Still seeking an injunction against Samsung, Apple files cross-appeal in first patent trial
0. phoneArena 17 Mar 2014, 02:33 posted on
Just two weeks before the scheduled start to Apple and Samsung's second epic patent trial, the former filed a cross-appeal related to the first trial. Last week, Samsung finally had the chance to file an appeal on the original case. This happened shortly after Judge Lucy Koh had completed the $929.8 million award that Samsung owes Apple following a pair of jury verdicts. That included one retrial after Koh had vacated part of the original $1.05 billion award...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
2. joey_sfb (Posts: 3466; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
Apple is a bully plain and simple.
How can they expect no competition in the smart phone arena. Every industries has all forms of competition.
Does any apple fans here really mistook a gs3 for their beloved iPhone? Lol!
3. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5975; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Sour grapes on Apple's part. They aren't satisfied with a $929 million award, they want more and more and more!
Apple is being a PIG.
7. Finalflash (Posts: 1944; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)
No, that is the "supposed" intent, but it is actually to make their case seem just as important as Samsung's. If they don't counter appeal it will look like they are satisfied with the verdict and the prize can only go down for them from there when the appeal finishes because the judge would know they were okay with the previous decision. So they have counter appealed to make their case seem stronger than it is and now will fight with several patents removed and devices that in no way look anything like their devices at all. The next round should be very entertaining as well as tragic.
9. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6802; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
Shows u Apple true colors and how they paying this arrogant judge
11. Ashoaib (Posts: 2494; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)
True capitalism, when you cant compete with them just destroy them... this is 2014 and in 2114 we will still be hearing news "apple applied for millionth appeal and still seeking an injuction with the help of icourts and judge lucy koh's grand daughter has award more money to apple but rejected an injuction otherwise from where samsung will feed apple?"
4. technitude (Posts: 29; Member since: 19 Dec 2013)
You would think that Apple would be somewhat more accommodating, after they were recently given a pass on an injunction by the president. Apple is really a company of technical thieves and legal jerks.
I used to be a huge fan of Apple, but they have proven themselves to be such hypocrites. Every technology they have introduced has been a copy of Microsoft, Palm, Xerox, Android, or Amazon. They are granted patents on things like rounded batteries, and styluses, that they don't even use. So, now I wish they would just go away.
5. Sniggly (Posts: 7199; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Good god, Apple, enough already. I mean, is this case going to go all the way to the goddamn Supreme Court?
6. express77 (unregistered)
i know sammy should be punished but this is just too much. sammy is paying 10 times more fine i think.
8. darkkjedii (Posts: 13337; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Pay what you owe, but no more than that.
12. garyII (Posts: 160; Member since: 26 Feb 2014)
i think apple should be contented by what had been offered, and if they carried on further, maybe the Court of Appeal might give the same decision or result together with reduced amount of fine for Samsung...haha...no offence
13. roscuthiii (Posts: 1883; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
"The new trial could end up costing Samsung even more money considering that more current models, like the Samsung Galaxy S III will be involved." - Alan F.
Dear God man, stop shaking the pom poms for once and actually try a little something called journalistic integrity. Considering the first trial awarded damages to Apple on patents that have now been invalidated, Samsung stands a chance to end up owing much less then what was just awarded. May as well label your articles all as "Op Ed" pieces. Or even worse than that, just copied & pasted op eds.