>And, not everything that Apple claims infringes is infringing.
> Like trying to pass the app drawer as the primary home
>screen. Or that "scrolling at the same pace of a finger
>moving" is innovation.
>
>And seriously? Who doesn't look at a competitor's successful
>product and find ways to hit those same notes? It happened
>with televisions, the Walkman, the iPod, the Wii, and tons of
>other products. Imagine if Nintendo had just outright sued
>Sony for blatantly copying the Wii... that hurts *consumers*
>by limiting competition. That's been my whole position this
>entire time. The massive boom of the tech industry in general
>this past decade+ has been innovators building on top of other
>innovators. Software is especially tricky since, in the eyes
>of patent issuers/enforcers, it's a far more "nebulous"
>concept than hardware.

Improving upon an existing idea or invention is innovation. To play into your example, the Sony Eye, or whatever they call it, is like the IR bar for the Wii only in that they are the basis for capturing interaction between the gamer and the system; but the Sony Eye is a totally different technology based on far more advanced and innovative motion capture design than a simple IR light bar/controller.

This document isn't pointing out deficiencies with the S1 compared to the iPhone for ways to innovate PAST the iPhone or simply correct oversight, it is flat out saying "we need to do exactly what they are doing". There is nothing innovative about aping another device or piece of software.

From a legal standpoint, this document may be frivolous unless there are direct Apple held patents in question, but it surely doesn't do Samsung any favors towards their claims of innovating on their own.