Hacker News Reader

Comment by arrrg | Hacker News Reader

I think the trial had a normal result given the legal framework. Sometimes trials like this might go a bit this or that way, but in general they will have results like this.

My own position on this is very simple: All (yes, all) patents should be abolished. The current law is the problem, not Apple or Samsung or the Jury or the judge.

I also think what Samsung did was – in part – morally reprehensible, but should have no legal consequences.

View on HN

But surely Apple deserves to be compensated for all the development work they did. Who's going to develop the next iPhone caliber innovation if the only reward they'll receive is to become the wealthiest company in history? Oh wait...

and people act like all Samsung did was copy. You realize they wouldn't be the most successful Android OEM if they didn't do their own innovation as well. And no, people aren't rushing out the buy Samsung phones because they look like iPhones (I mean they don't even have an Apple on the back, should be pretty obvious to anyone that it isn't an iPhone), they are buying them because they are cheaper and can do 90% of what an iPhone can do. Changing that to 88% (removing the two behavior patents) isn't going to make a dent in Samsungs ability to sell to the masses.

More like they can do 120% of what iOS can do. It's the UI mistakes that hurt them now. TouchWiz and S-Apps demonstrate innovation, but some of it is extremely disorganized (phone app) or painfully copied from iOS (S Voice).

i was referring more to the Samsung phones that run 2.2 or 2.3. The ones that run 4.0 and 4.1 cost the exact same as the iPhone, so people who buy phones like the SG3 (and 6 months ago, the SG2) are doing so because they CHOSE Android, not because it looks like an iPhone.

Android 2.2 & 2.3 still had more features that iOS.

It was just ugly as hell.

Hm, I wouldn't be so sure... most "normal" people out there who don't read HN every day can't really tell the difference between an ipad and a galaxy tablet. My mom, for example, refers to both tablets as an ipad. She uses an ipad to read her news sites but when she tried to use my galaxy tab, she was confused there was no browser on there. I've experienced a similar thing on the train as well, people would point at my 10.1 tab and ask if that's the new ipad... tech people can sniff out brands from a mile away. You may laugh, but it's a different world out there. Back when I owned a motorola razr, I had people ask me if my phone was a new nokia model... nokia didn't even make anything remotely similar to the razr. These people have no concept of product names, they refer to tablets as ipads and phones as nokia.

Well, on the other side I saw lots of ads for the iPad on tv and I don't remember even one about other tablets (I don't know, it may be different in other countries), but because of that, every tablet will an iPad to normal people's eyes

For people who believe that patents should be abolished: how do you see an ARM-like company existing without patent protection? Or do you think there is no value in being able to transact in designs?

The designs would surely be copyrightable.

> Or do you think there is no value in being able to transact in designs?

I believe that patents should be abolished.

There is value in being able to transact designs. There are costs in the patent system. Court cases for example.

The question is "does the marginal benefits of patents over the alternatives, justify the costs?". And sometimes it might and other times it won't.

It's harder to build an arm processor than just looking at one from some random phone you bought.

Most companies are going to need assistance from arm which arm can still charge for. Additionally the design can be copyrighted.

I ask for reform of the patent system, but I'm not sure how it should be reformed.

The existence of patent trolls is, surely, evidence that the system is horribly broken. Who is protected when a non-trading entity with no product is allowed to own patents and sue other companies for infringement?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com