Today will be a day marked in the history of both technology and lawsuits. In an unprecedented and controversial decision, a nine person jury found Samsung guilty patent infringement of several Apple patents related to cell phone and tablet products. Let the war of haters and lovers begin, and here is my take on it.
I've been reading a lot of forums and comments, and the first impression I'm getting is that time will be a better judge than the nine people or any of the people who have been throwing their opinions. One thing for sure is from now and on corporations will now think twice when copying similar products from their competitors. I'm going to throw my two cents and try to analyze the decision, its causes and consequences.
The first thing that we must understand is the stature of the law and patents. Patents exist for a reason and that reason is to honor the originality, creativeness, work and effort people (or corporations) put into developing something. That's as simple as it is... to a certain extent. Now how bad is the case of Samsung against Apple? Well, in a nutshell Apple submitted a lawsuit that states Samsung "copied" some design and software characteristics from their iPhone and implemented them in their cell phones. So let's back up one second and put things in perspective.
I wonder if back in the late 1800s, what would have happened if Fiat would have sued Mercedes Benz for taking their idea of a 4-wheel car that ran with a gasoline engine (or the other way around). I could already visualize the picture: "Hey, why can't you come up with an alternative fuel source, oh and by the way why don't you place your tires somewhere else as well?". The case here is that objectively speaking, there aren't many ways of building a car: I mean, you have to have two pair of wheels aligned, running on a fuel engine, and controlled by a steering wheel. Another example would be Airbus suing Boeing; again, you can only put together an airplane in a very limited amount of ways. Another -more recent example- would be Samsung suing LG for their design of LCD 42 inch TVs, but once again, you can only put together a TV in a certain number of ways: at the end of the day, they'll all have a rectangular screen, speakers, power buttons and a remote control. Most of Apple haters will use these examples as solid arguments to defend Samsung, but doing so is insufficient.
The cell phone industry however is a bit different. If you watch Steve Jobs' presentation of the iPhone back in 2007, he makes a very bold statement when he mentions how different (and complicated) smartphones were: the only thing they had in common was the huge keypad with 20 or 30 keys, but other than that the designs were quite different in the sense of colors, weight, software, functionality and so on. Comparing Samsung's latest cell phone to the iPhone is like comparing two 42 inch LCD TVs from say Sony and LG, in the sense that if you cover the logo underneath of the screen, it would be very hard to tell which is which. So what Apple is looking for is to see that their competitors are able to develop something original and different from their products. That is all they are asking for.
Like it or not, Samsung made a move and the move implicated a lot of risk: they didn't re-invent the wheel. Yes, you may argue that their phone is faster or better than the iPhone, but in the end it is nothing else but a carbon copy of the iPhone.
The physical design is astonishingly similar to the iPhone.
The buttons are conveniently located in the same place as the iPhone.
The home screen is similar to the iPhone.
The concept of fav-icons is identical to the iPhone.
Contrary to what happens with cars, airplanes and TVs, there ARE many different ways to design and put together a cell phone and Steve Jobs proved it during his iPhone presentation. The only thing in common cell phones can have is that they make calls, but apart from that, it is up to the manufacturer to conceive a unique product. Before the iPhone, a Blackberry was different from a Nokia, or a Sony.
So is Apple being greedy or unethical by suing Samsung and asking for $2 billion? Not at all. They are making a clear case that has concrete evidence that despite their contractual relations, Samsung took advantage of them. Do we have to agree with the decision? We have to. Yes, prices may go up and this can set up the base for a monopoly in the cell phone industry, but nothing anywhere suggests that other competitors may be able to create a new innovative design of a cell phone. So why not play a fair game? Apple did when they came up with the iMac.
As I stated at the beginning of my entry, I do believe time will be the better judge, but all in all I am quite sure that this will go as an important lesson in the history of corporations and research and development.
