backtop


Print 45 comment(s) - last by Cheesew1z69.. on Nov 12 at 8:07 AM

Meanwhile Samsung aims to toss the case on grounds of juror misconduct

Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) legal efforts against Android haven’t stopped its sales momentum.  Google Inc.'s (GOOG) operating system today is out-selling Apple 5-to-1 in unit sales [source].  

Meanwhile, Apple's efforts to ban Android devices has run into a few roadblocks; for example Apple's litigation against Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility has been dismissed with prejudice not once, not twicebut three times from different federal courts.

I. Apple Wants to Greatly Expand its Bans

But as they say, you only need to be in the right place at the right time, and that's precisely what happened when Apple sued Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  Initially, Judge Lucy Koh moved to dismiss the case, but in a somewhat unusual outcome a three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered [PDF] Judge Koh to reconsider tossing the case.  Judge Koh subsequently allowed Apple to take Samsung to trial, and in a stunning outcome the jury -- some of whose family members were Apple shareholders -- found Samsung guilty of $1.05B USD in damages.

In the wake of that lone victory, Apple is looking to triple the damages to $3B USD and to ban more Google products.  Hoping that lightning will strike twice, Apple filed in court this week request Judge Koh to tack on Google's latest Jelly Bean operating system, and Samsung's Galaxy Note 10.1.

Galaxy Note 10.1
While Apple's products don't have a stylus, the company still claims that the Samsung stylus-endowed designs infringe on its patents.

The Galaxy Note 10.1 is a particularly thorny pain in Apple's side.  It features a friendly pen-input technology that Apple's iPad lacks.  Samsung has gained quite a bit of ground on Apple in the tablet industry; Apple is eager to stomp out that potential rival before things get to far.

And by asking to ban Jelly Bean devices, Apple can hope to not only kill shipments of older Samsung smartphones to the U.S., but also to kill Samsung's full lineup of phones.

II. Judge Koh Strikes Down One Key Ban

It's unclear, though, whether Judge Koh will humor Apple.

Judge Koh, despite allowing the record jury verdict, recently struck down the ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 (the precursor to the Note 10.1), as the jury found it did not infringe on U.S. Design Patent D504,889, a design patent which depicted a bulkier button-less early iteration of the iPad, nicknamed by some the "fat iPad".

While Judge Koh did acknowledge that the Tab 10.1 was found to infringe on Apple user interface patents, she argued that was insufficient to ban the handsets.  

That's bad news for Apple, as while the jury found Samsung's product line to be almost entirely in infringement of Apple's UI patents, they only found some handsets to be close enough to Apple's smartphone patents to be ruled in infringement.  In other words if Judge Koh applies the same standard to smartphones, only a couple of older Samsung handsets, like the first-generation Galaxy S, might be banned.

Lawyers
Apple wants to add 17 more products to its lawsuit. [Image Source: Jason Mick/DailyTech]

Apple is making its plea to expand the case before Judge Paul S. Grewal, who will decide whether to send the new products for consideration by Judge Koh and the jury.  Samsung is understandably upset about the additions, which it argues will add 17 stylus-based products to the existing case.  (While Apple's products do not use a stylus, it argues its patents cover the absent feature as well.)

It argues it only wants to add a single product, albeit a big one -- the iPhone 5.  Victoria Maroulis, an attorney for Samsung, writes in a counter-brief to Apple's request, "By adding the stylus, Apple is going to enlarge the case significantly."

III. Jury Foreman Had Undisclosed Legal Bone to Pick With Samsung, Samsung Files for Retrial

On an interesting note Judge Koh agreed to hear arguments from Samsung that look to toss the $1B USD jury verdict on grounds of juror misconduct.  The claims don't deal with the share-holding family members; that interest was clearly disclosed and ruled okay by Judge Koh.  

However, one of the jurors did not reveal, when directly questioned if they had ever been involved with a lawsuit, an important case win which they were the defendant.  Specifically, the juror had been sued by a hard-drive manufacturer that now controls Samsung's old hard drive business -- Seagate.

Pinocchio
The jury foreman in the record verdict against Samsung "accidentally" forgot to mention he had been sued in the 1990s by a Samsung subsidiary. [Image Source: Walt Disney]

Basically, the juror had signed a note promising to pay Seagate, but did not, leading to a breach of contract suit.  In other words, that juror, Velvin Hogan -- who also happened to play the pivotal role of jury foreman -- seemingly would have a huge bone to pick with Samsung.

In light of that undisclosed bias, Samsung's attorney's are pleading with Judge Koh to toss the verdict and grant a retrial with a new foreman who doesn't conceal potential legal grudges against their firm.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Seriously
By MechanicalTechie on 11/7/2012 5:55:48 PM , Rating: 4
Another day... another Lawsuit

Makes me feel sick with contempt




RE: Seriously
By AMDftw on 11/7/2012 6:22:22 PM , Rating: 1
Because crApple is greedy.


RE: Seriously
By sprockkets on 11/7/2012 7:05:37 PM , Rating: 2
It's not going to get any better. Today, apple was granted official the design patent on a rectangle with rounded corners. You can't make this sht up.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/11/apple-awarded...

Note, that while indeed it is a picture of an ipad, the only part that is claimed is the area with the solid line - you guessed it, the rectangle with rounded corners.

And it is complete with a long list of prior devices that in the examiners opinion, didn't count. You know, like the Galaxy Tab.

I'm so glad the US gives all the ammo it needs to apple to keep apple suing away.


RE: Seriously
By MechanicalTechie on 11/7/2012 7:18:49 PM , Rating: 3
It's just wrong...

It's going to seriously damage the industry with this bull$hit yet all the techno-retards sing its praise... god people are stupid and shortsighted!!


RE: Seriously
By retrospooty on 11/7/2012 7:49:09 PM , Rating: 2
It wont. Nothing will change and anything you want to buy will still be available. Its just getting stupid to watch. LOL


RE: Seriously
By michael67 on 11/10/2012 2:27:26 AM , Rating: 2
Not to troll, but thats what you get with a dual party system like you have in the US.

Even do Parties like the "Pirate Party" and "Green parties" are working in the margins, they still have huge impact on policy, as they trade there votes on other subject in for support for there agenda.

What i see from the outside of US politics, and i follow it as mouths as possible, is that i know no other country ware politics are so polarized as in the US, to a point if one side says something, the other side has to object against it.


RE: Seriously
By sandineyes on 11/7/2012 11:42:56 PM , Rating: 2
I say good. Let us take down barriers on the top of the stairs, and remove the safety fasteners from the sink cabinets! We don't need any of this "kid friendly", Fisher-Price school of design. How can you deliver an edgy product without edges?! I say the time is now for our rectangles to re-sharpen their corners and strike back. Just focus on disappearing those bezels, and people will be too amazed to realize it all comes down to finger painting on glass.


RE: Seriously
By marvdmartian on 11/8/2012 2:57:04 PM , Rating: 2
How about someone design a tablet or phone that's a circular shape, with squared off sides? Should defeat the idiocy of the Apple patent!


RE: Seriously
By Insurgence on 11/8/2012 2:05:12 PM , Rating: 3
That is actually a design patent which is different from other patents. Pretty much every company puts in a design patent for their products so that other entities will not make identical clones. There was a post in that article that explains it all, one that was chosen as an editors pick. I actually have to give credit to the person who did the patent because she actually went through and said why it was not similar to other devices such as Samsungs products. I'll even quote the Editor's Pick down below

quote:
I think most people don't understand what it means that this is a design patent - it's not the same thing as a "regular" patent (a utility patent). Design patents allow a company to get an exclusive right to the form of a functional object so that a 3rd party can't make a different device with identical appearance (well, not legally at least). Almost every company that puts the time into making a distinctive shape for their devices gets one: Microsoft has one for the Xbox, George Lucas got one for Yoda etc.

Design patents are extremely narrow - you have to do your level best to copy them exactly in order to be found in infringement. Plus, they specifically cannot cover functionality - that has to be covered by a utility patent, if it's going to be protected. This design patent only protects a "portable display device" (that's the wording in the Patent itself), and only one with those specific design elements that are shown in the Patent Figures.

I'd be shocked if Apple hadn't applied for design patents for all of its devices. This really isn't an issue.


RE: Seriously
By drycrust3 on 11/8/2012 2:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm so glad the US gives all the ammo it needs to apple to keep apple suing away.

If you had read to the bottom of that Arstechnica article, you would have seen the "Editor's choice" comment, written by one "Chuckaluphagus", which basically says this is a design patent, not a utility patent, so it has a very precise interpretation. It's to prevent another company producing an exactly identical looking identical purpose product as you (or, in this case, Apple).


RE: Seriously
By NellyFromMA on 11/8/2012 8:48:11 AM , Rating: 2
I mean, I think its dumb, but I don't get angry or sick over it. Hmmm, you might need to move to colorado, I have a feeling it's going to be pretty relaxing over there.


Typical Apple
By jimbojimbo on 11/7/2012 7:01:11 PM , Rating: 2
You released another product but your stocks are still sinking big time. What do you do? Sue your biggest competitors and try to ban all their products!!




RE: Typical Apple
By Tony Swash on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Typical Apple
By MechanicalTechie on 11/7/2012 7:41:58 PM , Rating: 4
Why do you bother?

We both know the iPad mini is just a rip from the Kindle Fire based on left over parts from iPad 2. It's not hard to sell to morons... look pass your nose and envision a future that is dominated by a handful of massive corporations each holding a vault full of ridiculous patents for the soul purpose to stifle competition and innovation.

Here's some free advice...defending Apple at every turn makes you look pathetic


RE: Typical Apple
By retrospooty on 11/7/2012 7:52:39 PM , Rating: 5
"Here's some free advice...defending Apple at every turn makes you look pathetic"

Truer words have never been spoken.


RE: Typical Apple
By thesavvymage on 11/7/2012 8:16:37 PM , Rating: 1
In his defense, the stock price didnt start dropping until some of the ipad mini rumors. so yeah a month ago.

im saying i like the guy, im just saying hes not wrong


RE: Typical Apple
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/8/2012 9:23:32 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Here's some free advice...defending Apple at every turn makes you look pathetic
We already know he is pathetic, this is nothing new.


RE: Typical Apple
By nafhan on 11/8/2012 10:11:26 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Why do you bother?
This would be interesting to know. I used to think Mr. Swish was simply trolling, but at this point I would also consider the possibility that he has a neurotically aggressive form of confirmation bias.


RE: Typical Apple
By jjmcubed on 11/8/2012 8:15:43 PM , Rating: 2
There used to be a troll around here that switched accounts arguing with himself. One day I pointed out he was arguing the wrong point on the wrong log on. Didn't hear much of him after that.


RE: Typical Apple
By Kepler on 11/9/2012 10:22:12 AM , Rating: 2
Tony Swash = Reclaimer?????

(sorry Reclaimer, just a joke!)


RE: Typical Apple
By testerguy on 11/10/2012 5:06:02 PM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer = Retrospooty


RE: Typical Apple
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/11/2012 12:09:28 PM , Rating: 2
You = AppleTool


Is Apple serious?
By retrospooty on 11/7/2012 6:39:12 PM , Rating: 5
Now Android is outselling iPhone 5 to 1 and will be 6 to 1 by years end. Do they really think they will get anything banned?

Its just funny to watch at this point. MEanwhile Andoid is developing circles around IOS, its now not just a little better, it smokes it. Android is sprinting while IOS is stagnating and copying features Android implemented years ago.

LOL@Apple 2012.




RE: Is Apple serious?
By Helbore on 11/7/2012 6:53:19 PM , Rating: 4
It's wasted time and money on Apple's part. If they actually managed to get all Samsung products banned, it wouldn't result in those potential sales going to Apple. Instead, those people would end up buying from HTC or Motorola (or any other Android OEM).

Apple aren't making themselves popular with those who buy their competitors' products. You don't gain favour with the consumer by banning products they want to buy. At best, all Apple will achieve is to move consumers from one Android OEM to another.

It's an unwinnable war.


RE: Is Apple serious?
By StevoLincolnite on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Is Apple serious?
By Nutzo on 11/8/2012 12:03:53 PM , Rating: 2
It's Windows vs Apple all over again.

Apple with a closed system, suing their competitors running an open system. At least back then it was only the Apple hardware that was closed, now they even control the software you can load.

The more open system will always win in the end. That's why I don't see Windows Phone ever getting to more than 2nd or 3rd place.


RE: Is Apple serious?
By testerguy on 11/10/2012 5:09:09 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Now Android is outselling iPhone 5 to 1 and will be 6 to 1 by years end. Do they really think they will get anything banned?


First of all, Android isn't even a company. It's owned by nobody. Apple could use it if it wanted. You're combining all the other companies and saying that they collectively beat Apple. A silly story.

Secondly, sales are measured in $ or £, not number of items sold. So Android is actually not outselling Apple, certainly not when costs are factored in. Apple wont really be stressing when it takes in 70% of the profit for the entire industry.

Saying 'iOS is stagnating' and 'Android is sprinting' just reflects how much catching up Android had to do over the past 2 years. It's nearly there.


RE: Is Apple serious?
By retrospooty on 11/10/2012 6:50:36 PM , Rating: 2
No, its surpassed it and you know it. Remind me, what was the name of that phone you are getting? I forget. Oh yeah, it was the Google Nexus 4. Hmm, go figure. Must be bizarro world.


RE: Is Apple serious?
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/11/2012 12:11:22 PM , Rating: 2
Um, Google Android = owned by Google...


go away
By p05esto on 11/8/12, Rating: 0
RE: go away
By spaced_ on 11/9/2012 1:02:49 AM , Rating: 3
It's a different market. It's actually good to have this kind of market for people who aren't techies and who have plenty of money. It's just it's a smaller market than the rest.

I actually don't hope Apple goes away. I just wish they'd go back to innovating and collaborating with other companies rather than litigating and de-friending the entire industry. Let them keep their closed ecosystem that appeals to some people. They just need to dump Steve Jobs' legacy of destroying anyone in his way.


RE: go away
By testerguy on 11/10/2012 5:13:39 PM , Rating: 2
Googles Play store is every bit as closed as the Apple app store.

People describing iOS as 'closed' really don't have any clue why that affects the customer in any negative way whatsoever.

And also, the market for premium products is always less than the majority of the common people, but it's where the highest profits can be made by offering a premium product which performs better than the rest. Much like Porsche do, for example.

As for litigation, both Samsung and Motorola have attempted to ban all of Apples products and not through retaliation. What's most amazing is that people on this site are the ones who should be able to read benchmarks and understand what is and isn't open on Android, but I see the reverse.


RE: go away
By spaced_ on 11/12/2012 3:14:03 AM , Rating: 1
I'm not sure what relevance Google Play or the Apple app store have to my post.

iOS is a closed operating system, indeed. Again, not sure what that has to do with my post. I wasn't referring to iOS, but their ecosystem at large. It's essentially equivalent to the ecosystem gaming consoles have. Which there is also a rather sizable market for.

Great, premium products, we both know about some basic marketing and trade, that's wonderful.

In terms of litigation, I'd invite you to show me where Samsung and Motorola started their particular patent war with Apple. As far as I can tell, patent trolling has been going on for decades. Apple just happens to be one of (but not the only) main protagonist in the contemporary era. But what they've done of late, tends to buck the trend slightly from my knowledge. Whilst most companies in the past couple of decades used it to extort licencing fees, Apple are instead using the patent system in an anti-competitive way to attempt to maintain a monopoly.

And please explain to me, how the hell do you read benchmarks to better understand whether a project is open or not? Of the hundreds of open source projects I've worked with or worked on, I have no idea what benchmarks have to do with their openness. Either you are talking gibberish, or you were drunk when replying. I would hope for your sake it's the latter.


RE: go away
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/12/2012 8:07:55 AM , Rating: 1
It's gibberish like all of his posts. He spouts bullshit to to try to deflect the conversation to try to sway it in his favor. He's nothing but a troll.


Let's face it
By distinctively on 11/7/2012 6:50:46 PM , Rating: 5
Apple's lawsuits are corrupt and contemptuous towards integrity. If any more phones get banned due to dishonest trials, just grab one another Android phone of your choice. There are tons out great ones out there. I guess you could overpay for an undersized iPhone if you'd really like but there's just not that many people that can be suckered that easily. Those types already own an iPhone.




another one
By rob19478 on 11/8/2012 8:18:59 AM , Rating: 2
It is getting anoying to here week after week of new lawsuits ... tbh both samsung and apple got to stop




RE: another one
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/8/2012 9:26:41 AM , Rating: 3
Apple needs to stop. Samsung is defending itself.


By BZDTemp on 11/7/2012 7:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
It used to be Apple provided the cool and interesting alternative in the IT business, but since they stopped being Apple Computer and renamed them self Apple it has been going down quickly.

Luckily more and more people are catching on and eventually Apple will have to change their ways.




By hiscross on 11/7/2012 7:34:06 PM , Rating: 2
They changed their name from Apple Computer to Apple Inc about 5 years ago. Yea, some sinking ship.


Apple & Lawyers
By dowen777 on 11/8/2012 8:30:17 AM , Rating: 2
I come from a family of lawyers and as such I am grateful that Apple has seen the light and is now employing many more lawyers than before.

After all, once you've lost the competitive edge, at least you can try to hamstring your competition with endless lawsuits.

Way to go Apple!




RE: Apple & Lawyers
By spaced_ on 11/9/2012 12:59:13 AM , Rating: 2
Haha. Nice one.


Apple the fat kid.
By jahinoz on 11/8/2012 12:18:15 AM , Rating: 3
Apple reminds me of the fat kid in the playground with all the cakes. When the other kids start bringing their own, better cakes he starts bullying them because in his mind he's the only one allowed to be the fat @#$%.

If their products are so awesome why not let the consumer decide for themselves? Oh I know because they'll lose and the only way left it can stay competitive is by trying to take out competitors under the guise of its unintellectual property disputes (patenting a rounded edge rectangle? give me a break...)




This isn't just a lawsuit....
By CBeck113 on 11/8/2012 4:45:49 PM , Rating: 2
..it's Apple's way of introducing the last new product under Steve Job's rule: the Apple iSue. They didn't invent it, but through some serious out-of-the-box thinking like "Hey, why don't we get patents for even the most obvious features, like a rectangular body with rounded edges to contain a rectangular display" they've made it much easier to use...

Servus, Charlie




end result
By Mike Acker on 11/9/2012 7:01:20 AM , Rating: 2
sue em and sue em for suing

go boys

in the end the lawyers will own all yer companies and no one will dare invent anything




COO
By dwighty on 11/9/2012 5:35:55 AM , Rating: 1

like Michael implied I'm alarmed that people can profit $9804 in a few weeks on the computer. have you read this web page Fox92 dOTcom




"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki