Samsung victorious over Apple in Japanese patent case
On December 6th, Judge Lucy Koh will listen to motions from Apple which will seek preliminary injunctions on 8 Samsung devices which the U.S. jury ruled infringed on Apple's patents. In addition, since the jury ruled that Samsung had 'willfully' copied Apple's designs and infringed on its patents, the judge could decide to triple the amount of the jury's award to as much as $3.15 billion. Samsung has said that it will appeal the decision.
1. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
Nice to see there are a few rational human beings left on this earth..
45. AeroPrime (Posts: 142; Member since: 21 Feb 2011)
Apple you can win a lawsuit and make billion in your own country but please remind yourself don't even think about Sue-ing Samsung in the Asian region you are digging your own grave. True Justice comes within the heart of Asia.
46. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Except it wasn't a fair trial. Samsung had too much of a home field advantage since Japan is fairly close to Samsung's home turf.
48. Savage (Posts: 431; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)
So by the same rationale , Apple had the home advantage in US.
Try to get around that one!
49. Jobes (Posts: 364; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)
So by his own logic.... The trial here in America was unfair as well considering Apples advantage.. hmm *rubs chin* yeah you put yourself in a corner with that one Mxyzptlk, just sayin ;)
61. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I didnt put myself in the corner. Samsung has US operations as well.
53. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
That's like saying that an Israeli company has an unfair trial advantage in Iran.
Korea and Japan don't exactly have the best history of relations.
54. Jobes (Posts: 364; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)
Snig he just thinks because they are asian that they are friends.
62. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
So why did Japan rule in favor of Samsung then? I dont quite understand how you saw that as racist.
65. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
You really can't accept the idea that Apple couldn't prove that a) Samsung infringed on the patent or b) the patent was valid to begin with?
You honestly can't fathom any reason why the Japanese court made its decision other than "They're Azn too, lolzbbq."
And you pretend to be intelligent. What a joke you are.
68. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
They did prove it. They can only do so much with a biased foreign court. You can't fanthom my comment to be anything but racist because you don't want to admit that Samsung is wrong here.
I don't have to pretend sniggly. Can't speak for you I'm afraid.
70. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
You still haven't offered any proof that Samsung only won because the case was in an Azn court. A priori is not a valid argument. If Apple lost the case, it's because they couldn't prove infringement on the patent they sued Samsung over, or that the patent was valid. One or the other, possibly both.
I mean, if you're going to continue with this idiotic argument, you now have to admit that Apple won the US case because it was on home turf vs. Korea. Oh, you won't? That's okay, I knew you were a hypocrite anyway.
3. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Even in the darkness, a ray of light may break through.
Cut me a break, I'm watching Suburban Knights on TGWTG. All the fantasy talk has me going. Grr.
47. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
So you support companies ripping off other companies instead of innovation?
63. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Apple hasn't ripped off anyone.
52. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
No, which is part of why I don't support Apple.
64. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I didn't say you supported apple.
66. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
But you do, despite their acts of ripping off other companies.
69. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I support justice being served properly.
56. MEeee (Posts: 189; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
Apple is the biggest thieve and used the US court to rob people money.
5. FrostyDanny (Posts: 90; Member since: 15 Jul 2012)
Finally a judge without a head up her/his ass.
6. XiphiasGladius (Posts: 799; Member since: 21 Aug 2011)
Probably because the Judge doesn't think that it was "Apple since day one".
13. frydaexiii (Posts: 1156; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)
It's not "Finally a judge without a head up her/his ass.", it's "Cool, seem like the American judge is the only one with a head up her ass."
7. Bluesky02 (Posts: 1439; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)
A small victory for a big leap in the future
9. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
what was the first, an egg or Apple?........iCompost...
39. kingpet13 (Posts: 139; Member since: 02 Feb 2012)
It must be apple, because they are suing chickens because of their patent for "a round white object." Apparently their were no round white objects before apple. So either they were first or eggs used to be green. According to Tim Cook at least.
41. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
which begs the question of which came first? the patent or the egg?
Do you have prior art to validate? lol
51. Jobes (Posts: 364; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)
Well if the egg came first and there was prior art Apple would just sue and collect 3 bil in damages..
57. parkwaydr (Posts: 572; Member since: 07 Sep 2011)
it would be more than that, they would want 45 dollors for every egg every laid.
10. Savage (Posts: 431; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)
In every market, other than the US, Apple has been defeated. So who's right? The US or the world?
12. Phullofphil (Posts: 798; Member since: 10 Feb 2009)
I just can't believe apple can actualy get patients on ideas and things that are so broad and common place as a rectangle with a bezel for instance. All smartphones have that. They have to
14. Bfrenz (Posts: 106; Member since: 26 Aug 2012)
I've been at Japan once. Guys have to admit this,they are ahead us(U.S) about 10 years or so..
15. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Yeah, but they still have some weird s**t going on over there.
Though I guess the US matches them blow for blow with People of Walmart.
16. xtian1103 (Posts: 352; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)
let the fandroids celebrations begin! btw the patent in question is transferring media between phones. now if it's design patents, sayonara sammy
17. Sniggly (Posts: 6477; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
It was apparently the best that Apple could bring against Samsung when they filed the lawsuit.
With what happened to Samsung in Cali, I'm going to take what victories I can get.
34. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
out of all their lawsuits apple won.. what... a design infringement in Germany and Australia which was quickly tossed when they adjusted the design of the Tab... and the ruling in America... which wont stand long either. They got some products banned in S. Korea, but they also got themselves 100% banned in korea in the process. Out of how many dozens of lawsuits against samsung in the world?
Not the best track record.
20. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
So what you're saying is for actual technology, it's Samsung. For shapes and colors, it's Apple.
33. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
if you ask an inutter, shapes and colors are way more important than techonology
18. xtian1103 (Posts: 352; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)
it's like usa dream team winning against korea in the olympics, while korea def. usa in jones cup in asia.
24. ogy_dogy (Posts: 453; Member since: 29 Jun 2012)
Why do you think that apples victory has any impact on the rest of the world?? I see no effects of it here in europe, mainly becouse here you cant patetnt a box with rounded corners. So id compare the apple victory to a 3rd regional league victory that only the villiage it was played in gave a damn...
25. xtian1103 (Posts: 352; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)
that village must be so rich to award a billion $ price to apple.
58. ogy_dogy (Posts: 453; Member since: 29 Jun 2012)
In todays business, and with such players, 1 bil is a drop in the ocean...
21. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
C'mon, Judge. Order Apple to fess up in the local papers and in their website, "Samsung did not infringe our IP. In fact, it's not even our IP."
30. plgladio (Posts: 311; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)
Yeah same like London, oh wait did they publish that first? Lastly I heard that they appeal over..
31. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
they appealed it. i dont know if they got that over turned or delayed, but they havent posted it on their web page yet.
26. bkb01 (Posts: 43; Member since: 21 Aug 2012)
of course samsung wins"transferring media between phones" iphone cant even transfer file via bluetooth. Yeah i know there are other ways, just sayin.
27. kanagadeepan (Posts: 590; Member since: 24 Jan 2012)
Take that you half-eaten r0tten fru!t...
29. shuaibhere (Posts: 874; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)
Move on sammy........
Whole world is with you expect U.S.........
55. willard12 (Posts: 545; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
Except trials presided by Judge Koh in which she doesnt allow Samsung to present key evidence or witnesses. They beat Apple in every other US Court. See Judge Posner.
35. sithvenger (banned) (Posts: 371; Member since: 25 Aug 2012)
Although I'm an iOS user, and can care less about the billion dollars Sammy owes apple. I sincerely hope Sammy's phones don't get banned, or pulled. It's the consumer that I care about, and we should b able to by what we want. Sammy makes killer devices what else can u say.
37. Nikolas.Oliver (Posts: 1340; Member since: 01 Jul 2012)
it's very obvious why apple win in U.S, it's apple hometown,
38. Aeires (unregistered)
Checking the facts and it's another win for Samsung and loss for Apple.