x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Judge Koh continues Samsung's legal slump by denying all 12 summary judgment motions

0. phoneArena 01 Jul 2012, 01:17 posted on

A summary judgement motion brought by Samsung back in May was denied in its entirety by Judge Lucy Koh on Saturday; the Korean manufacturer had attacked the validity of Apple's IP rights and Apple's FRAND-related antitrust claims...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 01:21 20

1. wendygarett (unregistered)

Patent Troll Episode 503

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 13:50 1

176. DigitalBoy05 (Posts: 228; Member since: 04 Jun 2011)

so youre saying it has nothing to do with having a good product but entirely on how its marketed?

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:10 3

13. Otterbox (banned) (Posts: 71; Member since: 27 Jun 2012)

More like a slice of the justice pie.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:31 3

23. Gemmol (Posts: 792; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)

I do not understand half of yall on this website, in my opinion, if you own a business and someone steal your ideas you sue them, but then yall bring up the point that Apple do not like innovation, if that is the case Samsung and other companies do not like innovation, since they are stealing from Apple....If samsung and other companies are so innovated why dont they just make new things and stop using stuff Apple sue them for.....Then yall bring up the part of Apple not innovated because they buy companies, this is true, but once you buy the company the patent become yours, so even if they do not make the product they own it, which does not give another company the right to copy them.....I own a Galaxy Note, so no I am not a Apple user, but if I were the CEO of Apple I would sue anybody who use any patents I own, if they want to innovated go ahead and make their own product with their patent......If I was the CEO of Samsung I would do the same.....I will not sit there and let a company make money of my patents, if you say letting people make money off your patents is okay with you, then you do not need to run a business.... I know that I will receive a whole bunch of negative votes because theres a lot of samsung owners on this website, including me, but I am just speaking my opinion.....look at things from a business point of view and not because you like a certain product and if you do not agree with me then its fine......the comment section is for where people voice their opinions, so I would love to hear your opinions

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:31 27

24. iShepherd (Posts: 38; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

Yeah let's sue every phone manufacturer that's not Apple out of existence. This way we can have cheap $2000 iphones. If people can't take a loan out for it then they could just buy their newly patented iCan and iString for $200/piece. They may even throw in a proprietary charger for free.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 02:50 9

36. Rocksteady (unregistered)

nice, thanks you saved me the effort, you just explained my thoughts.
Have a nice day.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:11 1

41. nak1017 (Posts: 328; Member since: 08 Jan 2010)

Wouldn't putting Jellybean on the phone replace the part of the software in violation of the Siri patent?
No S-Voice, no problem...?

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:18 18

43. ilia1986 (unregistered)

A huge part of management is COMPANY ETHICS.

Ethics dictate that a company will strive to do things which do not generally cause it direct profit - ethical things.


If Samsung has indeed infringed upon patents from Apple - Apple could just demand Samsung to pay them some money to settle this. No need to demand an entire product to be banned.

But no. Instead Apple choose to demand the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany, Australia and US banned, and the Galaxy Nexus banned in the US as well.


Companies infringe of each other's patents all the time. Never before had a company demanded the absolute prohibition of selling the product in the entire country just because of patent infringement. Never before - until Apple and the lawyer death squad came along.

Remember: Apple is the first company in the history of the world to demand a product banned due to patent infringement.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 03:40 4

46. mandkeee (Posts: 82; Member since: 27 Feb 2009)

Judge Koh you did great job.....

samsung copied way too much stuffs from apple.....

and im telling you guys....from this website....most of users are love android....

so if you say something good about apple??? trust me...you will get bad reply...

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 04:31 8

54. D.Aceveda (Posts: 396; Member since: 30 Jun 2012)

Terri Schiavo probably had more intelligence than Taco50. Sad really.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 05:06 7

61. PackMan (Posts: 277; Member since: 09 Mar 2012)

This bitch is trash compared to Posner.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 05:21 8

66. som (Posts: 768; Member since: 10 Nov 2009)

Judge Koh is Tim Cook is mistress.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 05:10 9

63. TechDroid (Posts: 37; Member since: 14 Jun 2011)

There is no S-Voice on the Galaxy Nexus, so it's got nothing to do with that.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 06:15 1

72. Gemmol (Posts: 792; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)

I understand that, but as a company they should have the right to say no. If I have something and I do not want to share, I am guessing you would say I have unethical behavior.....the whole thing about it, they own the rights, it does not mean every company should share what they own.....do you share everything you own......no matter how you put it, apple own the rights to the patents, if the companies want to give better competition, make new stuff and if apple copys then ban them

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 06:21 6

73. groupsacc (Posts: 232; Member since: 28 Feb 2012)

I'd like to see you say this when you get sued by Apple for making your toast with rounded corners.

Of course, companies have the right to intellectual properties, but what we are pissed about here is the ridiculousness of the nature of these lawsuits.

Please reply after looking up what kind of patents Apple is suing for.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 06:26 2

74. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


posted on 01 Jul 2012, 07:15 2

80. ilia1986 (unregistered)

If you had a patent on glass - and were making TVs - would you demand to ban all the other TV maker's products?

If so I am truly sorry for you - you have no idea what management is all about.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:06 1

85. Gemmol (Posts: 792; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)

I am not saying what they doing is right, I think this is where everyone is getting my post confused, all I am saying they have the right to ban things, if they do not want someone using it, and for your example, if they wanted to ban them from making TV, then the other companies should make a new product to build TV's, if you look at technology, everything we once used is replace with something better and by having these patents, this is suppose to improve innovation, but samsung do not, they want to piggy back, which is okay with me because I love my Galaxy Note......but I still think everyone on PhoneArena is a joke to think Apple should not sue, this is their bread and water, this makes them profit, if someone making profit of your bread and butter, you should either get paid by them or ban them.....would you like it if someone took your product and made you go bankrupt.....this is the better question everyone should be asking themselves, these companies are trying to survive and if you say apple do not innovate all they do is buy companies, well its true, but now they own those companies patents, so it still do not give you a right to use their patents..........

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:07 1

86. Gemmol (Posts: 792; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)

read the post above you number 85 I answer your comment

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:14

88. OptimusOne (Posts: 694; Member since: 22 May 2012)

so what you said is that apple suiing people is the only way for it to survive as in bread and water

yes companies should sue if someone takes their ideas. but they should not use litigation to create market share and to ensure competitiveness. Apple instead should make the iphone 5 awesome with all that litigation money.

and suiing should be for something legit. like lets say samsung make an all glass phone with a metal rim around it with, and then add the exact same camera sensor on it. not for something as a rectangular device with rounded corners. If samsung coped the phone icon. BIG DEAL! what else do you put for a phone icon, a contacts book?

anyway suiing should be for something legit, and obvious

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:16

89. OptimusOne (Posts: 694; Member since: 22 May 2012)

when you sue something. it is for something that is really harming your marketshare and will cause inreparable harm to your market share

what apple is suiing for are things so subtile, they won't make a difference in the average consumer

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:35 2

95. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

I think a lot of the rancor against apple stems from the proven (in courts) facts that they infringed on many other patents and tech from other companies when they released the original iPhone and every subsequent model, and only got punished in fines and licensing costs (Nokia gets some big payments from apple from using a lot if it's tech, now that the courts proved the infringement), so they essentially got away with it. They're now exerting the success they had standing on the shoulders if giants to try to disrupt the sales of honest competing products (the Tab 10.1 is sort of infringing, but all this other junk is just laughable), instead of continuing the graciousness given to it by the world electronic manufacturer community when they allowed the iDevices to go on sale despite their infringements, being ungrateful and hypocritical in their actions. Honestly, I wish Nokia had not been as nice, and had been as ferocious with their patents as apple has been with the ones they got (most of which they shouldn't, prior art and products and features, etc) and had apple banned. Apple wouldn't have a leg to stand on, Nokia might still be as dominant as they had been, and Android would have flourished in its own right without B.S. suits attacking its leading products.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:40

100. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

@optimusone Yes, exactly

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 08:44 4

101. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

It is disheartening seeing Koh do this. She was doing great being unbiased and open-minded, now she seems to be dancing to apple's tune. Hopefully this is a play to get apple to lower its guard so she can throw the book at them

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 09:20 6

113. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)

Judge Lucy is just on the iRag; she just needs a few MiDol (Extra Strength) down her ('love you long time') throat.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 10:13 1

117. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)

And if tomorrow Posner sided with Apple you'd say he's trash too.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 10:23 1

119. good2great (Posts: 1042; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)

just out right offensive bro...

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 11:24 2

127. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)

Yes lets STOP MAKING phones and let Apple be the only manufacteurer then they will realize that NOT EVERYONE wants to buy a iProduct from these greedy bastards then they will drop their law suit

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 11:42

135. vbetts (Posts: 14; Member since: 23 Jun 2012)

While I don't agree with Apple going after so many patents and while I also believe the whole US patent systme is the most rediculous system on the planet, it is not unethical to want to protect your products. I hate what Apple is doing, but I can easily understand why. The main reason is to protect their products and design, now we all know too there's another reason and that's to knock out competition, but that's not the point.

And great claim there on Apple, I'm going to call BS on that because if Apple was the first company to ban a product because of patent infringements, that would completely and utterly defeat the purpose of having a US patent system. That's why it's there, if I patent a cookie with a speaker in it and someone else tries to make one and sell it without paying me royaltees, I'm going to shut them down.

posted on 01 Jul 2012, 11:58 1

137. E.N. (Posts: 2610; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)

Or maybe this is a decision that any judge would have made given their arguments....... stop being so biased yourself

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories