Monday, August 27, 2012

Implications of Apple's lawsuit win over Samsung

It is a sad day indeed when  anyone can claim copyright over how a device or an appliance looks and operates. Take the case of Apple's lawsuit against Samsung. These are what Apple claims copyright ownership, for which Samsung has to pay US$1bil:

*(i) Apple’s bounce-back effect when a user tries to scroll beyond the end of a list or image; (ii) Apple’s pinching and zooming scroll feature; and (iii) Apple’s tap-to-zoom feature. Regarding design, Samsung infringed: (i) Apple’s iPhone’s face, screen and speaker slot; (ii) the ornamental design and shape of the iPhone’s face, rounded corners and bezel; and (iii) the icon arrangement on the home screen. 

Computerworld has a good article** on the implications of the Apple win over Samsung. I'd like to echo the same sentiments here. As a consumer, I like to see standardization. It actually promotes competition more than it stifles creativity. We are able to readily drive different cars because the brakes and pedals are all in the same place, to quote the Computerworld article. We are not locked in to any one brand of electrical appliances when they all look and work in a similar way. For Apple to claim copyright over how its iPhone looks and operates, this certainly violates our freedom to choose, and it creates a precedence when non-standardization becomes the norm. 

With Apple's win in mind, when you walk into the electrical shops next time, try to spot ANY appliance that does not in one way or the other imitate one another in looks and operating mode. How dare Apple! Perhaps we should all boycott Apple products. It has finally met its match and it wants to stifle its competitor, by hook or by crook. Such a company should not be allowed to exist. Shame on you, Apple.



No comments: