Google comments on last week’s Apple vs. Samsung ruling

By , Aug 27, 2012

Just in case you missed out on the excitement last week, the high-profile Apple vs. Samsung trial ended with a bang. After 21 hours of deliberation, the jury ruled in Apple’s favor, awarding the company some $1 billion in damages.

Since then, we’ve heard official statements from both companies. Apple, of course, is thrilled with the outcome, while Samsung says it’s a loss for the American consumer. And over the weekend, Google finally commented on the verdict…

The Verge has the statement from Mountain View:

“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. The mobile industry is moving fast and all players — including newcomers — are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don’t want anything to limit that.”

Google is obviously trying to distance itself and its mobile operating system from Samsung’s loss, but it may not be that simple. As 9to5Mac points out, the Nexus S handset was found to be infringing on two patents in last week’s ruling.

Remember, the Nexus devices are pure Android — no TouchWiz or other software involved. And the two patents were Apple’s “rubber band” scrolling patent, and its interface patent related to gestures, which are both software-related and system-wide.

Yeah, if I were Google, I’d be nervous too. How long before Apple decides to go after HTC or other smaller Android partners? How long before it becomes too expensive and too risky to develop hardware for Google’s mobile platform?

  • Share:
  • Follow:
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Cannan/100000630162509 Steven Cannan

    Could They could take android down?

    • Pedro

      No they can not… Android is needed!!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/chucknaldo Chuck Man

        Apple fanboys need Android, there would be no need for their existence otherwise…

  • http://www.facebook.com/Salar.Aghaei Salar Aghaei

    As we all guessed, the final decision by the jury in the Apple vs. Samsung trail, affected the mobile industry. Now every company is afraid of their own shadows and this is not a good news for consumers.

    • http://twitter.com/JayshonTweaks Jason Duong

      Not Microsoft and Nokia! >:)

      • http://www.facebook.com/brian.pedersen.5496 Brian Pedersen

        LoL Nokia will soon die anyway

  • Geeks on Hugs

    It wasnt the “galaxy nexus s” there is no such device. It was the Nexus S which ships with Android 2.x.

    You’ll notice that the Galaxy Nexus was not included. Android 4.x, which is on the galaxy nexus, was designed with Apples position in mind.

    If anything the judgement will hopefully expedite manufacturers’ adoption of newer versions of Android which, in addition to being far cleaner of patent questions, is a vast improvement over Android 2.x.

    BTW the products found in violation profited Samsung by 21billion dollars. The judgement needs to be vastly increased in order to have a punitive affect. As it stands its just a reasonable cost of doing business. Maybe Samsung did it by design. They are not stupid.

    • Melvco

      I don’t think there’s any doubt that Samsung did this by design, and it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s made two or three times that amount over the years as a result of that decision.

      But you are assuming that this thing is over and done with. There are still months worth of appeals, and injunction hearings. The $1 billion damages could be tripled, or worse, and in addition, Samsung could see some of its products banned from the US.

      Furthermore, to say that Google is free and clear of worry at this point is, at the very least, extremely premature.

      • Geeks on Hugs

        No Android 4.x device was found to violate anything which backs up my point (possibly no 3.x devices too but I’m not sure about that). Further, Google is working on Key Lime Pie (the next version of Android and the second major release since 4.0) and I’m sure they are taking the judgement into account with that. Even if they weren’t Google doesn’t make any direct income from Android so it would be a very difficult lawsuit, even for Apple’s lawyers.

        Mobile is the fastest moving market in history and it’s truly a global phenomenon. We’re not the center of the world. Apple’s not going to be able to make hay out of this for long.

      • Melvco

        I think you’re forgetting that Apple is going after newer devices in a separate lawsuit, and is already making headway there.

        http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/06/29/apple-injunction-galaxy-nexus/

        The trial that just ended was over a lawsuit that essentially started over a year ago, when 4.x devices didn’t exist.

        http://www.idownloadblog.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-over-idevice-copycatting/

        I know, there’s a lot of them. It’s easy to get them confused.

      • Geeks on Hugs

        Time keeps on slippin’ into the future…

  • http://twitter.com/Jack_maredit Jackson Grong

    APPLE CAN TAKE DOWN ANDROID!!! With that patents!!!
    :D

    • Geeks on Hugs

      Unlike iOS with Apple, Android will survive even if Google fell! Android is free. Im not speaking economically but metaphysically.

      You can’t stop the signal!

  • http://twitter.com/imperiumSG Andy M.

    this scares me. i want good competition or else apple will not be in a hurry to innovate….

  • Gorgonphone

    android is lame as hell

    • http://twitter.com/oo7plasma Brandon

      have you tried it recently? Its actually made leaps and bounds in the past few years, I’d almost say its better than iOS now honestly.

      • Pedro

        lol… Seriously?!

      • http://twitter.com/oo7plasma Brandon

        Yes I am serious. Id also like to point out I own more iOS devices then Android devices

  • Gerard Hampton

    Apple are desperate and out of ideas. Having to sue to increase profits and limit competitors so they can continue to roll out old technology at their own slow pace. They’ve been stealing jail break ideas for the last few years also. When was apples last original idea? I like(d) both companies and have used both. This whole thing is just ridiculous and really turning me away from recommending apple to anyone. I used to stick up for apple when haters would complain about them, but now they’ve proven me wrong and really do look like the evil company people have told me they are. Pretty disappointing.

    • http://twitter.com/wonggt Oliver Wong

      What would you say if Samsung won?

      • Gerard Hampton

        There doesn’t have to be one winner.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sydney.liu.161 Sydney Liu

      Out of ideas? I think you meant Samsung. If you had designed something beautiful and inspiring and I stole it from you and make a profit. What would you say then? Furthermore, adding insult to injuries by having someone say to you ‘dude, you are out of ideas, just let Sydney copy..”

      Or what if you had a nifty idea that you presented to your lab professor and he stole it and published in highly regarded professional journal?

      Apple is just saying “Look, pay us some tiny amount for our design. It goes to show respect and appreciation for all the hard work we’ve put in so you can make a handsome profit.” Samsung told them off. And for that, the verdict is just.

      • Gerard Hampton

        Yup square icons are such an innovation and were never used before the iPhone. Big thanks to apple for that one.

  • Mysteroy3k

    LMFAO at folks that say it wouldn’t have competition cause of apple. So what do u call what apple did when they came out with iPhone while all other phones were just making the same. Thinking different creates competition not doing that same. Apple did that, now its up to other mobile makers to do the same. Apple don’t hold the ultimate way of making phones. But yet Samsung and other want to spend the lease amount off money to be different and branch off apple , at no cost

  • http://www.facebook.com/sydney.liu.161 Sydney Liu

    I agree with “Mysteroy3k”. Ppl who cannot afford the truly awe inspiring iphone usually flocks to defend copyist for obvious economic reasons – just like Samsung was motivated by taking a shortcut for not paying Apple royalties i.e can’t afford to pay apple. On another note, it really doesn’t matter how much R&D Samsung would have spent. Their so called designers just aren’t as talented. I believe that’s the main reason for Samsung to copy Apple. Case in point: Nokia – did not copy Apple and met with dire fate we all knew. RIM – laughed at iphone when it came out and 5 years later we all knew how RIM is doing. That’s the fate Samsung avoided by being a copyist. So yea, instead of losing an entire mobile phone business that would amounted to X billions loss, 1 B is not that bad as a punishment. If I were Samsung, I’d pay the royalties and pass it on to the consumer who likes ‘variety’.

    • http://twitter.com/djmobil2 djmobil2

      If you take some time and do a little research you’ll find out that the so called “apple original innovation” came out from apple’s infrigment on the dying Palm company patents. Apple took various Palm inventions and used them in the iphone for take smartphones to a new level. Palm couldn’t fight the big fish so they went to the drain. Now no one can say apple or use an apple as a symbol without being sued.
      We should issue a class action against apple for stealing a fruit’s name.lol

  • Dave Acklam

    It’s entirely ridiculous to allow a functionally different product to be ‘patented’ simply based on user controls… Apple lost this fight with Microsoft back in the 80s, and the result was superior software & computing products from both companies due to competition…. Imagine if Apple or Xerox (Xerox being the true inventor of the
    personal-computer GUI – even though Apple tried to claim they created
    it) had been allowed to patent the use of a mouse and onscreen pointer
    to control a computer?

    Apple is again trying to litigate away competition on the basis of various user-interface details, irrespective of the actual underlying mechanical functionality of the device…

    In the same way that you could patent a specific design of intermittent windshield-wiper for cars, but not all possible alternative inventions that *do* the same thing using a different mechanisim…

    You should not be able to patent interface gestures or elements – only specific underlying implementations. A competing company should be free to create the same appearance through different methods…

    There needs to be balance between securing the benefits of invention, and allowing free & open competition.

    Absurdities like this ruling and the Amazon ‘One Click’ patent of the ’00-years unfairly bias the playing field against competing firms.