American patent system is weird. Why is it fair for someone to patent "what" you do, what should be fair to patent is "how" you make this thing viable (e.g. the algorithms used, or something like that)?
As long as you don't use the mechanisms of your competition, you should be allowed to mimic the features present on other competitors' devices.
Considering this, it seems clear that Samsung would lose the dispute anyway.
> you should be allowed to mimic the features present on other competitors' devices.
To play the devil's advocate (as someone who hasn't taken a position on this ruling, but hates software patents in general):
Why? Apple appears to have spent a lot of time and effort on small details. Why does Samsung get to just copy that with far less time and effort invested? With design, the "how" is a crapton of iteration and careful thought. There may or may not be prior art in a lot of these examples (don't know enough to say), but where there isn't, why does Samsung automatically get to copy it for free? If these things are so obvious and trivial, why weren't they doing them before?
I agree that Apple should be able to protect what is looks like, not what it works like.
Sure this is a point of view (after all, the american patent system didn't come up out of nowhere). I believe that if you let people to patent things like 2-click buy, finger gestures, and stuff like that, you just close the door for competition. You effectively prohibit people of making things like that, because even though you come up with a completely different mechanism to provide the same interactive interface, you have to pay for an abstract idea.
Maybe Samsung should be able to copy it (the concept) for free because that is what is called competition. In an ideal scenario, to stay ahead in competition you should continuously come up with new and better ideas. If you competitors suck so badly that they must copy you everytime, you'll stay ahead anyway.
Copying is competition in the same way that, if you want to attract your friend's girlfriend, you should buy copies of your friend's entire wardrobe and dress like your friend, talk like your friend, and walk like your friend.
We are only discussing stupid patents in the software industry. I don't see any car maker suing the hell out of one another because their cars "have doors that open just like ours" or "their wheels move steady at 100km/h like ours".
This is all stupid, boring and sad. The IT world feels like a big bad joke.
As long as you don't use the mechanisms of your competition, you should be allowed to mimic the features present on other competitors' devices.
Considering this, it seems clear that Samsung would lose the dispute anyway.