FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[atommo]

Maybe you're right, but I always thought the internet network worked like this:

Your computer > gateway [internet hub] > switch > router > satellites > web server

Or something like that.
Anyway this is off topic and I haven't got much more knowledge to back me up so yeah.

[myownalias]

Just for the record it goes like this:

Your Computer -> Your Router/Modem (Gateway) -> ISP's DNS Server (resolves domain name to IP address) -> Fibre Optic Cable -> Data Centre -> Data Centre Router -> Switch -> Server...

There maybe other nodes in the chain depending on distance travelled but this is the core of how the Internet works!

Anyway, back from Apple stuff!

[Hammer278]

They're flying higher than ever...

Apple wins patent lawsuit
Jury orders Samsung to pay rival $1 billion.

Saturday, August 25, 2012

SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) — After a year of scorched-earth litigation, a jury decided yesterday that Samsung ripped off the innovative technology used by Apple to create its revolutionary iPhone and iPad.

The jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1.05 billion. An appeal is expected.

Apple Inc. filed its patent infringement lawsuit in April 2011 and engaged legions of the country's highest-paid patent lawyers to demand $2.5 billion from its top smartphone competitor. Samsung Electronics Co. fired back with its own lawsuit seeking $399 million.

During closing arguments, Apple attorney Harold McElhinny claimed Samsung was having a "crisis of design" after the 2007 launch of the iPhone, and executives with the South Korean company were determined to illegally cash in on the success of the revolutionary device.

Samsung's lawyers countered that it was simply and legally giving consumers what they want: Smartphones with big screens. They said Samsung didn't violate any of Apple's patents and further alleged innovations claimed by Apple actually were created by other companies.

Samsung has emerged as one of Apple's biggest rivals and has overtaken Apple as the leading smartphone maker.

Samsung's Galaxy line of phones run on Android, a mobile operating system that Google Inc. has given out for free to Samsung and other phone makers.

Samsung conceded that Apple makes great products but said it doesn't have a monopoly on the design of rectangle phones with rounded corners, which it claimed it had created.

The trial came after each side filed a blizzard of legal motions and refused advisories by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh to settle the dispute out of court.

Deliberations by the jury of seven men and two women began Wednesday.

Samsung has sold 22.7 million smartphones and tablets that Apple claimed uses its technology. McElhinny said those devices accounted for $8.16 billion in sales since June 2010.

Apple and Samsung combined account for more than half of global smartphone sales.

As part of its lawsuit, Apple also demanded that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market.

From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts viewed Samsung as the underdog in the case. Apple's headquarters is a mere 10 miles from the courthouse, and jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where Apple's late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer.

Although the legal and technological issues were complex, patent expert Alexander Poltorak previously said the case would likely boil down to whether jurors believe Samsung's products look and feel almost identical to Apple's iPhone and iPad.

To overcome that challenge at trial, Samsung's lawyers argued that many of Apple's claims of innovation were either obvious concepts or ideas stolen from Sony Corp. and others. Experts called that line of argument a high-risk strategy because of Apple's reputation as an innovator.

Apple's lawyers argued there is almost no difference between Samsung products and those of Apple, and presented internal Samsung documents they said showed that it copied Apple designs. Samsung lawyers insisted that several other companies and inventors had previously developed much of the Apple technology at issue.

During closing arguments at the trial, Samsung attorney Charles Verhoeven called that demand ridiculous and asked the jury to award Samsung $399 million after claiming Apple used Samsung Electronics Co. technology without proper compensation.

The U.S. case, the latest skirmish between the two tech giants, is one of some 50 lawsuits among myriad telecommunications companies jockeying for position in the burgeoning $219 billion market for smartphones and computer tablets.

______________________________________

I almost bought Samsung shares 2 weeks ago....

[darwin dali]

$1 billion - not too shabby. Could that be a problem for Samsung or is their war chest big enough to absorb this?

[LewEngBridewell]

[myownalias]

$1 billion - not too shabby. Could that be a problem for Samsung or is their war chest big enough to absorb this?

I'm sure that Samsung can absorb this amount; but the bigger problem is that Apple will for sure request that all offending devices be placed under an import ban.

The funniest thing, according to the BBC website, Apple buy a large amount of their components for the iPhone/iPad from Samsung.

Apple remains one of the South Korean company's biggest customers buying computer chips and, reportedly, screens.

Apple still have to fight Google/Motorola Mobility in a separate patent case, which could mean Apple products would be banned from sale in the US!

[darwin dali]

$1 billion - not too shabby. Could that be a problem for Samsung or is their war chest big enough to absorb this?

I'm sure that Samsung can absorb this amount; but the bigger problem is that Apple will for sure request that all offending devices be placed under an import ban.

The funniest thing, according to the BBC website, Apple buy a large amount of their components for the iPhone/iPad from Samsung.

Apple remains one of the South Korean company's biggest customers buying computer chips and, reportedly, screens.

Apple still have to fight Google/Motorola Mobility in a separate patent case, which could mean Apple products would be banned from sale in the US!

I see a merger/take over coming if Samsung can't get this reversed...

[LRW]

$1 billion - not too shabby. Could that be a problem for Samsung or is their war chest big enough to absorb this?

I'm sure that Samsung can absorb this amount; but the bigger problem is that Apple will for sure request that all offending devices be placed under an import ban.

The funniest thing, according to the BBC website, Apple buy a large amount of their components for the iPhone/iPad from Samsung.

Apple remains one of the South Korean company's biggest customers buying computer chips and, reportedly, screens.

Apple still have to fight Google/Motorola Mobility in a separate patent case, which could mean Apple products would be banned from sale in the US!

I see a merger/take over coming if Samsung can't get this reversed...

With Apple buying Samsung?

[darwin dali]

$1 billion - not too shabby. Could that be a problem for Samsung or is their war chest big enough to absorb this?

I'm sure that Samsung can absorb this amount; but the bigger problem is that Apple will for sure request that all offending devices be placed under an import ban.

The funniest thing, according to the BBC website, Apple buy a large amount of their components for the iPhone/iPad from Samsung.

Apple remains one of the South Korean company's biggest customers buying computer chips and, reportedly, screens.

Apple still have to fight Google/Motorola Mobility in a separate patent case, which could mean Apple products would be banned from sale in the US!

I see a merger/take over coming if Samsung can't get this reversed...

With Apple buying Samsung?

or becoming a major shareholder.

[LRW]

If that happens I may buy them both out......

[myownalias]

I suspect that Samsung won't merge with Apple no-matter what, I can see Samsung merging with Google but not Apple.

Apple are claiming that it should be able to use Motorola Mobility's tech under the FRAND licence; if US courts rule in favour of Apple in the Motorola Vs Apple case then this Samsung Vs Apple case also has to be reinvestigated; surely if Apple is allowed to use Motorola patented tech under FRAND, Samsung should be able to use Apple Patented design & tech under FRAND licencing!

[atommo]

Hm all this reminds me a lot of the Motorola vs Microsoft case where Motorola say Microsoft used Motorola software in their products. Sure, even if they do, the main reason people make these claims is for money. Theres some people out there who might trip on a pavement and sue the person who owns the land. It happens, an old man's daughter tried to sue the place one of my family members works at because he tripped on the ground.

[myownalias]

This Apple Versus Android Device Maker is not about money, it's about Apple monopolizing the market through legal means. The way the patent systems works, we'll end up going back to the stone age as no-one can sell any product because of infringing on someone or another's patent! These companies could simply work out a licencing system and compete for market share!

I have just had a thought, if Apple use Samsung Parts for their iOS devices, and if these are vital integrated parts, Samsung can refuse to sell to Apple, and leave Apple 8-balled!

[darwin dali]

This Apple Versus Android Device Maker is not about money, it's about Apple monopolizing the market through legal means. The way the patent systems works, we'll end up going back to the stone age as no-one can sell any product because of infringing on someone or another's patent! These companies could simply work out a licencing system and compete for market share!

I have just had a thought, if Apple use Samsung Parts for their iOS devices, and if these are vital integrated parts, Samsung can refuse to sell to Apple, and leave Apple 8-balled!

I'm sure Apple could source those parts somewhere else (China, Taiwan).

[myownalias]

I have just had a thought, if Apple use Samsung Parts for their iOS devices, and if these are vital integrated parts, Samsung can refuse to sell to Apple, and leave Apple 8-balled!

I'm sure Apple could source those parts somewhere else (China, Taiwan).

But would those parts be the same high quality? are those parts patented? hence why Apple buy them instead of making them in-house at their Chinese cheap labour camps!

Liked this video about what people perceive Apple to have invented!
[youtube]wFeC25BM9E0[/youtube]