With the jury’s official verdict of $1 billion already known, lawyers have shifted their focus to the aftermath. Both companies have issued official statements regarding today’s court ruling. Apple is claiming satisfaction with the jury’s decision, supporting the idea of original design and innovation. The Cupertino-based company hopes its statement sends “a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.” On the other side of things, Samsung fears the verdict hurts consumers, leaving them with “fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices.”
Now that the trial is over, Apple is seeking a preliminary injunction on Samsung’s infringing products. The initial hearing is slated for September 20th, though Apple will have until the 29th to file the motion, giving Samsung 14 days to respond. As expected, it’s been confirmed that Samsung will be appealing today’s ruling, but in the meantime you can read official statements from both companies after the break.
Folks in Cupertino and Apple fans around the world are surely in a good mood going into this weekend with the recently announced results of the Apple v Samsung trial in which Apple has prevailed (at least for now). More good news for Apple came out of the ITC today in determining that Apple had not violated a Motorola patent on some wifi technology. The ITC commission also exonerated Apple with regard to two other patents.
An ITC judge had originally ruled in Motorola’s favor and Apple was facing a ban of their devices had the commission’s review not gone in their favor. The possibility of a ban still exists as the case has been sent back to the original judge for a new review regarding the possibility that Apple violated a non-standards-based patent. This will effectively “reset” the case, so it will likely drag on for at least another year. In the meantime, Motorola has started a new action against Apple alleging more patent violations.
The verdict is officially in folks— Apple has officially claimed victory over Samsung. Based off extensive review and hours of deliberation, the jury believes Samsung not only violated numerous Apple patents, but also Apple has not infringed on any of Samsung’s patents. Here’s a quick rundown of each verdict:
- Jury finds Samsung infringement of Apple utility, design patents for some (though not all) products
- Jury upholds Apple utility, design patents
- Jury upholds Apple trade dress ‘983
- Jury finds Samsung “diluted” Apple’s registered iPhone, iPhone 3 and “Combination iPhone” trade dress on some products, not on others
- No Apple infringement of Samsung utility patents
- Jury found Samsung violated antitrust law by monopolizing markets related to the UMTS standard
As a result of the jury’s decision, Samsung is also ordered to pay a king’s ransom in damages— all to the tune of $1.05 billion, while no damages are assessed to Apple in Samsung’s countersuit.
source: CNet Live Blog
The entire tech world is waiting for the final decision from the jury in the Apple vs. Samsung trial, but it looks like we’ll have to wait a little longer as the jury is still in deliberations and has made a request to extend discussions by an hour before the trial takes a break for the weekend. The general idea is this likely indicates the group is either not so close to reaching a consensus or the jury wants to ensure it has all of the important facts correct and will leave no room for any sort of doubt once making the decision (hopefully by today). Oh and don’t forget either— the jurors have a hefty-sized notebook to go through in order to help decide what damages can be given to either Samsung or Apple.
There is still the hope that a verdict will be reached by 4:30pm PST today. Fingers crossed we’ll hear some news soon.
The Seoul Central District Court in Korea has ruled that Samsung and Apple violated each other’s patents. The end result is that both companies are banned from selling the infringed devices in South Korea including the iPhone 4, iPad 2, the Samsung Galaxy S2, Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1. Both companies were rewarded punitive damages.
Apple is accusing Samsung for creating consumer confusion and being a copycat. The judge noted despite similarities in physical design, the devices between the two companies have distinct logos, making it difficult for consumers to mix them up. In addition to logos, the judge also noted Samsung’s products differentiate from Apple’s with its three buttons in the front and differently adopted designs for the camera and sides. The judge also considered the fact that buyers look at other options when purchasing a new device such as price, brand, applications, services and operating systems.
The court ruled Apple violated two of Samsung’s wireless technology patents, while Samsung violated one of Apple’s for bounce-back technology. Apple must pay Samsung a punitive of $17,650 in damages for each violated patent, while Samsung must pay Apple $22,000 respectively.
With testimony finally being finished for both sides just a couple of days ago, jurors for the Samsung vs Apple patent case have now begun deliberation, thus this lengthy clash between the two titans is now starting to come to an end. This federal trial has lasted over 3 weeks (seems longer, doesn’t it?), and now this multi-billion dollar patent infringing case rests in the hands of 9 people (7 men and 2 women). Remember, Apple is trying to prove that Samsung ripped off the designs of the iPhone and iPad with their successful Android devices such as the Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab 10.1.
With so much money at stake, not to mention the implications this has in the mobile industry market, we should not expect a quick decision from these jurors anytime soon. According to Professor Mark P. McKenna of the University of Notre Dame Law, “This case has huge implications, it could result in injunctions against both companies.”
I know most of you are probably wondering how these jurors will make such a huge decision that could massively affect Samsung. First off, the judge has to read a 109 page set of instructions intended for the jury, as as they make their decision, jurors must fill out a 20 page form that includes dozens of “check-off” boxes. According to experts, this 20 page form that the jurors must fill out are “crazy” and “incredibly complicated.” Needless to say, these jurors have a lot of work ahead of them. Secondly, the jurors have several smartphones and tablets at their disposal in the jury room to further help them from determining whether certain patents were indeed infringed upon or not.
Last Friday Google’s Motorola Mobility unit filed a new lawsuit against Apple alleging a variety of patent infringements. Filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), Motorola is seeking a ban on imports of most of Apple’s product portfolio. Any device that “utilize(s) wireless communication technologies to manage various messages and content” is covered by the lawsuit. This covers not just mobile devices like iPads and iPhones, but computer devices like the iMac or MacBook Pro as well.
The ITC made the full complaint available on-line so we are now able to review which seven patents Motorola is claiming Apple has infringed upon: Read more
After three grueling weeks of the tech world’s highest profile patent trial, and hearing both sides of arguments, the jury in the Samsung-Apple trial were given final instructions by Judge Lucy Koh on what they should be deciding.
The jury will hand down one of two potential verdicts. A ruling in Apple’s favor could lead to a ban on Samsung products and force Samsung to change its designs or pay licensing fees. A Samsung favored outcome could taint Apple’s reputation of being the world’s leading tech innovator.
Being on this jury is anything but easy, as they’ve been given a total of 84 instructions after Judge Koh gave the jury a crash course in patent and trademark law. Hit the break for a brief overview from a few of the more important ones.
Tired of all these issues involving software patents? Well luckily, you’re not alone— even high-ranking officials at prominent companies are sick too. While speaking at the Technology Policy Institute conference, Google Public Policy director Pablo Chavez states:
“One thing that we are very seriously taking a look at is the question of software patents, and whether in fact the patent system as it currently exists is the right system to incent innovation and really promote consumer-friendly policies.”
Chavez certainly has reasoning for this too. As of now, Google has been involved in long-standing disputes against other tech heavyweights such as Apple and of course, the not-so-friendly Oracle. Oh and don’t forget patent trolls and patent bullies like the infamous and generally disliked Lodsys. The current software patent model doesn’t make sense and is not uniform in something like medicine-related patents. To support his notion, Chavez believes software patents can be differentiated from patents in areas such as medicine because a:
“Lot of structural differences between that industry and the software industry. With that in mind, we are starting to brainstorm longer-term solutions.”
Chavez’s reasoning certainly isn’t too unreasonable, especially since there are other experts who you know— share the same sentiment.
As you know, Samsung and Apple have been in a very heated battle regarding who copied whose patents, and assuming no settlement is reached, a final verdict will be made in the next few days. Yesterday, in a turn of events, Samsung was able to score a victory as Judge Koh made a surprising reversal to the prior ruling by Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal. Judge Grewal had originally decreed that the jury would be told Samsung had failed to retain evidence as part of the jury instructions.
This ruling upset Samsung for two reasons: First, the date they were accused of deleting their emails was well before the lawsuit was filed, and secondly, during that time Apple had not yet ordered its employees to start saving their emails either. Since Apple was the one who brought on the lawsuit, Samsung reasoned that they were equally as responsible for saving messages from the same start date since they knew the lawsuit was on the horizon. Read more