Apple's thermonuclear legal strategy scores a big win
0. phoneArena 24 Aug 2012, 17:00 posted on
The verdict is in, and Apple racked up more than $1 billion in damages against Samsung, although it failed to protect the design of the iPad/iPad 2, and probably won't be able to get injunctions against as many devices as it had hoped...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
99. roscuthiii (Posts: 1717; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
John f**king Zoidberg! You jinxed it by mentioning big bucks! ;-P
Or maybe I did with my "no whammies"... I dunno. I'm a little stunned at the moment with the lopsided nature of the verdict. I thought if there were any common sense involved that the verdict would have resembled the verdict in South Korea. So much for common sense! I thought the prior art was pretty obvious. Maybe Samsung's legal team did too; they just did not come into this trial with their heads in the game. You really got to pound your point home when talking to a handful of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty.
Say what you will about Apple... the bastards got some mojo.
The problem for them is, their success inflating like a bubble. And as we've seen with all bubbles recently, eventually they pop. I'd give Apple another 5-7 years of success before theirs does. Hopefully they haven't litigated all the other competition out of existence by that point.
103. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
"You really got to pound your point home when talking to a handful of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty."
that was pretty funny... and sadly true.. lol
I think 5-7 is way longer than they have without a major shake up in their OS. maybe 2 or 3 with out any major market surprises with WP starting to grow and android still more than double the daily acts of iOS.
7. DroidDoesVZW (Posts: 9; Member since: 19 Oct 2009)
I'm an Apple fanboy through and through but I'm really hoping that Samsung is victorious in this case. What Apple is doing is just cruel, especially considering how much money they have already. This whole case is ridiculous.
9. AdamW33 (Posts: 39; Member since: 25 Aug 2011)
Winner: Big Business, Loser: Consumer.
Time to end the rediculous patent and copyright laws in this country.
11. androidornothing (Posts: 143; Member since: 26 Apr 2012)
I have a feeling that both will pay something. I dont think anyone will get their products completely banned.
13. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
ladies and gentlemen.. place your bets now.
100 to 1 odds that apple will be the sole winner
300 to 1 odds that samsung will be the sole winner
2 to 1 that they both have products banned
5 to 1 that apple has design patents rejected
10 to 1 that samsung has its 3G patents rejected
1000 to 1 that there will be no appeal regardless of the decision
14. Scott_H (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Oct 2011)
I would have taken the split verdict odds in the middle of the week, but given how fast the decision was I'm really not sure what to expect.
19. rusticguy (Posts: 2811; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
match is FIXED ... needless to say in favor of whom :)
25. ardent1 (Posts: 1983; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
America is known for strong property rights, and it's one of the main reasons why American has such a high GDP per capital in the world.
If we don't protect our personal property in America, then there's no personal property left to protect. The people in the jury room may have already asked this question: How would I respond if someone tried to steal my property?
252. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
This is such a good point. It deserves 10 thumbs up, not down.
31. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
you got that right. I didnt think we'd hear anything till like tue/wed at the earliest.
20. -box- (Posts: 3566; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Yep. "The first verdicts out of Apple vs. Samsung are in, covering claims 19, 8, and 50 of the so-called '381, '915, and '163 software patents, respectively — those are the patents that cover "bounce back" scrolling functionality, pinch-to-zoom, and tap-to-zoom.
For claim 19 of '381, the answer is yes for all devices.
For claim 8 of '915, the answer is yes for all but the Ace, Intercept, and Replenish."
No surprise there; Korean courts found the same thing. Bad news of that is that it may not mean apple's patents are invalidated :(
26. jroc74 (Posts: 3980; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Pinch to zoom and tap to zoom will be interesting for Android as a whole.
Is it specific done in a specific way on iOS that Apple wont worry about other Android phones or is this leverage to go after Android as a whole?
I dont think Samsung and Apple will get a split like what happened earlier this week in Korea.
53. -box- (Posts: 3566; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Not just android, but darn near anything with a screen or multi-touch trackpad... Appeals are going to very heated, I expect.
29. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
its not the bounceback im worried about. besides, that was fixed a while ago on most every android set.
Im worried about their blank rectangle minimalist BS patents they never should have been awarded. If they win on those, that is going to be major trouble for the industry.
28. master0fursinz (Posts: 104; Member since: 26 Apr 2010)
so far from what im reading sammy lost badly...
30. jroc74 (Posts: 3980; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Yea.....Apple didnt win by a landslide.....but they won enough for me to say they can be seen as winners in this case.
Let the fanboy wars....begin....
33. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
oh crap.. samsung is getting pounded.. the damages are huge.
42. Non_Sequitur (Posts: 1111; Member since: 16 Mar 2012)
Ikr. Never supporting Apple ever again. This is total bulls**t and the only reason Apple even did this is because Samsung made a better product.
Either way, 1.5 Bn. is just peanuts to both Apple and Samsung, especially with Samsung after all the Galaxy S3 sales.
The US patent system is still f**ked up. I'm f**king pissed. Can't wait until Google pulls out the notification patent and forces Apple to change half of iOS and OS X.
70. taz89 (Posts: 1948; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Its 1.05 billion..as you stated this isn't going to damage Samsung or suddenly make apple rich as they are loaded...to these companies a billion is like what a million would be to us...as I have said if this ''copying''has taken samsung to the top then that 1billion is not that bad...if they had to pay 1 billion and were struggling in the market Then they probably would have hurt them...for now its probably huRt there ego more than their pockets.
60. roscuthiii (Posts: 1717; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Did anyone really expect a different outcome here? When you take into account the manner in which Koh presided over this case? When you take into account California not only being Apple's backyard, but coupled with the Hollywood/hipster nature of the state that iPhones probably make up +/-70% of the smartphone market and that Apple's other products probably also see their market shares there? Taking into account the partisan nature of most Americans to see everything in the black and white terms of "us" vs "them"?
66. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the way the case started, i expected a heavy apple win.. the whole thing was lopsided from the start. But when samsung pulled out all the prior art and tech, i thought they did a pretty good job of proving that Apple didnt invent it, and thus should not have gotten the patent for it. Also, I'm surprised that they didnt come down on ANY of Samsung's patent claims like they did in Korea. That part I'm surprised about.
The decision is completely lopsided, but on a positive note, Apple did not get their silver bullets validated... the generic ipad design sketches and some other things which keeps them from being able to pretty much shut down the tablet industry and go after a lot of other things. The tech part about it, like the bounce back, samsung didnt really put any effort into defending, so that doesnt surprise me. Besides, few android phones have any bounce back anymore.
The other positive is that the jury only really found american SGS1 variants as copying the iphone 3gs, and the SGS2 variants were pretty untouched unlike in Korea where they all got banned a long with the iphones and ipads.
The SGS1 variants on sale now are few and far between, so that doesnt have much of an effect now.
Either way.. APPEAL APPEAL APPEAL.
74. taz89 (Posts: 1948; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Honestly I wouldn't even appeal I think give the 1.05 billion which honestly Samsung will make back next quarter.. all android phones have their own bounce back different to apples so that won't be an issue anymore.
34. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
wow. I cant believe that they didnt invalidate ANY of Apple's patents on the prior art. That crap was pretty open and shut. At least they didnt win on the rectangle ipad drawing. So... is it invalidated or do they get to keep it anyways?
59. cdgoin (Posts: 355; Member since: 28 Jul 2010)
I have to say I hate Apple more than probably anyone.. But that said, looking at the evidence, even I would have had to side with Apple. That said, Apple showed a Nokia 900 and brought it as an example of innovation and NOT a copy of iPhone.
Funniest thing, Apple stole much of their UI from windows mobile 5.0 so you know they wont try to go after MS if WindowsPhone finally takes off.
37. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
wow is this judgement 1 sided. they didnt side with samsung on any patents so far. This highlights the huge difference in the courts in the world between ours and samsungs.
38. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the ipod touch got found to be infringing, but the iphones did not........ how the hell?? its the exact same thing but WITHOUT the 3g radio.. lol.
40. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
zero damages to samsung from apple? woooooow.
Soooo.. who wants to take bets on how fast the laywers are preparing their appeal? I bet its already written.. lol
43. rusticguy (Posts: 2811; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
One sided judgment ... arrogance at it's best.
45. ayephoner (Posts: 833; Member since: 09 Jun 2009)
1 bil 50 mil =/= 1.5 bil
numbers. how do they work?
81. Scott_H (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Oct 2011)
You were right - an initial report had it at $1.5, it's updated now.
48. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
a one sided court hearing for the prosecution from the beginning with only snippets of impartiality from the Judge turns out a one sided jury finding with only snippets for the defendant. Amazing.
51. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
one difference between this case and korea, other than the obvious lopsided nature of the verdict. In korea they found every phone except the SGS3 basically as infringing and banned, where here they only found the SGS1 american variants infringing and not much else. Not gonna be much if any phone banning since most are not on sale, but still, the verdict is crazy and now apple has precedence to go after other manufacturers.
Hit that appeal button.. hit it now, samsung!
52. DechyX (Posts: 112; Member since: 16 May 2011)
2.3 billion evidentlyhttp://live.cnet.com/Event/App
56. cdgoin (Posts: 355; Member since: 28 Jul 2010)
Winner, Windows Phone.. Think HTC and Samsung, and others aren't going to look at Windows Phone as the safer bet..
62. jroc74 (Posts: 3980; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
This wasnt about stock Android. This was about some things Samsung did that was found to be infringing on Apple patents.
Samsung, HTC and others dont need to dump Android anytime soon.
68. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
exactly, they were going after touchwiz and the SGS1.. and older unused versions of touchwiz at that. The jury didnt find anything for the SGS2/SGS3.
128. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
can you explain what they won, troll, other than money, which is pretty much no object to either of these companies?
156. Aeires (unregistered)
Are you 2 years old?
58. taz89 (Posts: 1948; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Actually its 1.05 billion PA... considering this ''copying'' took Samsung to the top I would say 1.05 billion is an OK price to pay Considering where it has brought Samsung mobile division too..again good for apple I just hope all the itrolls don't get giddy as if they have won a court case...
61. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
Do you know if this means that apple's rectangle ipad drawings are invalidated completely, or just valid for this case?
84. Scott_H (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Oct 2011)
I don't know for sure, but the jury seems to have accepted that Apple can't claim any protection for the iPad because other products shipped or were shown (including the Galaxy Tab) prior to its release, so I suspect Apple is basically out of luck in the tablet market.
67. parkwaydr (Posts: 572; Member since: 07 Sep 2011)
this is pathetic, koh was one sided from the beginning and it rubbed off on the jury, so much for common sense. the sad part is, i'm not even a samsung fan and this upsets me.
90. Scott_H (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Oct 2011)
To be fair to the jury, Samsung's lawyers did not do near the job that Google's did vs. Oracle. Samsung seemed to be too concerned with counter suits and non-infringement, rather than making the vast majority of the case about validity.
Think about it for a moment; the question of patent validity on the jury form was AFTER the questions on infringement. How can that possibly be? Samsung's legal team clearly failed to properly frame the issue from the start.
95. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the jury form? yea, I cant believe samsung didnt fight that tooth and nail. Having it reverse the way it was practically guaranteed a favorable return of some sort for apple. if they've already gone through the work and said yes to a few things, then its pretty likely they will say the patent is valid.
maybe they need to bring the lawyers from Korea over to help the american lawyers. They did a better job on offence, though the americans did a better job on some defense.
97. parkwaydr (Posts: 572; Member since: 07 Sep 2011)
how can you say they failed when more than half of what they put up for evidence was shot down by koh?
131. protozeloz (Posts: 5328; Member since: 16 Sep 2010)
Agree, Google did a great job against oracle, Samsung could have done better
72. rusticguy (Posts: 2811; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
This is typical American way of punishing Korea's ban on Iphone 4/4S and yes it seems a revenge going by the swiftness and hurry with which it was done. Would never buy any Apple Product ever.