Print 37 comment(s) - last by Silver2k7.. on Jun 17 at 6:08 AM

  (Source: Warner Bros.)
Slow pace is killing Apple's efforts to legally damage Samsung, HTC, and Motorola

Another week is passing by, and Apple, Inc. (AAPL) has seen its hopes in yet another anti-Android court trial slip through its fingers.  Last week saw Judge Richard A. Posner, a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge who moonlighted in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois(Chicago), toss Apple and Motorola Mobility's (a Google Inc. (GOOGsubsidiarysuits/countersuits out of court.  

I. No Ban For You

Now across the country, his peer Northern District of California (San Jose/San Francisco) Judge Lucy Koh has ruled on a crucial decision in Apple's legal war with Android -- whether to put in place a ban that would spoil perhaps Android's biggest summer blockbuster launch -- the Samsung Galaxy S III.

The news was not what Apple was hoping for.

After hearing arguments from top Android smartphone maker Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) and Apple's legal teams, Judge Koh announced that she would not rule on whether to grant a preliminary injunction on the Galaxy S III ahead of its June 21 launch.

The Samsung Galaxy S III
The ruling is a blow to Apple.  Apple earlier this week announced iOS 6, which disappointed some in lacking the major graphical overhaul/refreshing that Google and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) have delivered in their recent builds.  Aside from its increasingly dated UI, Apple has not yet announced when it will ship its next generation iPhone.  The general expectation is that it will see a July launch.

That would place it roughly a month behind Samsung's flagship model in the U.S. market.  Apple was hoping to eliminate Samsung's head start with a court-enforced injunction, but its lawyers’ pleas fell on deaf ears.

II. Apple Faces Vanishing Hopes of Worthwhile Victory

Google spokesman Jim Prosser complained in a statement to Reuters that "vague" patents by Apple and others are creating a legal mess in the smartphone industry.  Kristin Huguet, spokeswoman for Apple, reiterated her complaint that Android phonemakers were guilty of "blatant" copying.

But Brian Love, a professor at Stanford Law School, says that ultimately Google is winning by not losing, while Apple is losing by seeing its cases bog down to a sluggish crawl through the court system.  He comments, "The stalemate is much more of a victory for the accused infringers than it is for Apple."

Paul Berghoff, a seasoned Chicago-based patent attorney with McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff (not involved in the case), echoes, "If Apple's goal still is the Steve Jobs holy war, then the status quo is not in their benefit."

Even Apple's own attorney, Josh Krevitt, sounded frustrated in a hearing last week, remarking, "Samsung is always one step ahead, launching another product and another product."

Android doll
Google has been a mean machine, trashing foes in court. [Image Source: ZuperDZigh]

Increasingly, Apple is looking like Wile E. Coyote to Samsung's Roadrunner, constantly seeing its competitor escape its sluggish legal deathtraps.  That's a disturbing trend for a company whose late co-founder ordered it to spend every penny it had to "destroy" Android in "thermonuclear war."

Apple is increasingly looking like it may be doomed to follow in the line of Oracle Corp. (ORCL), who at one point hoped to squeeze $6B USD from Google on claims of Java infringement in Android.  At the end of the day, a pair of court victories in a jury trial absolved Google of most infringement claims, while finding it guilt of only a handful of infringements, which will likely lead to trivial workarounds and only a few million in damages -- not exactly a worthwhile outcome in such a massive legal crusade.  Apple has not commented on the Oracle case, but it surely has watched concerned as Google legally demolished its accuser's claims.

Sources: U.S. District Court, Northern District of California [PDF], Reuters

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: Meanwhile Apple Copies Android...
By Samus on 6/14/2012 1:02:08 AM , Rating: 4
Apple actually licensed ActiveSync from Microsoft before everybody (but RIM) and to date has the most solid implementation of it. Everything else you guys have mentioned I agree with. Apple suing Samsung over S Voice 'copying' Siri is the biggest joke since suing over a minimalist design (which no Andoid phones have as far as I'm concerned.)

S Voice is licensed from Nuance and heavily modified by Samsung. Furthermore, voice-activated searching/dialing has been in Android (and many, MANY other smartphone OS's) long before iOS implemented it. I think Samsung is a little cocky calling it S Voice, but I find it kind of amusing at the same time...

RE: Meanwhile Apple Copies Android...
By retrospooty on 6/14/2012 7:59:06 AM , Rating: 2
??? I was using it on my Palm Treo at least 3 years before the iPhone came out. I had a Treo 650, but I know it was there on the Treo 600 as well. This is true only if they licensed it 4 years before the iPhone was ever announced.

By MZperX on 6/14/2012 11:58:17 AM , Rating: 2
Blackberrys also had voice commands and voice dialing well before the first iPhone appeared.

RE: Meanwhile Apple Copies Android...
By masteraleph on 6/14/2012 1:54:59 PM , Rating: 2
Apple and MS have had cross licensing for at least a decade. Active Sync was included in that portfolio.

RE: Meanwhile Apple Copies Android...
By retrospooty on 6/14/2012 4:18:56 PM , Rating: 1
Yet it wasn't available on the iPhone when released. Palm had it functioning in released product 3-4 years before Apple.

By crazyirish on 6/14/2012 7:37:20 PM , Rating: 2
Warms my heart to see Apple lose another. Stop with this stupid lawsuits and come up with some cool shit.

"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki