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

Status
Not open for further replies.
O to those who are claiming that jury verdicts rarely get overturned on appeal, keep in mind that this is not a normal case in the sense that it is a complex IP case that actually made it to verdict. There are interesting areas of law to be considered and the stakes are high. This is EXACTLY the type of case where it could easily be overturned on appeal. I wouldn't say it WILL be (I'm no expert, just conversational really...), but I wouldn't put very much weight in the jury verdict.
 
Pandemic said:
I'm new to this whole case, so what happened with the decision? And what does it mean for the company that lost?
Click to expand...

Apple's suit:
Samsung violated certain software patents and also copied registered trade dress (i.e. how the objects looked). Samsung was found in violation for a few of the patents (pinch to zoom and springy scrolling) across the line, a few software patents on other models and trade dress on a limited number of models.

Samsung's defense was essentially "we came to it indepedently" but Apple kept pounding them on internal documents which basically said "COPY THE IPHONE DAMMIT". Jury found that they did violate it on certain models but others were distinct enough. They awarded an amount they thought commensurate with the sales of each model.

Samsung's suit:
Apple violated certain patents essential to the operation of WCDMA. Apple was not found in violation for these patents.

Apple's defense was essentially:
  • It's a standards essential patent you can't hold it hostage that's an violation of the antitrust laws - Jury said no
  • Even if you could we bought the chips of Qualcomm as a complete package and we affirm a defense based on the doctrine of patent exhaustion - Jury said yes

It's dramatically oversimplified but it's the jist of it.
 
Wanting to see apple get some of their own medicine is not equivalent to condoning the US software patent system.

I'll say it again - had other companies been as ruthless and stifling to apple in the 80s and 90s they wouldn't be where they are today.
 
Those software patents are killers ruling for Apple. The trade dress stuff is a bit more ambiguous about how applicable it will be to other devices. Of all the manufacturers, Samsung modification to Android bring it closest to iOS. Hard to judge how applicable the trade dress will be without Touchwiz.
 
Pandemic said:
I'm new to this whole case, so what happened with the decision? And what does it mean for the company that lost?
Click to expand...

this posting from my rebel, illegal, outlaw Galaxy Nexus 4G LTE Unlimited verizon here

FUCK THE POLICE

will verizon stop drop all samsung phones from being supported ?
 
AAK said:
But what is this about the ruling about "software" patents. Is Android going down or something?
Click to expand...

Android phone makers could be forced to remove or devise alternatives to certain features that users have come to expect from a modern smart phone operating system. Apple is under no obligation to license these features to Android phone vendors.
 
Sir Abacus said:
Apple's suit:
Samsung violated certain software patents and also copied registered trade dress (i.e. how the objects looked). Samsung was found in violation for a few of the patents (pinch to zoom and springy scrolling) across the line, a few software patents on other models and trade dress on a limited number of models.

Samsung's defense was essentially "we came to it indepedently" but Apple kept pounding them on internal documents which basically said "COPY THE IPHONE DAMMIT". Jury found that they did violate it on certain models but others were distinct enough. They awarded an amount they thought commensurate with the sales of each model.

Samsung's suit:
Apple violated certain patents essential to the operation of WCDMA. Apple was not found in violation for these patents.

Apple's defense was essentially:
  • It's a standards essential patent you can't hold it hostage that's an violation of the antitrust laws - Jury said no
  • Even if you could we bought the chips of Qualcomm as a complete package and we affirm a defense based on the doctrine of patent exhaustion - Jury said yes

It's dramatically oversimplified but it's the jist of it.
Click to expand...
Interesting... Will this 1 billion have a massive impact on Samsung? Some people said it'd go bankrupt...?
 
Cheebo said:
Apple's stock is at an all time high in after-close trading due to this result.
Click to expand...

holy crap. it went up almost 12 bucks. 674 now.

anyway, I'm not sorry that Samsung lost this. They were blatantly copying Apple left and right when the 3G was out. they'll pay that billion and go back to making lots of cash. Similar to how Apple had to pay up for infringing on some Nokia patents last year.

Now, the bigger question is what's gonna happen with other devices from other companies in the future now that a precedent has been set with those all important zooming, scrolling and pinching patents. If Apple doesn't license them for "reasonable" amounts that Android device makers can live with, it's gonna be rough.
 
Sir Abacus said:
Android phone makers could be forced to remove or devise alternatives to certain features that users have come to expect from a modern smart phone operating system. Apple is under no obligation to license these features to Android phone vendors.
Click to expand...

fuck a goat...
shit-just-got-real_o_gkp31.gif


I still have flash on my galaxy nexus... na NA NA NA NA NA WEYYYYYYYYY HEEEEEY


GOOOOOODBYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

still fuck the police.... my shit is like a mini mobile as fuck computer, flash support and access to the full web on LTE 4G unlimited all ... :D

FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS MOTHERFUCKS...!!!!
 
Pandemic said:
Interesting... Will this 1 billion have a massive impact on Samsung? Some people said it'd go bankrupt...?
Click to expand...

There aren't many companies that can afford to just fork 1billion over to a competitor. EDIT: It'll significantly hurt their operations, though not necessarily bankrupt. But they won't end up paying out that much. It will almost CERTAINLY get reduced on appeal at least some, or settled at a different amount pending appeal.
 
Sir Abacus said:
Android phone makers could be forced to remove or devise alternatives to certain features that users have come to expect from a modern smart phone operating system. Apple is under no obligation to license these features to Android phone vendors.
Click to expand...

So basically this ruling screws over Samsung and all Android supported device companies (Sony, LG, etc.) AND all android software developers also?
 
AAK said:
So basically this ruling screws over Samsung and all Android supported device companies (Sony, LG, etc.) AND all android software developers also?
Click to expand...

Device companies yes, software developers maybe. If they reimplement springy scrolling or pinch to zoom after it's removed it could leave them vulnerable.
 
Pandemic said:
Interesting... Will this 1 billion have a massive impact on Samsung? Some people said it'd go bankrupt...?
Click to expand...

Like I said before, 1 billion isn't THAT much to Samsung. They just threw 4 billion at their fab here in Austin. This is actually comes out pretty good for Samsung cause that's just a fraction of money that they've made off their phones that were modeled after the iphone.
 
Emily Chu said:
fuck a goat...
shit-just-got-real_o_gkp31.gif


I still have flash on my galaxy nexus... na NA NA NA NA NA WEYYYYYYYYY HEEEEEY


GOOOOOODBYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

still fuck the police.... my shit is like a mini computer, flash support and all ... :D
Click to expand...
Yeah I think Apple gives no fucks about flash.
 
brucewaynegretzky said:
There aren't many companies that can afford to just fork 1billion over to a competitor. EDIT: It'll significantly hurt their operations, though not necessarily bankrupt. But they won't end up paying out that much. It will almost CERTAINLY get reduced on appeal at least some, or settled at a different amount pending appeal.
Click to expand...

This gonna severely affect SGIV :( and Note II
 
Sir Abacus said:
Device companies yes, software developers maybe. If they reimplement springy scrolling or pinch to zoom after it's removed it could leave them vulnerable.
Click to expand...

So it's "come up with a better alternative to pinch & zoom, or be damned", right? Seems like the real culprit here is the buggered up patents laws.
 
Sir Abacus said:
Device companies yes, software developers maybe. If they reimplement springy scrolling or pinch to zoom after it's removed it could leave them vulnerable.
Click to expand...

So why are there people happy with this ruling? People just want to buy iPhones indefinitely? Seriously.
 
Verge making a good point. Will likely push Samsung and the rest more towards Windows Phone 8 due to Apple's partnership with Microsoft to allow the Microsoft OS to use their patents.
 
TCRS said:
The peasants always suffer. HOW WILL WE ZOOM?
Click to expand...

They just have to pay Apple to license that technology. The same way someone has to license to include DVD playback on a device.

This is really just an issue due to Android being an open source free OS.
 
It's funny, in my family I have 2 iPhones, an iPad, a 2008 MacBook Pro and a 2009 MacPro, and I've been on Samsung's side the whole time.

Apple have been complete dicks in all of this, and this was nothing more than Apple wanting to fuck up a genuine competitor. Not on.

So does this mean Samsung will go mostly Windows Phone 8 now?
 
firebricks3 said:
Like I said before, 1 billion isn't THAT much to Samsung. They just threw 4 billion at their fab here in Austin. This is actually comes out pretty good for Samsung cause that's just a fraction of money that they've made off their phones that were modeled after the iphone.
Click to expand...

Samsung hit for massive crab damage!!


While it won't bankrupt them in any stretch of th imagination (people don't realize how much money Samsung actually makes), it is an epic blow that will cause them to rethink everything in their design to avoid the patent issues. They really should have just cross-licensed and been done with this mess. This was always a no-win for them. Ah well. Will be interesting to see how they REALLY respond, because Apple is currently shifting focus away from Samsung being a primary component manufacturer and thats likely to accelerate now.
 
buhdeh said:
So why are there people happy with this ruling? People just want to buy iPhones indefinitely? Seriously.
Click to expand...

I'm personally happy that Samsung's counterclaim was slapped down hard. Using standards essential patents as leverage was far worse than claiming ownership of something Apple did actually develop and patent "properly".

If there's anything else to be happy about it'll hopefully start to drive big companies in the Valley to push patent reform within Congress.
 
The law blogs I'm following are questioning the ability of the jury to pull a verdict on 700 decisions out of the air in two days
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
UK Supreme Court rules legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex
2
62
4K
jason10mm replied
"The Simpsons 2" is officially in the works and set to release in theaters on July 23, 2027.
News  2
60
443
Codes 208 replied
Tim Apple got stitched up the Courts
39
2K
winjer replied
Leonardo DiCaprio set to star in Michael Mann's Heat 2
2
59
930
DKPOWPOW replied
Paramount is streaming Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (2025) on Youtube (starts in 10 minutes)
14
389
Saber replied
Top Bottom