Innovation, Patents, and Drugs (I Assume Samsung is on Drugs)

Jim Dalrymple:

What Apple’s win prohibits Samsung, and others, from doing is blatantly copying Apple’s design. There is nothing in the ruling that says Samsung can’t continue to innovate.

Great post from Dalrymple that perfectly shows just how far “news” outlets are willing to stretch the truth to craft the perfect anti-Apple headline for their stories.

As I’ve said, the most interesting part of this verdict is going to be to watch how Google and its “partners” react. So far, here are the reactions I have seen from Google and Samsung.


The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don’t relate to the core Android operating system, and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office.

Roughly translated means: “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”

Samsung’s internal memo on the case has several interesting points in it:

We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers.

To me this opening salvo sounds massively important. “Had been” a customer? So is Samsung cutting off the supply of iOS device parts to Apple, or is Apple shifting to not use suppliers that also compete with them?

We’re not talking about a few small parts, we are talking about multi-billion dollar business deals. So is Samsung letting it out that not only do they owe Apple a billion dollars, but now they have effectively lost Apple’s business? That would be devastating news to Samsung’s stock.

The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple’s designs. These courts also recognized our arguments concerning our standards patents.

“The U.S. is just being an ass.”

History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.

Huh? This seems horribly made up. Further, what’s Samsung’s innovation: being lightening fast at copying the market leader?

We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritize innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt.

To me I read this as: If Apple continues to succeed, then consumers clearly want innovative products, and we will prove this by starting to lose money and make products that are not innovative, and therefore are products no one wants.

Sometimes it’s just best to keep your mouth shut, or remain vague. Two things Samsung should have copied from Apple.


Just saw this piece from Seth Weintraub, which argues that this is about more than Samsung — it reaches into Android too. As Weintraub notes with the findings against some Nexus phones:

These are software patents and there is no Samsung in pure Android software.

Ouch, if I am an Android “partner”, I am calling Apple and then Microsoft today.

Originally posted for members on: August 27, 2012
Follow along on RSS,, or Twitter.
~I would appreciate it if you considered becoming a member.~