Apple vs Samsung : Apple wins $1bn in patent suit against Samsung
Posted By Saimatkong on Aug 27, 2012 | 0 comments
22,492 views
Hmm… it’s been going on since sometime back last year if I remember correctly and it’s finally award to Apple against Samsung in the patent suit.
So can I just go and patent that my kid will have 2 eyes and 1 nose and a round face. If your kids having the same features will infringe the patent and pay me some amount of money??
What’s the benefit of doing this and will this affect the sales of both Apple and Samsung and the rest of the competitors like HTC, Motorola, Nokia laughing out there because they can concentrate on the sales without any interruption? 🙂
Apple v. Samsung jury finds Apple’s patents valid, awards it nearly $1.05 billion in damages
The federal court jury in the patent infringement lawsuit between Apple and Samsung has presented its verdict after deliberating for just 21 hours and 37 minutes following the three week trial. This particular case started with Apple’s lawsuit last April and now the jury’s decision is that Samsung did infringe on Apple’s ‘381 bounceback patent with all 21 of its products in question. For the ‘915 patent on pinch-and-zoom, the jury ruled all but three of the devices listed infringed, and more damningly, found that Samsung executives either knew or should have known their products infringed on the listed patents. The jury has also found against Samsung when it comes to Apple’s contours on the back of the iPhone and its home screen GUI. The Galaxy Tab, was found not to have infringed upon Apple’s iPad design patents. The bad news for Samsung continued however, as the jury decided that not only did it willfully infringe on five of the seven Apple patents, but also upheld their validity when it came to utility, design and trade dress.
The amount of the damages against Samsung is in: $1,051,855,000.00 (see below). That’s less than half of the $2.5 billion it was seeking, but still more than enough to put an exclamation point on this victory for the team from Cupertino. The final number is $1,049,343,540, after the judge found an issue with how the jury applied damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE and Intercept. The jury also ruled that Apple did not infringe upon Samsung’s patents with the iPhone 3G and 3GS, and has awarded it zero dollars in damage. We’ll have more information for you as it become available.
Update: Both companies have released statements on the matter, with Apple stating via the New York Times the ruling sends a loud and clear message that “stealing isn’t right.” Samsung has its own viewpoint calling this “a loss for the American consumer” that will lead to fewer choices, less innovation and high prices. You can see both in their entirety after the break.
Apple:
We are grateful to the jury for their service and for investing the time to listen to our story and we were thrilled to be able to finally tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trail showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.
Samsung:
Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer
Source : Engadget
Breaking down Apple’s $1 billion courtroom victory over Samsung
With a 20-page verdict form and 100 pages of instructions to explain it, many figured it would take longer for the jury to render a decision. But, the tech trial of the century has concluded, with Apple scoring a not-quite-flawless victory over its rival Samsung. While the company didn’t win on every count, its cadre of lawyers did convince the nine jurors to award Apple over $1 billion in damages for Samsung’s IP transgressions. Join us after the break and we’ll hit you with the legal math that gave Apple a ten-figure bump to its bottom line — and served as a shot across the bow of every other mobile phone manufacturer.
First things first, let’s explain a little bit of the law that’s put Samsung on the hook for such a sizable sum. A company’s liable for patent infringement under Title 35 of the US Code, Section 271, for making, using or selling a patented invention in the US without authority from the patent owner. So, Samsung’s US subsidiaries were accused as direct infringers for selling phones and tablets here in America. Samsung Korea, however, doesn’t do business in the US, but is still liable under another part of Section 271. The pertinent statutory language states that “whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.”
The jurors were tasked with determining if Samsung’s devices at issue infringed Apple’s IP, and whether Samsung Korea induced its US subsidiaries to sell those infringing devices. Additionally, the jury had to decide if Samsung did so willfully, as such a finding gives Judge Koh the discretion to triple the damages and award attorneys fees to Apple. Lastly, the nine jurors had to make a call as to whether Apple’s patents were even valid — if a patent isn’t valid, then it doesn’t matter, damages-wise, whether it’s infringed.
Apple brought three utility and four design patents to bear against Samsung. Patent number 7,469,381 is for the bounce back that occurs when you scroll beyond the edge of a webpage or document in iOS. Patent number 7,844,915 is for single-finger scrolling and two-finger zooming, while number 7,864,163 claims tap-to-zoom technology. As for the design patents, D618,677 claims the iPhone’s edge-to-edge glass, speaker slot and display border, while D593,087 claims its rounded corners and home button, and D604,305 claims the grid-style icon layout in iOS. The last design patent, D504,889 is for the iPad’s edge-to-edge glass, rounded corners, and thin bezel.
Apple hit a home run with the ‘381 bounce-back patent — the jurors found that all 21 Samsung devices at issue infringed
Apple hit a home run with the ‘381 bounce-back patent — the jurors found that all 21 Samsung devices at issue infringed and that Samsung Korea induced its subsidiaries to sell those infringing devices as well. As for the the ‘915 and ‘163 zooming and scrolling patents, team Cupertino was also successful, albeit not completely: the jury found that most, but not all of the devices infringed and that Samsung Korea was, once again, guilty of inducement. Apple enjoyed similar success with its design patents, with the jury finding that every Samsung phone at issue infringed the D’305 iOS icon grid patent. Meanwhile, the D’677 edge-to-edge glass patent was infringed upon by every handset except for the Galaxy Ace, and the D’087 rounded corners patent was infringed by the Galaxy S, Galaxy S 4G, and the Vibrant. The D’889 patent turned out to be Apple’s sole loser, as the jury found that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 WiFi and 4G LTE didn’t infringe the iPad’s design. To top things off, the jury found that all of the infringement was willful except for the infringement of the D’087 patent, and that all of Apple’s patents are valid.
Apple’s patent portfolio didn’t provide its only victory, however, the company also won on a trade dress claim. As a (very) brief refresher for those not familiar, trade dress is a means of protecting a business’s image and overall appearance and how that image is perceived by consumers. The most common example used to explain trade dress is the shape and design of the Coca-Cola bottle: people recognize the bottle and associate it with Coke. Similarly, consumers see the design of the iPhone and associate it with Apple. The jury had to determine if Apple’s iPhone and iPad had protectable trade dress, and if their designs were famous enough to have their value diluted by Samsung’s devices. Once again, the jury found in Apple’s favor, deciding that the iPhone 3G’s (but not the iPad’s) trade dress was valid and that several Samsung handsets had diluted Apple’s brand.
As for Samsung, well, it struck out. On everything. It alleged that Apple was infringing five of its patents, and while the jury found those patents to be valid, it decided that Apple wasn’t infringing them. So, it had no wins to offset its considerable losses, which resulted in a resounding courtroom victory and a $1,049,393,540 windfall for Tim Cook’s crew.
Source : Endgadget
Apple wins $1bn in patent suit against Samsung
SAN FRANCISCO: Apple won more than $1 billion in a massive victory Friday over South Korean giant Samsung, in one of the biggest patent cases in decades – a verdict that could have huge market repercussions.
A jury in San Jose, California rejected Samsung’s counterclaims against Apple, according to media reports – a big win for the Silicon Valley giant, which had claimed its iconic iPhone and iPad had been illegally copied.
The jury, which had examined infringement claims and counter-claims by Apple and Samsung, ruled the South Korean electronics giant had infringed on a number of patents, the tech websites Cnet and The Verge said in live courtroom blogs.
The verdict affects patents on a range of Samsung products including some of its popular Galaxy smartphones and its Galaxy 10 tablet – devices alleged to have been copied from the iPhone and iPad.
“This is a huge, crushing win for Apple,” said Brian Love, a professor of patent law at Santa Clara University.
“All of its patents were held valid, and all but one were held to be infringed by most or all accused Samsung products. Even better for the company, five of the seven patents were held to be willfully infringed by Samsung.”
Love said this means that Judge Lucy Koh “now has the discretion to triple Apple’s damages award, which is already a monstrous and unprecedented $1.051 billion.”
Technology analyst Jeff Kagan said of the verdict: “This is a great day for Apple. And it will turn into a very expensive day for Samsung.”
Kagan said it was not immediately clear if Samsung would be able to continue to use the technology and pay Apple for the right to do so, or if they must pull their devices and redesign them.
In any case, the verdict in the case – one of several pending in global courts – is likely to have massive repercussions in the hottest part of the technology sector, smartphones and tablets.
Even a delay in sales could endanger Samsung’s position in the US market, where it is currently the top seller of smartphones.
A survey by research firm IDC showed Samsung shipped 50.2 million smartphones globally in the April-June period, while Apple sold 26 million iPhones. IDC said Samsung held 32.6 percent of the market to 16.9 percent for Apple.
The jury reached its verdict after deliberating for less than three days, examining claims of infringement by both sides. The trial heard evidence during 10 days over a three-week period.
Samsung had steadfastly denied the charges by Apple, claiming it developed its devices independently, and countersued in the case, seeking more than $400 million for infringement on its wireless patents.
The verdict came the same day a South Korean court ruled Apple and Samsung infringed on each other’s patents on mobile devices, awarding damages to both technology giants and imposing a partial ban on product sales in South Korea.
The court banned sales in South Korea of Apple’s iPhone 4 and iPad 2, as well as Samsung’s Galaxy S and Galaxy SII among other products. – AFP
Source : TheStar
I saw this image below and thinking is Apple getting the idea from Minority Report?
Apple “pinch-to-zoom” Patent #7,812,826 (2006) vs Minority Report (2002)
Can you do this even I copied you?
Apple vs Samsung patent war in Oppa Gangnam Style by Reggie Lee!!! Haha this is funny!
I’m using both Samsung + Apple and they have their own strong point. Peace!
