Federal Appeals Court: Samsung and Apple do not have to reveal profits in court

Federal Appeals Court: Samsung and Apple do not have to reveal profits in court
On Friday, the Federal U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington reversed a ruling made by a lower court that forced tech titans Apple and Samsung to release documents containing sales and profits information. During last year's epic patent trial between Samsung and Apple, a court battle that was so widely covered in the media that seats in the courthouse were consider prized possessions, both companies turned over documents during pre-trial hearings that were redacted to cover up financial information.

Reuters challenged Apple and Samsung's actions and Judge Koh said that the public's right to understand the trial outweighed the companies' bid for secrecy. An appeals court disagreed with the judge, allowing Samsung and Apple to cover up some of its financial information. In coming to that decision, Judge Sharon Prost said, "While protecting the public's interest in access to the courts, we must remain mindful of the parties' right to access those same courts upon terms which will not unduly harm their competitive interest."

The Federal Appeals Court disagreed on Friday, saying that while the public does have the right to understand certain proceedings, this right does not extend to "mere curiosity" about confidential information that is not "not central to a decision on the merits." The ruling did not go over well with Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition. The group argued in court in favor of the release of the sales and earnings figures. Scheer did note that the ruling prevents companies from keeping information secret in court merely by calling something a "Trade Secret". Corporate requests for secrecy must be scrutinized by a judge.

Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $1.05 billion by a jury after last year's trial. Judge Lucy Koh vacated $400 million of the award which will be the issue of a retrial in November. In February 2014, the next patent trial between Samsung and Apple will begin, again presided over by Judge Lucy Koh.

source: Reuters



1. xperiaDROID

Posts: 5629; Member since: Mar 08, 2013

The battle of the babies never ends...

2. Foxytail

Posts: 4; Member since: Nov 11, 2012

The babies that dominating smartphone market, with millions of jealous hater.

3. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

I still don't get how Samsung gets equal blame for this. They are merely defending themselves from injustice. What are they supposed to do? Take it up the ass like HTC and give Apple money that they in no way deserve? It's not like Apple would stop either if Samsung just took the bullying. They literally have no choice in the matter. It is Apple that is 100% at fault here.

4. xperiaDROID

Posts: 5629; Member since: Mar 08, 2013

Exactly. Those "patent", "sue", "court" etc. are all from Apple. Apple is the one who started this.

5. mayur007

Posts: 593; Member since: Apr 10, 2012

and apple will be the one who will lose..

6. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Apple is the victim. Samsung was adjudicated in a court of law to be guilty of stealing Apple's IP. Samsung's actions were so effen blatantly that the jury awarded a HUGE penalty. xperiaDROID, when someone steals your phone and when you try to get it back from the thief, then I will be the first person to mimick your thought process that "you started this."

7. tedkord

Posts: 17478; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

And Apple was adjudicated to be guilty of stealing Samsung's IP, but the man Apple donated half a million dollars to vetoed that. Apple is not the victim. The consumer is. Apple is the attacker, brandishing a broken patent system as it's weapon.

9. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Opinions are not facts. The fact is Samsung is trying to extort from Apple using Samsung's 3G patents obtained under FRAND standards. The court adjudicated against Apple so the court could do the same thing against Samsung when the time came (a simple point obviously lost to the Samsung camp). That forced the President of the US to act against Samsung's extortion. Btw, Google and Motorola tried the FRAND-patent extortion approach and it blew up on its face. Apple's patents are not under the FRAND standard since Apple's patents are utility and design patents MEANING ANYONE could out-invent Apple (another point lost to the Samsung camp). The patent system isn't broken -- again, that is your opinion. In contrast, Samsung stole Apple's IP -- that is a statement of fact. What Samsung did wrong was to steal IP when they could have spent money to out-invent Apple. In America, we have strong property rights -- stealing is just wrong.

10. tedkord

Posts: 17478; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Wow. Conspiracy theory much? The court ruled against Apple so they could rule against Samsung? You're right. Facts are facts. And the fact is that a the judge panel found that not only was Samsung not abusing FRAND patents, but that Apple was negotiating in bad faith, ie. they never planned to pay fair and reasonable, they were trying to not pay at all or to get better pricing than anyone else. Not surprising, after watching them try to strongarm the music industry into giving them licensing rates half the next lowest licensee. So, as a statement of fact, Apple stole Samsung's IP. The court found that, and the veto did not dispute it.

8. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Taters: That was a wonderful revisionist approach to ESTABLISHED and KNOWN facts. Apple asks Samsung to stop stealing Apple IP, and Apple was willing to offer Samsung access to lower-level patents as an inducement. Samsung says to Apple to drop dead. After several negotiations failed to stop Samsung's actions, Apple is forced to sue. Judge Koh orders both sides to work things out. Samsung doesn't want to admit their wrong-doing. Then we have the trial. Before jury deliberations, Judge Koh again asks Samsung if they want to settle as in apologize and make amends. Again, Samsung declines because they like telling Apple to drop dead. The jury comes back and it's a landslide victory for Apple. The jury wanted to send a STRONG SIGNAL that stealing IP is wrong and awards a $1 billion+ penalty. So what does does Samsung do -- they went after the jury foreman. Samsung lost and like a sore loser, they started attacking the American justice system. Remember, stealing is wrong and Samsung got caught in their hands in the cookie jar, and now they must pay for the consequences of their actions. Apple is the victim here. These are facts. There is a saying in America: While the wheels of Justice grinds slowly, it grinds incredibly fine (Samsung had to learn the hard way). Samsung was a thief, and as a result, they are not defending themselves from injustice -- they committed the injustice.

15. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

So ardent1, would it be the iPhone Stupid or the iPhone Cheap for you...lol

20. Googler

Posts: 813; Member since: Jun 10, 2013

So Obama didn't just overturn the ruling against Apple stealing from Samsung? You must have missed that article. You need to just stop this stupid defense of Apple, there's far too much evidence pointing to them being completely innocent like you paint them to be. There's also few that will buy your line so you're just wasting time trying to convince people of your stance, right, wrong, or indifferent. The more you keep bringing up hand picked points, the more people look at you as being out of touch. In issues such as this, you have to look at the entire case and not just selectively pick points that build up your point of view and ignore those points that completely contradict it.

22. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

You just typed up a lot BS for nothing. There is a reason that Samsung WILLINGLY pays Microsoft, Ericcson, and EVERYBODY else for patents and told Apple to drop dead. There is also a reason why HTC was fighting the same BS accusations for so long. Because they were just that. BS claims. And nothing changes just because Samsung was found gulty by a bunch of retarded Americans. I hope that is not the barometer that we use to judge guilt these days. Just the fact that Apple's claims were tossed in most other coutries tells you just how lame Apple's claims were. Samsung is defending themselves from a thief that masquerades as a stand up citizen. Nothing childish about what they are doing. Apple on the other hand....

24. tedkord

Posts: 17478; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Samsung went after the foreman because he ignored instructions, improperly introduced his own evidence during deliberations, and swayed the jury away from a common sense verdict.

16. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

I'd say both APPLE SAMSUNG should just drop this damn case. this shyt getting bothersome

11. Ronny666

Posts: 128; Member since: Jun 08, 2013

A thief is saying stealing is wrong. LOL!

13. rusticguy

Posts: 2828; Member since: Aug 11, 2012

Yup a high profile thief who didn't even spare the "Clock" Design

25. stealthd unregistered

Price fixing isn't stealing, it wasn't even a criminal trial.

26. tedkord

Posts: 17478; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

In the US, price fixing is a criminal federal offense prosecuted under the Sherman Anti Trust act. Yes, it was a criminal trial, and Apple was convicted, so yes, they are criminals.

12. AfterShock

Posts: 4147; Member since: Nov 02, 2012

I thought a couple of these patents were coming under review for being semi illegal as prior art has turned up. Judicial system at work here is working with bent tools and as usuall will be bent on outcome. Common sense an judicial rulings are as common as unicorns.

21. tedkord

Posts: 17478; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Yep. Much of what Apple hollers about others stealing, they in fact stole first. Slide to Unlock, grids of icons, etc. Even more recently, they applied for a patent on a flexible amoled device. Something they have never done a lick of work on, while others did, and they tried to patent the idea. And knowing how truly broken the patent system is in the US, they could get it granted.

17. androiphone20

Posts: 1654; Member since: Jul 10, 2013

Samsung should keep making phones... like the Hennessey cuz that's what they do best

18. androiphone20

Posts: 1654; Member since: Jul 10, 2013

okay lets be honest Samsung copied the iphone design unaware it had patents they just realised it a little too late

19. androiphone20

Posts: 1654; Member since: Jul 10, 2013

okay lets be honest Samsung copied the iphone design unaware it had patents they just realised it a little too late

23. tedkord

Posts: 17478; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

I would give Apple a small payout for the OG Galaxy S, just on trade dress and not the silly, overbroad patents. But after that the whole situation breaks down to the absurd as Apple tries to claim that a tap is just a zero length swipe, defending a patent on something they stole initially.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.