Samsung takes its patent fight with Apple all the way to the Supreme Court

posted by Alan F. / Dec 14, 2015, 3:52 PM

Samsung takes its patent fight with Apple all the way to the Supreme Court

Earlier this month, Samsung said that it would pay Apple $548 million by the end of the business day today after being ordered to fork over that amount to its rival. That check would take care of the first patent infringement case that originally awarded Apple close to $1 billion. Judge Lucy Koh (you remember her, right?) eventually called for a new trial on the damages.

Even though some might consider Samsung lucky to get away with paying roughly half of the original verdict, the company itself doesn't think so. Samsung has filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the highest court in the land to overturn the verdict. Samsung says that the jury was not given enough information to understand the patent issues.

Cases heard in the Supreme Court are selected by the justices, so there is no guarantee that the case will end up being heard by the Court. If it is, both Samsung and Apple will make 30 minute oral arguments as well as file briefs on the merits of the case. Samsung claims that current patent law is not suitable for modern times, which is the hook needed to get the Supreme Court to hear the case. Samsung adds that "If the current legal precedent stands, it could diminish innovation, stifle competition, pave the way for design patent troll litigation and negatively impact the economy and consumers."

source: Re/Code via AndroidCentral

FEATURED VIDEO

Options

56 Comments

1. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

Weren't the patents for this case thrown out of the of the patent office? http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apples-pinch-to-zoom-patent-invalidated-by-USPTO_id37871 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apples-Bounce-Scroll-patent-is-now-invalid-in-the-U.S._id35807 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Patent-that-Apple-used-in-recent-trial-against-Samsung-found-to-be-invalid-by-USPTO_id59118 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Patent-that-Apple-used-in-recent-trial-against-Samsung-found-to-be-invalid-by-USPTO_id59118 Or did apple pay enough for the court to ignore the fact that the patent is just stuff apple stole and claimed is theirs?

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 4:03 PM 22

5. TBomb

Posts: 1004; Member since: Dec 28, 2012

I think they were the reason the price was dropped (price samsung had to pay) , but others were still kept. Not sure though.

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 4:21 PM 0

12. sgodsell

Posts: 6644; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

Samsung should just pay, then add on a F"$k you charge for the components that Apple purchases from Samsung. Besides Apple Zealot's have been proven that they will pay anything for a low tech Apple device.

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 5:01 PM 11

18. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

I know Samsung would never settle but its not to their best interests. All indicator show that they could not get far without major funding into lobbying Congress into the 'right' judgement.

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 5:51 PM 6

57. shm224

Posts: 211; Member since: Mar 19, 2015

@joey_sfb: this particular appeal has a wide support of many US companies and industries, as well as the legal community/academia, so will see. It's unlikely that Barbara Boxer or Mike Lee is going to send letters to congress to change the law -- as they did to reverse Apple's ITC loss a couple of years back -- but all US manufacturing companies would be adversely effected by this, so it's in all their interest to see this ruling reversed.

posted on Dec 15, 2015, 12:23 PM 0

23. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Much like you and the ones who blindly follow Android?

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 6:25 PM 2

29. iushnt

Posts: 3035; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

People don't blindly follow Android. People blindly follow Apple.

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 7:08 PM 23

55. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Have you seen Android fans in some of the Apple articles?

posted on Dec 15, 2015, 10:13 AM 0

59. iushnt

Posts: 3035; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

Do you visit Apple Insider and Macrumors? See Apple fans in any article there.

posted on Dec 15, 2015, 8:41 PM 0

49. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

That's stupid.

posted on Dec 15, 2015, 9:30 AM 0

56. shm224

Posts: 211; Member since: Mar 19, 2015

@sgodsell : like store-only gift cards?

posted on Dec 15, 2015, 12:20 PM 0

27. tedkord

Posts: 17043; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

No, two more were invalidated since the trial, both of which were included in the judgement. That doesn't include the sham of a trial, with a jury foreman who held a nebulous patent like Apple's, who introduced his own evidence in deliberations and who ignored the judges instructions. A man who convinced the jury that prior art didn't apply because the software woodland run on an iPhone, then discarded that reasoning for Samsung.

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 6:57 PM 6

35. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

4th link was meant to be: http://www.phonearena.com/news/USPTO-Apples-949-patent-aka-the-Steve-Jobs-patent-is-invalid_id37440

posted on Dec 14, 2015, 9:01 PM 4

41. Spedez

Posts: 542; Member since: Aug 29, 2014

Pinch zoom and bounce scroll patents make no sense because A I'm pretty sure Apple didn't invent those B they are "common sense" GUI patterns just like e.g swiping. Only Apple (and US gov) can be such a dick that they actually (allow) patent such things.