backtop


Print 66 comment(s) - last by Strunf.. on Jan 4 at 6:06 AM

Samsung says release damages it competitively; federal judge says "too bad", sides with local firm, Apple

While Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) and Apple, Inc. (AAPL) are still preparing to square off for a second major patent infringement case, both companies are also actively engrossed in battling over damages in the first case, which saw Apple found innocent of infringement and Samsung guilty of $1.05B USD in willful infringement.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge Lucy Koh gave Samsung a bit of a boost in December when she rejected Apple's request to ban sales of 26 Samsung "Galaxy" products, writing that Apple failed to prove that Samsung's infringement drove the demand for Samsung products.

But she's still in the process of finalizing how much Samsung should have to pay Apple.

And this week she dealt Samsung a blow, denying a request by Samsung to seal the results of a Dec. 10 request she made to Samsung.  Judge Koh had asked Samsung last month to reveal unit sales of certain products over certain time periods.  It is unknown what models precisely were requested, but they likely included the Galaxy S and Galaxy S II smartphones -- centerpieces of Apple's first infringement case against Samsung.
 
Samsung had pleaded with Judge Koh to keep those details out of the public eye, arguing that it would damage it from a competitive perspective.  Judge Koh had little sympathy for the South Korean electronics company, though, siding with local firm Apple, who argued the information should be made public regardless of the damage to its rival.

Apple is pushing Judge Koh to triple the damages to over $3B USD, which can be done in certain cases if the infringement was deemed "willful".  Samsung, meanwhile, is urging Judge Koh to trim the settlement, pointing out that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has filed preliminary invalidation rulings regarding two of the key Apple utility patents involved in the case.

Thus at this point damages could go in any direction.  For now all that is clear is that we'll soon be learning some new information on Samsung sales and that for now no Samsung products are banned.

Source: Bloomberg



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Glad to see it
By retrospooty on 1/2/2013 3:21:19 PM , Rating: 2
[/facepalm]

Yes, poor poor Apple was copied.

They would get alot more sympathy if they weren't one of the worst companies in the tech industry at copying other companies ideas.

I fully stand behind my post above. BIG fingers to both Apple and Samsung.


RE: Glad to see it
By Nortel on 1/2/13, Rating: -1
RE: Glad to see it
By Cheesew1z69 on 1/2/2013 4:17:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple pays for use of other companies patents
No, no they don't, not always.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57547606-37/in-y...


RE: Glad to see it
By messele on 1/3/2013 2:13:35 AM , Rating: 2
And you have the gall to call Apple patent trolls? How can you avoid infringing on patents of companies who are hiding behind anonymous faces like VirnetX?

Besides, looks like they paid to me...


RE: Glad to see it
By theapparition on 1/3/2013 12:45:32 PM , Rating: 2
By doing a diligent and thorough patent search.


RE: Glad to see it
By maugrimtr on 1/3/2013 8:34:26 AM , Rating: 2
Apple also copied the phone. They blatantly copied the position of the ear ring speaker, and microphone and then proceeded to make it capable of making and receiving phone calls. The bast***s!

All companies copy from each other. The real world calls it free market competition. Apple are actually suing over stuff they "patented" (two of those patents now being preliminarily ruled as invalid for obvious reasons). The damages being awarded are likewise utterly moronic. Bouncy animations and making rectangular phones with rounded corners are clearly not worth $3B.


RE: Glad to see it
By Nortel on 1/2/13, Rating: -1
RE: Glad to see it
By nafhan on 1/2/2013 4:41:58 PM , Rating: 2
It sounds like you're implying that the current IP madness is ultimately good for the consumer, then?

Note: the original intent of the patent system was to increase innovation for the good of the consumer. Instead we have millions of dollars of electronics being thrown in the trash because they look somewhat similar to some other companies electronics. We have huge companies spending more on lawyers than R&D. We have thousands of companies set up solely to just sue others and rake in money from it. I read today (on Ars Technica) about a case where small business are being extorted for hundreds of thousands of dollars because someone patented scanning a document and then emailing it. You keep supporting this stuff, though. It must be good because Apple is for it!


RE: Glad to see it
By retrospooty on 1/2/2013 4:56:23 PM , Rating: 4
No, what Nortel does is take Apples side no matter what and DOES NOT pay attention to all of the facts, especially when they dont favor Apple...

Things Apple copied just recently... Ignoring all the stuff Mac copied.
- Notifications
- Over the air update methodology
- Widgets
- Free turn by turn navigation
- Social network integration methodology
- Multitasking
- Drop Down Notifications
- Opening apps from the lock screen
- Custom Wallpapers
- Panoramic photos

I am sure some day soon we will see them copy multi-user support, Multi-window support and a whole bunch of other stuff as well to try to catch up with the competition.

Nortel, Apple isn't worthy of your idolization. It's hardly worthy of you as a customer, much less a disciple. Its a company FFS. Get over it.


RE: Glad to see it
By nafhan on 1/2/2013 5:16:19 PM , Rating: 2
That does seem to be more likely than anything else. Ah well.
quote:
I am sure some day soon we will see them copy... to try to catch up with the competition.
Except it won't be catching up, it will be doing it right for the first time ever in the history of computing, AND IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE! :) Seriously, though, they should and will copy this stuff, it makes sense, and that's how technology advances!


RE: Glad to see it
By retrospooty on 1/2/2013 5:22:14 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly... And there is nothing wrong with it if Apple does copy these things. All companies build off the ideas of others. Its not about who thinks of the best thing, its about who can bring it to market at a price point that people will buy it at. That is called free market and its how business has always been done since civilization began. Then only "foul" going on here is Apple crying about it and suing as if they dont do it themselves.

I wonder what the honest answer would be if we could ask Steve Jobs what the iPhone would be if not for Palm and RIMM?

Answer(if there were no Palm and RIMM): "What is an iPhone?"


RE: Glad to see it
By Conner36 on 1/2/2013 10:55:45 PM , Rating: 1
And if there was no Newton:
"Whats a palm pilot?"
And if there was no Larry Tesler at Apple: (Started the project after Steve Jobs was ousted in 1987)
"Whats a Newton?"
And if there was no Steve Jobs and Woz:
"Whats Apple?"

Learn your history... it's easy enough with access to the internet. Products like the Android or iPhone have deep development roots and it's mere chance that someone came up with the idea before someone else. Give credit to where credit is do though. There were many smart people working their butts off under Steve's direction to make the iPhone. Small known fact that the tech in the iPhone was meant for a tablet, but Steve saw a market and directed the engineers to create a phone.
It takes a good company to foster good chance taking which is why RIM is in the shitter right now.

ps It took years before the competition caught up with the original iPhone's UI snappiness

pps The tech industry as a whole needs to stop using patents as a crutch, but at this point with so much money on the line you would have to be crazy not to sue. It's just business. And its up to US citizens to vote people into Congress to affect change and make sense out of copyright and patents.


RE: Glad to see it
By retrospooty on 1/3/2013 7:45:36 AM , Rating: 2
"Learn your history"

If you did, you would know that the Apple Newton and Palm Pilot both copied the earlier Psion product (The first PDA)... But that doesn't change my point, in fact it underlines it. ALL companies build off the ideas of others. Apple has a long history of copying other companies products and again, there is nothing wrong with that.

"it took years before the competition caught up with the original iPhone's UI snappiness"

It did. The initial iPhone was a huge homerun. Apple's reward for making that hit product was record profits. Now they have been caught up with and surpassed and they are suing instead of going back to innovating. THAT is the problem here.


RE: Glad to see it
By MartyLK on 1/3/2013 9:43:09 AM , Rating: 1
And if you knew your history, you'd know that every technology the world uses came from the United States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Simon


RE: Glad to see it
By retrospooty on 1/3/2013 10:27:23 AM , Rating: 2
This helps my point that all companies copy and its OK. Thanks.


RE: Glad to see it
By MartyLK on 1/2/2013 6:11:20 PM , Rating: 1
A few of the things Google was ripping from Apple illegally based on patent rights.

slide/swipe-to-unlock
drag-over-icon-to-create-folder
embedded hyperlink phone numbers

Where's the patents on what you listed?


RE: Glad to see it
By ritualm on 1/3/2013 2:24:54 AM , Rating: 2
Google ripping off Apple on software gestures? LOL

Software patents are full of bullcrap. So are your posts.


RE: Glad to see it
By nafhan on 1/3/2013 10:15:39 AM , Rating: 2
Your examples are great illustrations of one of the current problems with IP law: they're not innovations worthy of protection. Nonsense like this is exactly why we've got companies spending more on lawyers than R&D.

You'd like to slow down innovation in order to protect a simple method for creating folders on a touchscreen. WHY?


RE: Glad to see it
By MartyLK on 1/3/2013 11:12:08 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree. I see the merit in protecting IP work. It's very much similar to protecting a bunch of oil paint and canvas mixed together in a specific way to produce a highly valued work of art.

At its root, a painting that gains worldwide recognition and multi-million-dollar value is nothing more than a smearing of paints on a simple canvas. But the value comes not only from the way the smearing of paint was done, but also by whom it was done.

Anyone can spear paint on a canvas. But that doesn't lead to value. Anyone can produce a swipe-lock effect, but the originator of the effect takes the crown.


RE: Glad to see it
By nafhan on 1/3/2013 4:33:38 PM , Rating: 2
Part of protecting IP is creating reasonable criteria for determining which IP is valuable. I'm not discussing IP vs. no IP. I'm discussing protecting IP at a reasonable level vs. what we have now - which is skewed towards incumbents and legal posturing rather than innovation, research, and benefit for the consumer (i.e. ideas in line with the original intent of IP). If that ends up looking "anti-Apple", that may be because you care about Apple and only Apple - not the larger environment of technology and innovation.


RE: Glad to see it
By Strunf on 1/4/2013 6:06:04 AM , Rating: 2
What you fail to see is that you can make 1 million different paintings or more, the chances that 2 people come up with the same painting is virtually impossible, that's why you can put a copyright on it just so no one copies it.

On a smart-phone touch sensitive or not there are very few possibilities, if you want to unlock a phone and it's touch sensitive the very basic would be touch to unlock or touch and move to unlock, the barn at my grandmother farm has a slide to unlock door, there's really nothing new on a slide to unlock. The same with the two fingers thing to zoom, this has been around for ages on science fiction movies...

At the end of the day you use your fingers to operate a touch-sensitive device so it's perfectly normal to admit than you never really come up with a unique input method.


RE: Glad to see it
By MartyLK on 1/3/2013 11:31:48 AM , Rating: 2
I have to resort to this because of the censorship here.

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c165/MartyLK/Pos...


RE: Glad to see it
By ritualm on 1/3/2013 5:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
If you really think DT is censoring you on purpose, wait until you're in North Korea.


RE: Glad to see it
By Andora76 on 1/3/2013 12:07:46 AM , Rating: 2
If Apple is starting to copy other companies in order to stay competitive then great for us - the consumer. Sounds like competition is working. I can only hope we see more tech adoptions (copying.). I do have to say, those 3D maps Apple has is pretty awesome, regardless of who invented what. I can care less who invents what as long as the consumer can benefit. Now they need to just fix the maps, since at this point the 3D maps are not trust-worthy at all.


"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch














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