Judge Koh shoots down Apple's request for a ban and Samsung's motion for a new trial
0. phoneArena 18 Dec 2012, 00:59 posted on
Judge Lucy Koh is now starting to hand out her decisions on motions made by Samsung and Apple related to their epic patent trial held earlier in the year; on Monday, Judge Koh ruled against Apple denying the Cupertino based firm's motion requesting that specific Samsung devices be banned in the United States and also denied Samsung's request for a new trial...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3890; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
"Samsung may have cut into Apple's customer base somewhat..."
So what?? it's not Samsung that did it...it is the customers' choice!!
8. p0rkguy (Posts: 685; Member since: 23 Nov 2010)
Her entire quote is just competitive business.
If that's the case, Microsoft should sue Apple for OSX.
18. garz_pa (Posts: 154; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)
Actually, Microsoft got that whole graphical user interface thing from Apple.
34. true1984 (Posts: 823; Member since: 23 May 2012)
wrong, apple and microsoft got it from xerox
10. MeoCao (unregistered)
The fun part is how much SS has to pay now. I think the calculations that the jury made was a total mess. And Apple garbage Steve Jobs patent will be invalidated too.
After all this there is still Court of Appeals and it will be a hollow victory at best for Apple
33. TheMan (Posts: 490; Member since: 21 Sep 2012)
Personally, I was surprised that SS went with the "foreman's biased" as its lead argument. I thought the issue was that the jury didn't follow the instruction given it -- more through incompetence as opposed to a vendetta -- resulting in a mistrial.
But, then, I'm not an attorney; I play one online.
16. Ohrules (Posts: 327; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)
this may be beside the point, but in the featured stories, it says: "Jidge Koh says no"
25. sithvenger (banned) (Posts: 371; Member since: 25 Aug 2012)
So y don't u day that when customers choose apple. Instead u go into a tirade.
28. JC557 (Posts: 1541; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)
I didn't know we, the customers, have to buy stuff from Apple.
2. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
It was clear iKoh would deny.......like completely unfair court battle not allowing showing facts against rotten and lying Apple....hope Apple+Microsfot=pure Evil will pay 3 % to Motorola!
20. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3890; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
And it's not fair to sue each and every time similarities exists.
24. jacko1977 (Posts: 428; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)
why when apple is bad in the spotlight your nowhere to be seen ?
39. dmckay12 (Posts: 243; Member since: 25 Feb 2012)
Please cite the precedent for that. Specifically the non-existant precedent that allows a company to knowingly violate patents in the making of a product and profit off of it without paying for it. Apple knew that the patents existed and refused to pay for them. Fair use=/=free.
45. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
You mean stealing forcefully and then when gettin g caught calling it Fair use right?
46. jroc74 (Posts: 6014; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
For the umpteenth time...the F in FRAND ...does....not......stand....for.....Free.....
3. quakan (Posts: 1374; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)
As if a $1.05 billion isn't enough. If had even a fraction of that......sigh.
4. bvalde09 (Posts: 181; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)
Are we serious? Apple is seeking more money, so 1 Billion isnt enough? Apple vs Samsung We all heard about this and we are f......ng tired of the same sh.t. Why dont you guys give a new face to your IOS? Give a new face to the Iphone instead of making money on court?
11. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
and the fact is to pay more even for invalidated patents!!!
6. quakan (Posts: 1374; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)
Please tell me you didn't make that Judge Koh picture your avatar after you read this. -_-
7. StringCheese01 (Posts: 64; Member since: 27 Jan 2012)
Haha no no i've had this avatar since the early days of the trial
9. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
It will be interesting to see how Judge Koh rules on damages, given the recent invalidation of Apple patents that I believe are at the heart of the trial.... Apple could be looking at a Pyrrhic victory.
12. Dunknown (Posts: 84; Member since: 23 Jul 2012)
I think it is better to banned Samsung in this particular world. The phone they produced is getting worse. Like the Galasy S3. Nothing much in there, it shows laggness. And sometimes the screen froze and restart. I just use it for about six month and it shows this kind of shows for me. I think I should swith back to Iphone or maybe Nokia Lumia 920 that kinda attract me a lot.
14. joey_sfb (Posts: 5819; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
That why you Dunknown that S3 is good. Apple fan pretending to own high end smartphone. iPhone is an dumb phone too restrictive to be called a smartphone.
19. chaoticrazor (Posts: 2347; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)
you both idiots, one he's obviously letting off a load of bs, the s3 is a great phone. but second for you to then say the iphone is a dumb phone is bs too.............why do you have to be all defensive and attack other product instead of only setting him straight is beyond fanboyism.
38. joey_sfb (Posts: 5819; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
iPhone is a dumb phone to me. You don't have to agree.
Besides, i only pay for item that would serve my long term interest. Apple want to remove choices, so i buy samsung to defend it. Lawsuit do cost lots of money and apple has truckload of it and are bullying competitors with lawsuits.
I am not a fanboy of any brand. I only serve my interest.