Seriously?
Two questions...
1. What driving factor is there for a company to innovate new products if other companies can blatantly rip them off without repercussion?
2. How does innovation even come about if companies decide to copy the leader, instead of coming up with their own innovation?
This is a win for the consumer. Hands down.
More importantly, it's a win for me. I couldn't give a damn about how the "consumer" feels provided they keep buying Apple products.
1. Yes I understand that patents are
supposed to stimulate innovation.
Apples trade dress to me seems incredibly broad, the litmus test for trade dress infringement is confusion, samsung is the biggest consumer electronic manufacturer in the world, they make everything from tv's to dishwasher the idea that people were tricked into believing that any of the phones mentioned were the iphone. This completely ignores any brand equity samsung has built with consumers.
Apple having did innovate with a black rectangle, nor did it innovate with a grid of icons, that to me is not innovation but simply abuse of a broken patent system. I thought samsung did a good job of demonstrating prior art in all of these cases, products existed with similar physical and interface ideas, same with pinch to zoom, the bounce back is the only patent that seems legit to me.
Apple owning black rectangles with grids of icons is bad for innovation, the patents are too broad.
I think they copied, but i don't think that samsung now owns all rectangles with capacitive touch screens.
I wasn't aware you were a share holder so yeah for you good for the rest of us no.
Im not even sure how good it is for you, this is really a referendum on samsungs dumb skins, which have evolved past apple copycat status.
Also the idea that they didn't find a single, one of samsung pantest infringed upon? the 3g standard? crazy sounds to me the jury just decided that samsung was wrong and we won't give them ****.