Apple Wins Patent Case Vs Samsung , Awarded More Than $1 Billion In Damages

R

RoBoGhOsT

Perambulating
Skilled
Samsung Vs Apple patent battle has finally reached verdict .

ip2010.png


Apple has won the case and Samsung will have to pay Apple more than $1 billion in damages .On the other hand, Apple was not found to infringe on any of Samsung's patents with their iPhone and hence will not be awarded any damages .

The jury ruled that Samsung infringed on six out of seven Apple patents . The patents included Apple's '381 bounceback patent , '915 patent on pinch-to-zoom etc .

Source
 
Nice to see those cheats getting punished.They have been farcicaly blatant about their stealing of apple's property and design.
 
Whatever is the output.This is not the final battle.There are bound to be many more in future.I found the idea of patenting the RECTANGLE by apple quite funny....seriously lets face it..patent system itself is totally broken.
 
vantheman5211 said:
Nice to see those cheats getting punished.They have been farcicaly blatant about their stealing of apple's property and design.
Click to expand...
Stealing Apples design!??
A rectangle, some similar icons, and a few interface related things that are nice but not essential??
What about Apple stealing Samsungs patents without which their phones wouldn't be phones at all.

It's ridiculous how nice but non-essential design related patents are accorded more importance/value than essential technical patents which are needed to make the device work in the first place.

I hope all hardware manufacturers decide to boycott Apple and let them produce their own hardware. If I was continually being sued by my client, I'd seriously reconsider my relationship with them.
 
ch@ts said:
Stealing Apples design!??
A rectangle, some similar icons, and a few interface related things that are nice but not essential??
What about Apple stealing Samsungs patents without which their phones wouldn't be phones at all.

It's ridiculous how nice but non-essential design related patents are accorded more importance/value than essential technical patents which are needed to make the device work in the first place.

I hope all hardware manufacturers decide to boycott Apple and let them produce their own hardware. If I was continually being sued by my client, I'd seriously reconsider my relationship with them.
Click to expand...

"Boy, we've patented it"
- Steve Jobs at Mac World 2007 keynote, when showing the iPhone for the first time to the entire world.


That should've been the first warning for Samsung. Instead, Samsung went in with "If you can't innovate, just imitate" which would never be quite as good as the original. They ripped off Apple's years of research and hard work that went into making their phones.


Here's one of the key Samsung's internal UX testing documents where Samsung documented how they wanted to copy each and every feature of iPhone for their Galaxy S. This is a must read :


Samsung Relative Evaluation Report on S1, iPhone


The trial lasted few weeks where both the parties claimed to have infringed each other's patents. Today, the verdict is out and Apple has been cleared off with no penalty while Samsung was found guilty for infringing Apple's patents in it's long list of mobile phones that includes all the Galaxy phones as well. Samsung was charged with 1.05 $ penalty.


Samsung, being a thief, comes up with statements like that the law is bad and Apple is trying to patent rounded rectangles. I won't be surprised if Samsung fan boys would even start spreading rumours saying that the jury were Apple fan boys.


It's clearly not about rectangles but it's about how deep Samsung went into copying Apple devices, the strategy and even the Apple stores!


Every smartphone need not look and behave like an iPhone to succeed. Look at Nokia Lumia, Sony Xperia and HTC One. All these phones are quite different and have done fairly well in the market.


References:
Jury: Samsung copied Apple, should pay at least $1.049 billion in damages | The Verge
Apple decisively wins Samsung trial: what it means | The Verge
Samsung Relative Evaluation Report on S1, iPhone
 
^^ The reason apple won is because they were the first to patent, not because they were the first to innovate. Apple has always done that since the start. They get patents over stuff that others did, but did not bother to patent and then sue them over it. Heck, Apple sued Xerox labs over stuff that they borrowed from them so as to stop them from working on it anymore.
 
Are patents awarded in the US enforceable/valid worldwide? Can Apple sue Indian phone manufacturers, in India?

Apples business model seems to be to get people to buy it's overpriced hardware, so that they can buy digital content from it's istore that they will never own, and cannot use on anything not made by apple.
And they're going to sue anyone who thinks they can offer consumers a cheaper, more open platform.
 
I'm sitting in a Starbucks doing random whatever over an iced americano. While I waiting for my drink, I watched a guy with his friend, pick up a newspaper; and start to remark on the Samsung Apple verdict.

Guy: "Wait, so what they're saying is, Samsung is the same as Apple?"
Friend: "I know, right? Makes me think twice about how much I paid for my Mac Book"
Guy: "Seriously"

Not 10 minutes later, a husband and wife, same newspaper:

Husband: "... Samsung's iPad is the same as Apple's iPad, and I paid how much for the Apple one? Honey, I told you they were a ripoff", after looking up the Samsung tablet on his iPhone.
Wife: "Oh wow," looking at the screen, "... that's a lot cheaper. Think we can return it?"

I put my Samsung QX410 on my table, and started to plug in, when he leans over to me, "Sorry, you don't mind if I ask, how much did you pay for your Samsung laptop?"

"Oh, no worries, it was $700." I replied.

I watched shock overcome his face, like actual shock. He looked at me, blankly, for an awkward amount of time, "Mind if I have a look?" he asked.

So, I obliged, and showed him a few things. He commented on Windows 7, so I opened up my virtual machine of OS/X... By the time the conversation was over, he was ready to kick Cupertino in the nuts, I think.

... Now, the punchline:

I'm writing this post after the FOURTH group of Starbucks patrons have made the connection that Samsung is now the same as Apple. They don't know the details, they don't really care, what they know is Apple is saying that Samsung is the same as Apple ... and with one simple Google Search, you get prices that are basically half for what seems to be the same products -- for nearly everything.

Two of these groups (including the husband/wife) asked me about my Samsung laptop, the second group noticed my Galaxy phone (also by Samsung)... Best billion dollar ad-campaign Samsung ever had.
Click to expand...

Source - https://plus.google.com/u/0/114476892281222708332/posts/246srfbqg6G

LMAO. I never knew americans are so focking stupid. They should see some china phones & tablets xD
 
Lord Nemesis said:
^^ ......... Heck, Apple sued Xerox labs over stuff that they borrowed from them so as to stop them from working on it anymore.
Click to expand...

Borrow? NO! Steve Jobs blatantly copied Xerox. But Xerox being Xerox, probably never understood the implications. There is an interesting anecdote about this - an exchange between Steve Jobs & Bill Gates - in Steve Jobs' biography. Steve Jobs was raving/ranting about Bill Gates copying his GUI and after allowing him to vent-off, Bill Gates calmly replied "Steve, we both had this rich neighbor (Xerox) and we both went to steal the TV. You were first. End of story!
 
^what a wonderful article, thanks for sharing.

And copying Apple didn’t just result in monster profits. It also helped Samsung earn a reputation, among consumers and tech reviewers, as a company that can make compelling devices. Yes, it was clear that many of Samsung’s ideas weren’t original. But customers don’t care about originality—if they did, Windows wouldn’t have won the PC world, and we’d all be using Friendster instead of Facebook.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that’s why, since 2007, only two handset makers have consistently booked strong, growing profits: Apple and its doppelganger Samsung. Apple’s profits have, of course, been historic—since the release of the iPhone, it has made at least $70 billion from that device alone. But Samsung’s numbers aren’t anything to scoff at. Over the same period, Samsung has collected about $25 billion in handset profits. If the patent trial ends up costing the company $3 billion of that, it would certainly be a hit. But it wouldn’t be catastrophic compared to the money Samsung did make from copying.
Click to expand...
 
Jambumali said:
Borrow? NO! Steve Jobs blatantly copied Xerox. But Xerox being Xerox, probably never understood the implications. There is an interesting anecdote about this - an exchange between Steve Jobs & Bill Gates - in Steve Jobs' biography. Steve Jobs was raving/ranting about Bill Gates copying his GUI and after allowing him to vent-off, Bill Gates calmly replied "Steve, we both had this rich neighbor (Xerox) and we both went to steal the TV. You were first. End of story!
Click to expand...
Wrong! Apple didn't copy XEROX. It's a hugely circulated myth by anti fans. Here's the story:

Myth: Copyright Theft, Apple Stole GUI from Xerox PARC Alto | Obama Pacman
 
Lord Nemesis said:
^^ The reason apple won is because they were the first to patent, not because they were the first to innovate.
Click to expand...

Perfect, its always one who patents it first. Remember USA got patent for basmati rice long back.

I am not a fan of closed system but not against any one as well. But Apple patenting the name "App Store" sounds stupid to me. Patenting some tech/research make sense, but as we have seen in all these years, they have overdone it. Patenting the nouns, and shapes (rectangle), does not make sense. And I do believe as others that the patent system is flawed. And considering the case was in US, there were very high chances of Apple winning it.

- - - Updated - - -

For end user, options are better. I do not want to live in a era of monopoly; and Apple sure wants to do that. Trust me end user in the hand of Apple; will only get empty pockets. Nothing else. (I am not defending Samsung here)
 
[h=1]Apple Loses Patent Lawsuit Against Samsung In Japan[/h]Apple Inc. lost a patent lawsuit in Japan as a Tokyo judge ruled that Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) smartphones and a tablet computer didn’t infringe on an Apple invention for synchronizing music and video data with servers.
“It’s hard to believe the products belong to the range of technologies of the claimant,” Shoji said in dismissing Apple’s case.Apple was ordered by Tokyo District Judge Tamotsu Shoji today to pay costs of the lawsuit after his verdict, the latest decision in a global dispute between the technology giants over patents used in mobile devices. Samsung shares rose, erasing earlier losses.
Apple and Samsung are battling over the smartphone market, estimated by Bloomberg Industries to be worth $219 billion last year, with patent disputes being litigated on four continents. Apple won a $1.05 billion verdict in the U.S. on Aug. 24, with a jury finding that Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung infringed six of seven patents for mobile devices. The two companies are also bound by commercial deals involving components supply.
Apple, the maker of iPhones, sued Samsung, the world’s biggest maker of mobile phones, in Tokyo last year, claiming the Galaxy S, Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S II infringed the patent on synchronization, and sought 100 million yen ($1.3 million) in damages, according to court documents. The Galaxy series of products in Japan is offered by NTT DoCoMo Inc. (9437), the country’s biggest mobile-phone company.
[h=2]U.S., Korea Rulings[/h]Samsung welcomed the decision, the company said in a statement. Carolyn Wu, a spokeswoman for Apple, declined to comment.
Shares of the South Korean company rose as much as 1.6 percent after the ruling, and were trading at 1.227 million won at 2:08 p.m. in Seoul.
Samsung doesn’t provide sales figures for Japan. The company generated about 12 percent of its revenue from Asia, excluding South Korea and China, in the quarter ended June 30, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Cupertino, California-based Apple got 5.7 percent of its sales in Japan during the same period, according to the data.
“This will likely turn the tide in favor of Samsung,” said Kim Hyung Sik, Seoul-based analyst at Taurus Investment Securities Co. “Samsung had this win in a country that’s strong at intellectual property. The mood is turning positive for Samsung.”
[h=2]IPad, IPhone Bans[/h]Both companies were barred from selling some phones and tablet computers in South Koreaon Aug. 24 when a Seoul Central District Court ruled they infringed each other’s patents.
Apple was ordered to stop selling the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad 1 and iPad 2 in South Korea, while Samsung must stop selling 12 products including the Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Galaxy Tab. Apple was also ordered to pay Samsung 40 million won ($35,000) and the South Korean company must pay its U.S. rival 25 million won for the patent infringments.
In the U.S., where Samsung had been barred from selling the Galaxy 10.1 tablet, Apple sought to extend the ban to eight models of Samsung smartphones following the jury verdict. U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, has scheduled a Dec. 6 hearing on Apple’s request.
In Australia, a preliminary ban on Galaxy 10.1 tablet sales was overturned by the highest court in December. A judge last month began hearing Samsung’s claim that Apple products infringe its patents on wireless transmission. That trial also includes Apple’s claim that Samsung phones and tablets infringe its patents on touch-screen technology.
Samsung retained its position as the world’s biggest seller of smartphones in the second quarter, holding about 35 percent of the market, Strategy Analytics said in July. Apple had the second slot with about 18 percent, according to the market researcher.
The Japan case is Apple Inc. (AAPL) v. Samsung Electronics Japan. Case No. Heisei 23 (WA)27941. Tokyo District Court.
 
Back
Top