actually attacking them for that as a "trademark" issue.

cashxx says:

"Patent wars stifle copying, promote innovation."

There is no innovation when all a company is doing is following and copying another company.

Innovation comes when a company does its own R&D and comes out with something of its own like a new device, etc.

Apple is the only one innovating these days.....Microsoft is finally doing its own Google and partners are yesterdays Microsoft, all they know is to copy Apple and not innovate!

BrianDigital says:

So your saying rounded corners that us present in furniture, appliances, etc. Us a valid patent. Also your saying that searching to indexes at the same time (example search and search ads) are valid because Apple invented them. Also abbervating the word application to app, are also valid patent that Apple should have complete control over the use of?

I get your point, but

brendilon says:

The abbreviation of application to 'app' in the 'App Store' does not fall under patent law. It's not an invention. It falls under Trademark law (or possibly copyright, I have trouble distinguishing between the two).

jameslepable says:

Which also got overturned because it was a TM on something which was to generic and descriptive. "App Store" it is describing what it is. Best excuse was apple's lawyers claiming that it wasn't a store for apps :')

Unibrow says:

best sarcastic post I've ever seen, good job

moises1204 says:

how long did it took apple to put your brain back in to your skull?

xKrNMBoYx says:

I'm pretty sure Samsung designs and actually releases more items (innovating products) then Apple does with their small line of computers and tablet/phones.

Computers (Laptops,Desktops,Slates,Monitors)
Phones (Smarphone, Feature Phone [Flip, Slide])
Blue-Ray/DVD Players
Home Theatre (Spearks,CD Player)
LED Lights

Those are just the products. There one of the OEM's that usually are the first out with a new piece of technology (New RAM specs (DDR3,DDR4), Cheaper SSD Technology.)

Whatever Apple wan't their iPhone to do, Samsung basically has been working on getting "that specific thing" to work.

No one is really innovating these days as far as phones go. The iPhone 5 was not innovative. All it is a thinner, lighter phone, with a good A6 SoC designed by Apple. The original iPod, iPhone, Macbook Air, iMacs were innovative, now they just refresh it with no changes. Their software is the same especially their Mobile OS.

Patent's are suppose to promote innovation, but Apple patents things that don't even fully function neither do they exist. While Apple can think of an idea and start patenting it, someone else could be 75% there. Even if a company has a patent, I can't see how they could sue another company if the feature is not exactly the same. Meaning looks, feel, and the programming code. If you took to long to release something then it's your fault that someone else finished and released it before you.

Also how was Microsoft copying Apple? Because they started making computers?

jameslepable says:

Software shouldn't be patentable because it is an idea. Patenting stuff like slide to unlock is patenting an idea of it. The is no other way to do that function without infringing on the idea of moving your finger on a TOUCH screen phone. The is no such thing as software patient such as that in the uk because the courts understand the difference between ideas and products. Now if Samsung or anyone else copies apples slide to unlock pixel by pixel, line of code then of course they infringe. But doing it differently (looks code) should be aloud.

sublimaze says:

"Samsung welcomes this reversal by the Federal Circuit as yesterday’s decision confirms that...the U.S. patent system is FUBAR, and patent abuse will continue so long as corporations continue to invest more resources in lawsuits, rather than innovation and letting the competitive free market decide which products succeed."

Fixed it for you, Samsung. No need to beat around the bush, just say what needs to be said.

Apple hasn't been innovating on the iPhone for a while. Bigger screen? Android has had it longer. Notification window? Yup Android had that first. Apple is great for people who need simplicity. Great smart phone for a teenager or older person trying to get into a smart phone I'll give them that. But you just don't get the freedom and customization that you do on Android. I've owned both and won't be going to Apple again anytime soon. That's the great thing about having choices. Apple should stop trying to strong arm people into their choice.

Xanth18 says:

Yes, the iPhone is a wonderful BEGINNERS device. :)

jameslepable says:

I would beg to differ. The best beginners devices is a cheap hackable devices imo. Mine the lg gt540 (dreadful phone) was awesome because it made me want to learn about android stuff like coding and just learning that you could do more than play angry birds on a phone. That you could actually do computer type stuff on it.

If someone asked me which phone to get I would recommend the HTC onex/s, gs3, gn or LGnexus 4. They will be worth the extra money than a cheap android. Probably still cheaper than the current iphone and can do more stuff. Also android has got to the point (at least for me) where it is less laggy than my laptop.

Mikey47 says:

Those who say Apple doesn't innovate are completely wrong. They are constantly coming up with new and novel ways to make it look like they are being copied left and right and in getting judges to agree with them.

"Rounded corners" is a patentable design? There are millions of examples of devices having rounded corners long before the iPhone.

vinny jr says:

Finaly the court system worked. Apple is on a slow downward path due to lack of innovation. Because Apple has realized they are no longer creating and innovating they decided littigation isthe answer. The I-Phone 5 is a collection of yesterday's ideasand parts. Apple is operating scared and it shows. Apple needs to sell phones, Google doesn't. I predict over the next few years Apples numbers will drop dramatically. Their days are numbered, see you in the resr view mirror. What goes around comes around. Just ask the Woz.

sublimaze says:

When Project Glass goes public, iPhone will become obsolete (as a communication device) practically overnight. Apple will continue to sell to the preteen & geriatric crowds, and anyone else that doesn't need/want the next generation of mobile communication, but as a communication platform iPhone will become the next Blackberry.

Karma is a bitch.

xKrNMBoYx says:

I don't know about obsolete. If the company exists making other good products then that will keep their phones and sale from going down all the way.

Cheetah23 says:

Will this bring back the universal search on the GS3?

icebike says:

Universal search patent is effectively dead as far as banning phones from here on.
Reading the decision makes it clear that the adults have stepped in and said you can't ask for bans due to some frivolous feature, without showing that there will be actual HARM.

This decision goes WAY PAST apple vs Samsung.

Import bans and the judges that issue them just got a b1tchslap from on high.

THIS... AND +1. Well-said, icebike.