Court set to rule on Apple vs Samsung case in a few minutes

Status
Not open for further replies.
my consumer choice was the most infringing device in the entire trial based on jury awards ($130M)





6B0ry.jpg

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390&repost=1

"Once you determine that Samsung violated the patents," Ilagan said, "it's easy to just go down those different [Samsung] products because it was all the same. Like the trade dress, once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flatscreen with the Bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel. But we took our time. We didn't rush. We had a debate before we made a decision. Sometimes it was getting heated."

Bezel = infringing! This is the most inept and idiotic jury I've ever heard.
 
Nothing indicates that they did discuss Prior art again, lest of all this verdict!

But I guess it helps the narrative to some in here to believe Apple did nothing wrong, as they stand in line for thier yearly iPhone update.
Bzzt, try again.

One of Apple's clean sweeps in the verdict was that all Samsung's smartphones were found to infringe on Apple's patent covering bounce-back. In short, this is what lets a user scroll beyond the edge of an image, Web page, or list, and have it bounce back onto the screen.

"We were thinking Apple filed a patent for bounce-back, (and) that's where we got stuck...because (of) prior art," Ilagan said. He added that the group eventually found some of Samsung's prior art "significantly different" from the technology outlined in Apple's bounce-back patent.

http://news.cnet.com/2300-13579_3-10013512-4.html

SAN JOSE, Calif.-- Just minutes after the nine jurors in the Apple Inc. AAPL +0.09% and Samsung Electronics Co. 005930.SE -0.93% patent trial began deliberating last week, they were stuck. It was seven "yes" votes to two "no" votes on the first question they faced: whether Samsung violated an Apple patent related to the bounceback action a touch-screen makes.

With the votes tallied on a white board, they decided to review the evidence, recounted juror Manuel Ilagan in an interview. They powered up a video of a computerized touchscreen tablet that had been developed by Mitsubishi 8306.TO -1.60% that Samsung asserted proved Apple didn't come up with the idea first and that its patent should be invalidated.

They were huddled around a large oval table in a conference room at the federal courthouse here. On one side there was a large white board. On the other, a refrigerator and coffee machine.

Mr. Ilagan, who is 59, said they watched the video "very, very carefully" but decided to move on when the two weren't swayed. "We didn't want to get bogged down," said Mr. Ilagan, who works in marketing for a company that makes circuit boards.

The bounceback patent, which the jurors eventually decided unanimously that Samsung infringed, was one of a handful of sticking points in the otherwise smooth and surprisingly quick 22 hours of deliberations, according to Mr. Ilagan's account.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444270404577612160843420578.html
 
I personally don't like this decision (even though I think Samsung has been pretty blatant in its copying at times) but the amount of bitter tears and fanboyism in this thread is pretty amazing.

While the droid fanboys are acting like this is the biggest legal error since Korematsu even stranger are some Apple fanboys who are acting like they just won their "OJ prize". I will never understand how people can get so attached to consumer electronics corporations.
 
I think the point is rather that when the time does come to upgrade, standing in line for the next iPhone is exactly what they will do, and they'll do it without entertaining even the faintest idea of getting anything else. For people like this, there really isn't a choice to make at all; their minds are made up before even being asked the question.

Of course this doesn't apply to all iPhone owners, but there's definitely a substantial amount of people who operate this way. I've met plenty of them - people who just cannot believe anyone would choose anything over an iPhone.
You could say that about any product though. Plus there's the whole app ecosystem of course that people spend lots of money in and would rather continue using devices that already use those apps. But it's not every user every single year. That's a generalization and a stereotype.
 
I was speaking to Korean friends and they were saying how s. koreans don't actually like samsung; how much they influence government, how they make it impossible for smaller korean companies and how they aren't adding jobs in korea.

Yeah, Samsung is really immensely tied up with the corruption of the chaebols. It's fucked up how much power they have in South Korea.
 
I think the point is rather that when the time does come to upgrade, standing in line for the next iPhone is exactly what they will do, and they'll do it without entertaining even the faintest idea of getting anything else. For people like this, there really isn't a choice to make at all; their minds are made up before even being asked the question.

Of course this doesn't apply to all iPhone owners, but there's definitely a substantial amount of people who operate this way. I've met plenty of them - people who just cannot believe anyone would choose anything over an iPhone.

But for some of us, we already have an investment in that ecosystem. Why should I trash all those apps I paid for by switching app store ecosystems? I'm going to continue buying iproducts because that's where I've already made my app store investment. Samsung could make an android phone that completely shits all over the iphone and I still won't go for it because of that investment I've already made.
 
why has nobody tried to patent an lcd screen with a thin black bezel and curved edges before? they could've had every tv and monitor manufacturer paying them their dues for the best part of a decade.
 
But for some of us, we already have an investment in that ecosystem. Why should I trash all those apps I paid for by switching app store ecosystems? I'm going to continue buying iproducts because that's where I've already made my app store investment. Samsung could make an android phone that completely shits all over the iphone and I still won't go for it because of that investment I've already made.

lol, that's terrible. So are you on a Mac? You didn't give up all your Windows "investments"?

If Android or WP somehow completely left Apple behind in hardware and software (i.e. "completely shits all over the iphone"), you'd stay because of a few apps that you bought? If everyone had that type of rationale, OS X would have been dead long ago.

EDIT: This also kind of proves RoadHazard's point.
 
why has nobody tried to patent an lcd screen with a thin black bezel and curved edges before? they could've had every tv and monitor manufacturer paying them their dues for the best part of a decade.

Know what else has glass surrounded by a bezel? Picture frames.

unclescrooge.tiff
 
Did they really think they could have gotten away with blatantly ripping off and stealing from Apple? This result was obvious the minute the court case began.

People keep using the phrase "blatantly stealing" or "blatantly copying". What was blatant?

The Galaxy is larger than the iPhone, has a different button layout, and slightly different proportions. No one would confuse the two.

The iPhone is pretty distinctive. I've never seen someone with an Android phone of any kind and thought it was an iPhone.
 
People keep using the phrase "blatantly stealing" or "blatantly copying". What was blatant?

The Galaxy is larger than the iPhone, has a different button layout, and slightly different proportions. No one would confuse the two.

The iPhone is pretty distinctive. I've never seen someone with an Android phone of any kind and thought it was an iPhone.

You underestimate Americans, my friend.
 
People keep using the phrase "blatantly stealing" or "blatantly copying". What was blatant?

The Galaxy is larger than the iPhone, has a different button layout, and slightly different proportions. No one would confuse the two.

The iPhone is pretty distinctive. I've never seen someone with an Android phone of any kind and thought it was an iPhone.
They're all black bricks with a giant screen and a single button. I can see how they would be confused, but I'm also confused as to how anyone could think one company should have a monopoly/claim to such a basic design.
 
People keep using the phrase "blatantly stealing" or "blatantly copying". What was blatant?

The Galaxy is larger than the iPhone, has a different button layout, and slightly different proportions. No one would confuse the two.

The iPhone is pretty distinctive. I've never seen someone with an Android phone of any kind and thought it was an iPhone.

You don't believe the Galaxy S was intentionally designed to look like the iPhone? Samsung? The company who's biggest pre-iPhone phone was the Blackjack? Of all the things up for debate with the case that's one of the most obvious. People confuse much more "distinct" devices.
 
People keep using the phrase "blatantly stealing" or "blatantly copying". What was blatant?

The Galaxy is larger than the iPhone, has a different button layout, and slightly different proportions. No one would confuse the two.

The iPhone is pretty distinctive. I've never seen someone with an Android phone of any kind and thought it was an iPhone.
That 100s of pages long document detailing precise things Samsung wanted to do to copy the iPhone. Pretty much finished the case.
 
You don't believe the Galaxy S was intentionally designed to look like the iPhone? Samsung? The company who's biggest pre-iPhone phone was the Blackjack? Of all the things up for debate with the case that's one of the most obvious. People confuse much more "distinct" devices.

Nope. I think it was designed to be practical and look ultra-modern.
 
I think that the position that Samsung enjoys now as the absolute leader of all the Android OEMs and the profits and mindshare they have generated since the Galaxy S are worth 1 billion dollars. Now all they have to do is updating Touchwiz using ICS/JB as the inspiration rather than iOS because people are now buying Galaxys on the base that they are Galaxys and not because they are "like an iPhone" which is a big win for Samsung
 
The Jury foreman speaks:

Hogan, a 67-year-old electrical engineer who lives in San Jose, said he was influenced in part by his own experience acquiring a patent. By the end of the first day of deliberations, he said he decided that Samsung's prior art arguments didn't hold up.

"I was thinking about the patents, and thought, 'If this were my patent, could I defend it?'" Hogan recalled. "Once I answered that question as yes, it changed how I looked at things."

The jury "wanted to send a message to the industry at large that patent infringing is not the right thing to do, not just Samsung," Hogan told the newspaper. "We felt like we were 100 percent fair, but we wanted something more than a slap on the wrist."

Article here: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...bes-deliberations-we-wanted-to-send-a-message
 
You got that damn right.

bitterapplehaters-1.jpg


They copied the best, after all.

Just looking at that picture, the height to width ratio is different, the screen dimensions are different, the speaker is in a different place, and there are three buttons on the bottom instead of one.

That aspect of the case (trade dress) should have ended right there.

Also, no Android users except complete n00bs use that layout.
 
lol, that's terrible. So are you on a Mac? You didn't give up all your Windows "investments"?

If Android or WP somehow completely left Apple behind in hardware and software (i.e. "completely shits all over the iphone"), you'd stay because of a few apps that you bought? If everyone had that type of rationale, OS X would have been dead long ago.

EDIT: This also kind of proves RoadHazard's point.

No, fuck Mac. I have lots of Windows based stuff. So yes, the computer situation in my case is exactly the same. I exist with Windows products and I don't feel like starting from scratch financially.

Maybe I overstated it when I said "shits all over iphone" because deep down I know that will never happen. Both products will continue to be competitive with one another like ATI/Nvidia or AMD/Intel.

If there came a day were the iProducts start sucking completely in comparison to the competition, I'm sure I'll be forced to move on. But for now, the apps I own will continue to move to each successive iDevice with me.
 
"Send a message"? "Slap on the wrist"? Sounds like their goal here was to "teach Samsung a lesson", and that seems like a pretty strange attitude to me. Aren't juries supposed to be as objective as possible?

By the way, this is the same guy that owns a patent. Thanks alot asshole, you fucked the rest of us! I really hope this shitty verdict gets overturned.
 
Just looking at that picture, the height to width ratio is different, the screen dimensions are different, the speaker is in a different place, and there are three buttons on the bottom instead of one.

That aspect of the case (trade dress) should have ended right there.

Also, no Android users except complete n00bs use that layout.
This comment reminds me of:

35677022017639660_EoUmejTV_b.jpg
 
"Send a message"? "Slap on the wrist"? Sounds like their goal here was to "teach Samsung a lesson", and that seems like a pretty strange attitude to me. Aren't juries supposed to be as objective as possible?

Both closing arguments encouraged the jury to send a message to the other side and to the industry at large.
 
"Send a message"? "Slap on the wrist"? Sounds like their goal here was to "teach Samsung a lesson", and that seems like a pretty strange attitude to me. Aren't juries supposed to be as objective as possible?

After the evidence has been laid out and they are shoved into a room to make judgments? That's kinda the point.
 
Both closing arguments encouraged the jury to send a message to the other side and to the industry at large.

After the evidence has been laid out and they are shoved into a room to make judgments? That's kinda the point.

http://www.slashgear.com/apple-samsung-jury-speed-doubts-raised-after-punishment-ruling-26243946/

“The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer”

Again, inept jury.
 
Korea Times said:
``Judge Lucy Koh will make the final ruling in the next few weeks. Samsung will try best to persuade Koh that we didn’t willfully infringe on Apple’s design patents. Samsung, however, is ready to bring the issue to the Supreme Court as the verdict was based on protectionism,’’ said a Seoul-based patent lawyer.

To me this quote is hilarious, coming as it does from one of the most protectionist states of the developed world (Korea) and the company that has been protected the most. I mean... the Korean government banned iPhone for years, pretty much so Samsung could sell their phones without competition. Of course they'd think the whole world worked like that.

Does anyone really think this jury sided with Apple because it's an American product? It's laughable.
 
Just looking at that picture, the height to width ratio is different, the screen dimensions are different, the speaker is in a different place, and there are three buttons on the bottom instead of one.

That aspect of the case (trade dress) should have ended right there.

Also, no Android users except complete n00bs use that layout.

Isn't that the app drawer on the Samsung phone and not even a homescreen? That comparison has always been ridiculous.
 

Despite what the juror said, they kept it within the margins of what both Samsung and Apple argued as to profit margin, and was much closer to what Samsung argued than to what Apple argued:

Apple's damages expert testified that Samsung earned margins of roughly 35.5 percent on the products at issue in the lawsuit, on $8.16 billion in revenue. However, Hogan said they thought Apple's percentage did not properly take into account many other costs identified by Samsung.

Samsung's damages expert testified the margin should be closer to 12 percent, and the jury picked a number slightly above that, Hogan said.

And out-of-line verdict would be something above the Apple figure. Formally, you are just punishing an infringer if you're having them pay more than what the injured party argues is the amount that will compensate them for the damages.
 
"Send a message"? "Slap on the wrist"? Sounds like their goal here was to "teach Samsung a lesson", and that seems like a pretty strange attitude to me. Aren't juries supposed to be as objective as possible?

One of the jurors had vested interest in 'punishing' samsung given his own patents.
 
I believe this applies more to you than him.
Nah. Anyone who looks at that pic and still thinks Samsung isn't a blatant and lazy copyist is in serious, hardcore-denial mode.

Isn't that the app drawer on the Samsung phone and not even a homescreen? That comparison has always been ridiculous.
Ridiculous? Sure... until you realize Samsung themselves used the hell out of that image to advertise their iClone :)
 
Have you ever seen a Galaxy S in real life?
The Galaxy S? I'm pretty sure I have, unless they were iPhones. Kinda hard to tell them apart.

EDIT: I'm guessing you're referring to the "that's just the app drawer not the actual home screen derp" defense? Kinda pointless bringing that up. Samsung plastered that image with the "app drawer" everywhere. TV ads, web ads, magazine ads, etc. which is why Apple used it during the trail. It's pretty obvious why Samsung did it. They can only blame themselves.
 
While I think the verdict is bad news overall for the industry, I always felt that the Galaxy S (my own previous phone) was trying to be very much like an iPhone 3gs. Their subsequent phones, however (S2 and 3) have gone down a totally different route.
 
The Galaxy S? I'm pretty sure I have, unless they were iPhones. Kinda hard to tell them apart.
Yeah nice try but I have a hard time believing that.. Anyone with two functioning eyes can see the difference between them right off the bat (not sure about those who have eyes blinded by the Apple lights). They aren't even the same size, proportions or dimensions and the Galaxy S has a much larger screen.
 
While I think the verdict is bad news overall for the industry, I always felt that the Galaxy S (my own previous phone) was trying to be very much like an iPhone 3gs. Their subsequent phones, however (S2 and 3) have gone down a totally different route.

Yeah nice try but I have a hard time believe that.. Anyone with two functioning eyes can see the difference between them right off the bat (not sure about those who have eyes blinded by the Apple lights). They aren't even the same size, proportions or dimensions and the Galaxy S has a much larger screen.
 
Yeah nice try but I have a hard time believe that.. Anyone with two functioning eyes can see the difference between them right off the bat (not sure about those who have eyes blinded by the Apple lights). They aren't even the same size, proportions or dimensions and the Galaxy S has a much larger screen.

Yeah nice try but I have a hard time believe that.. Anyone with two functioning eyes can see the difference between them right off the bat (not sure about those who have eyes blinded by the Apple lights). They aren't even the same size, proportions or dimensions and the Galaxy S has a much larger screen.

Some pretty blatant post copying going on here!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom