Good job Apple. You fucked the world...

This is why I don't buy Apple products in the first place... their ethics as a company are not exactly news. Don't be surprised at what happens when you give money to a tyrant.<p>Since I'm probably about to be downvoted out of existence by Apple fans, it was nice knowing you HN.

Apple did what they had to do and Samsung did not just try to solve a usability problem, they willfully copied Apple even when they knew there were patents on these features. The reason Microsoft is exempt is because they licensed rights to these patents and agreed to steer clear of the aesthetics of the iPhone which they did with Nokia's version of Windows Phone. And I think the Metro UI is creative and innovated while Android and what Samsung is actually devoid of creativity and innovation.<p>Given all the years that Samsung has been making phones they could have come up with these solutions but they didn't. If tap to zoom was so obvious why didn't they do it? Why was Apple the first to do it?<p>Apple has been screwed before. And mostly by Microsoft copying features and putting them into Windows while marginalizing Apple just enough to keep their market share small enough so they were not a threat, but big enough so they could survive and create new features which Microsoft could "borrow" time and again. Innovation is a process and Apple does a good job of doing it incrementally with each OS X update. The original OS X did not have gestures. They worked on the iPad and iPhone for 6 years before releasing it. They carefully worked out the gestures, which the Open Source community was experimenting with but was completely ignored by Microsoft. Now Apple's OS X relies on a solid trackpad with lots of gestures in Mountain Lion and Microsoft is jumping in with many similar features in Windows 8 to make it a tablet-friendly OS. Without the patent protects Apple would continue to be marginalized and since they are known as a strong innovator I think it is best for them to defend their work as much as possible.<p>Consider what The Oatmeal's review or Telsa's contributions and how Edison took advantage of him because Tesla did not protect his work with patents while Edison leveraged the system as much as possible for his personal benefit. Tesla felt his work should benefit the world. The result was that Edison won, for now.<p><a href="http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla" rel="nofollow">http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla</a><p>Apple's second act under Steve Jobs has been to fight to protect the hard work done by it's employees and continue pushing the envelope.<p>This is not the end of creativity and innovation for other companies. It is insulting and disgusting to suggest that. Copying Apple is not innovation. The likely result here will be more unique offerings from the Android OEMs who will be forced to blaze their own trail just as Microsoft has done with Windows Phone.

The level of Apple fanboyism on Hacker News is really evident in comment threads like these.

It's 'just business'. Agreeing or not doesn't really matter and the 3 people here not buying Apple products because of it also doesn't matter. Apple makes (in my opinion) great hardware: I haven't found a better iPad-like or Air-like or even Macbook-like. I like the Lenovo t420 but I like my Macbook more; I really don't care at all about looks or brand; it's just nice to work with IMHO.<p>This kind of 'practice' has been going on for a looooong time. All 'younger' people should read about MS in the 80s &#38; 90s. You didn't see it and maybe you think they are great now and Windows 7/8 is so much better than mac/lin etc; read up on the history. They used to be hardcore evil. If HN was around in those times, there would be stories of disgust and misery on the frontpage every single day. It's nothing new.<p>Companies defend their backyard in any way possible and they just add power-points to their company by taking this kind of action. If they didn't take this action or they would've lost, maybe Samsung could just 1 to 1 copy their products and get away with that. Would that be good for consumers? I don't think so. I am against patents and i'm actually against all patents; I don't believe they are for the greater good of humanity. If you cannot get your 'invested research money/time' (which is bullshit for most patents) back by execution, maybe you should just sell the entire research to a company that can and not try to peddle it yourself.<p>But as long as this kind of shit exists, don't worry about it. It doesn't affect you nor 'the consumer', Samsung has to say that as 1000s and 1000s of companies did before them who lost. In reality Samsung just pays something per infringing product sold to Apple and that's it. Hopefully cases like this will have companies fighting harder against patents and make pacts to open up patents for the real greater good. Not sure if I'll see that in my lifetime though :)

There has been a lot of things (and a lot of nonsense) written about patents recently.<p>To me, this piece was spot on. A simply expressed reminder of why patents (at least, some) are evil.

Good job Apple?<p>All your complaints are about the patent system. Good job Congress. Good job Representatives. Good job voters. Good job you.<p>Focus calls for change where the change is due.

"Rectangles with rounded corners are everywhere! Just look around this room!" -Steve Jobs

No company should be able to patent a grid of icons, a pinch-to-zoom gesture or shape of a phone. Fair enough I do agree to an extent that Samsung infringed, but the incompetence of the jury in this case will make for a delicious appeal and halt the celebrations.<p>Some of the solutions like pinch-to-zoom, etc would have mostly been solutions another company would have eventually come up with anyway.

"The things that Apple has highlighted are not inventions. It's simply solutions to common problems."<p>Name a consumer innovation that isn't a solution to a common problem.<p>Don't hate the player, hate the game. And if you really don't like the game, go change the game.

All this energy complaining about Apple in the law courts is ridiculous. Of course Apple shouldn't own the market using the law courts. But it is a legitimate business practice to protect yourself in the courts because if they don't they tacitly approve of every other company 'copying them'.<p>Everyone does it, (google bought motorola for their patents). If you don't like it talk to the WTO, congress, parliament, UN and lobby to get it changed.<p>Every company, I am sure, would rather spend their time and efforts creating great things, no one more than Apple spends their time creating things of beauty. CEOs don't get in to CEO-ing so they can pay hoards of patent lawyers to sit in court all day.

Every invention solves a problem, or else it has no reason to exist. Patents are supposed to protect the person who found a particular solution first; this isn't new.<p>I'm sure it was wrong of Eli Whitney to patent the cotton gin, too, since that's clearly the only way to quickly separate cotton seeds and fibers.

Let's not blame Apple for a court's decision. Blame the court.

Whoa, cowboy! It's all just swings and roundabouts. Stop, count to 10 and breathe. Then remember what's really important; family and friends.