backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by nocturne_81.. on Sep 21 at 7:28 PM


  (Source: New Line Cinema)
Why not just ask Samsung to give up all its money?

Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) is still reeling from a massive $1.05B USD jury verdict loss to Apple, Inc. (AAPL) in Californian federal court.  Now Apple has added insult to injury, asking a judge to triple the damages.  If the judge accepts Samsung would now owe Apple over $3B USD.

I. Apple Looks to Triple Its Court Payday

The request comes due to federal rules regarding "willful" infringement.  In such cases, the plaintiff is allowed to request that a judge multiply the damages as a punishment to the infringer.  As the jury ruled that Samsung not only infringed, but also did so "willfully", Apple was eligible to make such a request.

A report in the Korea Times quotes an unnamed "senior legal executive" as saying, "By using that condition, Apple has decided to request the judge to order Samsung to pay more than $3 billion in the hearing on the San Jose verdict on Sept. 21 in California.  The decision means Apple want to quickly address the harm that Samsung’s infringing products are said to be causing. As has been the case throughout this trial, Apple is pressing its full advantage over the jurors’ decision."

Another legal source was quoted as saying that Apple is simply trying to levy more severe provisions against Samsung in an effort to kick it out of the market.  That source argues no amount of damages will satisfy Apple until it can kick its rival out.

Red card
Sources say Apple won't be satisfied until it kicks Samsung out of the market. [Image Source: AFP]

Comments the source, "Apple lawyers still believe Samsung should pull its popular Galaxy line of devices including smartphones and tablets from the United States and leave the market to proprietary handsets from Apple and Microsoft."

II. Kicking Out a Bigger Competitor

Currently, Samsung outsells Apple's smartphones 2-to-1 globally.  If Apple can indeed "kick Samsung out" of the global market (or at least the lucrative U.S. market), it could go on to dominate the smartphone market.

Samsung, however, is bracing itself for a tough fight to try to prevent that from happening.  It's countering Apple's request to Judge Lucy Koh, the presiding judge in the case, with a counter-request to toss parts of the jury verdict, reducing the damages.  If it cannot succeed, it will drag the case into the U.S. Federal Appeals Courts.

Samsung smartphones
Some say despite the pending bans, Samsung may be able to stay ahead of Apple.
[Image Source: Reuters]

Judge Koh this week upheld a ban on Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the U.S.

The South Korean phone maker is also hedging its bets, increasing its Windows Phone 8 offerings.  Jumping ship from Google Inc.'s (GOOG) Android operating system to Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) Windows Phone 8 could offer an easy escape route for Samsung, as Apple presumably can't sue Windows Phone makers due to its cross-licensing pact with Microsoft.

Source: The Korea Times



Comments     Threshold


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

Land Mine Patents.
By drycrust3 on 9/19/2012 4:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The request comes due to federal rules regarding "willful" infringement.

The problem with this is what is "willful"? The situation with Apple's patents is like walking into an unsign posted mined area, standing on a land mine buried in the ground, being killed, and then having the coroner say it was suicide.
Some of the patents in question are written in such a way that any normal person reading them would have almost no idea what Apple had a patent for, so how is Samsung supposed to avoid infringing upon Apple's patent if no one can understand it? You can't!
If this patent is worth $1B, then it was worth writing in a way that was clear and precise, with definitions for non-standard terms.
The situation with unintelligible patents is so bad that one could easily suspect that Apple thinks of what these patents cover after the patent was filed, and not before.




RE: Land Mine Patents.
By t_sandman on 9/19/2012 4:43:39 PM , Rating: 1
I would agree with your assesment if it were not for the fact that Samsung was 'warned' by Google. Google says to Samsung, dude, your shit looks too much like Apple shit. Samsung says, shut up and mind your own business. Somewhere during this time, Apple sends a notice to Samsung saying your are copying my shit. Samsung says, go screw yourself.

Samsungs whole defense was that it was prior art, not that Apples patents were too vague. I will agree that at least one of the patents was vague, the whole rounded corners shape design thingy (technical term). But that is only 1 out of 6 that Apple won. What about the other 5, screen bounce back and others.


RE: Land Mine Patents.
By michael2k on 9/19/2012 7:55:17 PM , Rating: 2
Willful means that Samsung acted intentionally even after being warned by Samsung's internal review, Apple's external offer to license, and Google's product review.

In other words, there were signs everywhere that a minefield is up ahead, and Samsung went in anyway. How is that not suicide?


"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain














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