x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options
    Close






Jury: Samsung infringed on at least one Apple patent; Apple awarded $119.6 million

0. phoneArena 02 May 2014, 19:48 posted on

A jury in the second Federal patent trial between Apple and Samsung, concluded that the latter did infringe on at least one Apple patent. But unlike the verdict in the first case, which ended up with Apple awarded nearly $930 million following a second jury trial related to the damages awarded, the jury on Friday concluded that Samsung must pay Apple the much smaller figure of $119.6 million...

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

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:00 5

1. Sauce (unregistered)


Just in: After several hours of deliberation, the jury has finally come to an agreement and found that Samsung has infringed on Apple’s patents…

More to come

(source: 9to5)

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:03

2. grahaman27 (Posts: 361; Member since: 05 Apr 2013)


9to5 what? It makes a difference!

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:43

11. Sauce (unregistered)


There is 9to5google, 9to5mac, 9to5forums, 9to5toys

I said 9to5 because thats what my RSS client pushes.

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:29 10

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


You forgot Dolly Parton's 9to5, which is probably more appropriate given this travesty of justice or iNjustice!!

Samsung shouldn't pay them a penny. Apple should be grateful to Samsung because if it were not for Samsung you guys would still be on iPhone 3GSX.

posted on 02 May 2014, 21:18 6

39. Arte-8800 (banned) (Posts: 4562; Member since: 13 Mar 2014)


And still be using outdated outdated screen and specs

iJustice is a must

posted on 03 May 2014, 17:25

72. Sauce (unregistered)


By the way (http://9to5google.com/2014/05/02/verdict-reached-​in-apple-v-samsung-patent-trial-with-mixed-results​-apple-awarded-119-6-million-in-damages/)

I believe it says, "..//9to5GOOGLE.com…"

Does it make a difference now? LMAO

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:31

8. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Thanks for the tip...this lil nuggest was posted at 9to5mac:

Apple was found guilty in the case of Samsung patent ’239, which deals with streaming video during FaceTime calls.

The court also ruled that Apple had infringed on some of Samsung’s property and awarded the Korean company $158,400 in damages.

So....seems Samsung can use some of the money from this to pay for what they owe...

Overall so far...Samsung found guilty on 2....mixed results on 1...not guilty on other 2..

Apple found guilty on 1, not guilty on another...

Let the fanboys wars begin!!!!

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:13 4

19. 14545 (Posts: 1604; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)


I'm confused about how apple can "infringe" on a patent and only have to pay 160k, versus 119million. I mean FT is one of apples signature apps. So it seems like the valuation would be much higher there vs. sammy.

posted on 03 May 2014, 04:32 1

62. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Yea...its crazy...I know.

posted on 05 May 2014, 11:00

76. StanleyG88 (Posts: 231; Member since: 15 Mar 2012)


Because the Judge is in Apple's pocket.

Also, how can Samsung be liable for Apple's patent on the SS Gal Nexus when it is a 100% Android device. Samsung did not supply any SW for it.

posted on 03 May 2014, 03:56 6

57. Ashoaib (Posts: 3229; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)


Apple's patents are expensive 119 million and samsung only 158400.... so only apple's patents are worthy, other company's patents are not worthy... still its a small win for samsung bcoz its proved that apple copy too

posted on 03 May 2014, 03:59 2

58. Ashoaib (Posts: 3229; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)


Title of this post is missleading... it should be"Apple Also Found Infringing Samsung's Patents"

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:05 3

3. Alan01 (Posts: 387; Member since: 21 Mar 2012)


It's not true...verdict has yet to be released

Alan F.

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:09 14

4. brrunopt (Posts: 742; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)


let me guess; they will decide in favor of apple ...

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:13 1

5. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Title says Samsung infringes on at least 1 patent....

If after all this and its only for 1 patent....this was almost an absolute waste of time. And should be alot less than 2.2 billion.....

Cant wait for further details.

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:14 9

6. gamalielct (Posts: 2; Member since: 11 Dec 2013)


i really hope samsung finally wins... that will make apple fanboys cry :D

CANT WAIT!!!!!

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:33 9

27. The-Sailor-Man (banned) (Posts: 1095; Member since: 25 Mar 2014)


Agree
Samsung is not happy for that.
Even $1 paid for such a BS trial, is offending. Even if Google pay it, it's a stain on Samsung, not on Google(US).
That's what Apple want. They know that trey will lose in the tech batle, so they try to bite Samsung's honor(just to keep the iZombies united, and not to run away).

posted on 02 May 2014, 21:20 2

40. Arte-8800 (banned) (Posts: 4562; Member since: 13 Mar 2014)


Lmfao

iZombies.

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:22 2

7. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Ok....title update says Apple has been awarded...119 million....

Wow...thats a wee bit less than 2.2 billion....lol. I cant wait to find out what this one patent was...

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:32

9. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Ok....read my other reply....seen more info about the ruling after posting this....

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:46

13. Sauce (unregistered)


"The first verdict read was for patent 5,946,647, Apple’s “data detectors” that transform typed text such as addresses into actionable links. Samsung was found guilty of infriging on this patent in all devices listed in the suit."

"The next patent in question was number 8,074,172, which deals with how autocorrect suggests words. Here the jury found Samsung guilty of infringing Apple’s intellectual property."

"In the case of patent 8,046,721, a gesture-based unlock screen (“slide to unlock”), the jury returned mixed results. Samsung was found to infringe on some of its devices, but not all of them."

_________________

"The court also ruled that Apple had infringed on some of Samsung’s property and awarded the Korean company $158,400 in damages."

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:38 1

28. androiphone20 (Posts: 1654; Member since: 10 Jul 2013)


ReCode says the amount can be increased from $120m since n thee infringement was 'wilful'

posted on 03 May 2014, 08:37 1

67. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


I hope thats the same case for what Apple owes too.

Face Time feature vs every patent Apple was suing over....The amounts really should be reversed.

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:36

10. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


With the '721 patent, some Samsung devices, like the Samsung GALAXY Nexus were found to have infringed on it.

Ok.....that was stock Android.......

Which reminds me....I wonder if this is one of the patents Google will cover the loss on.

posted on 03 May 2014, 10:32 1

68. deathgod (Posts: 122; Member since: 23 Nov 2011)


As a current Galaxy Nexus owner this is Total BS!! Did any of the jurors even use this phone to come to that conclusion!?

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:46 14

12. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)


FCK YOU APPLE. FCK YOU JUDGE KOH/JURIES.

posted on 02 May 2014, 19:51 4

14. jellmoo (Posts: 1693; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


Um... Is that really necessary? A jury reached a decision after weighing the evidence, and the monetary award is *way* less than Apple was seeking.

I can't for the life of me understand your reaction.

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:13 9

18. The-Sailor-Man (banned) (Posts: 1095; Member since: 25 Mar 2014)


Evidence??
What "evidence"? BS patents that can be patented only in US and only by Apple. And existing in the stock Android?(Google is US company- so no problem there)
Come on.
What Samsung is to be blamed, or punished? Oooh wait...I get it...they smash Apple litle by little.

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:27 3

23. jellmoo (Posts: 1693; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


Again, there is a lot of opinion being flung around about what is or is not a valid patent. I happen to agree that the patent system in the US is ridiculously broken.

But the jury is limited by patent law. They made their decision based on it to the best of their abilities. Whether you or I agree with the decision is moot. Insulting the jury for having done their job, and odds are one they never wanted is completely unnecessary.

posted on 02 May 2014, 20:48 7

30. networkdood (Posts: 6330; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


I highly doubt they could find enough intelligent people to sit on a jury, nowadays..lol

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories