Apple, Samsung patent judge: 'I feel like I'm in Groundhog Day here'
Samsung tried its very hardest to argue for a retrial in a hearing with Apple yesterday, as the fruity firm pushed for additional damages on top of the $1bn it already won. The hearing was ostensibly to discuss permanent bans on sales of Samsung products that a jury decided infringed Apple patents, but the South Korean firm's …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Re: Just pay up
The problem with "do your own thing" is that Apple have patents on obvious stupid stuff and will still sue you.
Re: Just pay up
> The problem with "do your own thing" is that Apple have patents on obvious stupid stuff and will still sue you.
This is exactly what the problem is here.
This court case is about two companies wanting the other to just disappear. No-one can win a dispute like that. It's no better than getting two bickering school kids to shake and "make up". It might make the teacher feel good, but at the end of the day the kids still hate each other and they'll take it outside the school yard later on.
There is nothing in it for either side to make up, particularly for Samsung because a settled court case will not actually solve anything for them. Apple will just go after them for something else ad infinitum.
Re: Just pay up
Why should they do that. It seem pretty clear that the foreman and/or the jury screwed up. Didn't follow the judge's instructions and were in such a rush that the damage award makes no sense. Something is wrong with the way the jury handled the deliberations.
Re: Just pay up
even if it is true what you say, then they have the patents don't they by your own definition. So grow up, move on and do you own thing...If Apple has the patents stop infringing them and be innovative yourself...Its tough but those are the rules of the game...
@AC 06:04 Re: Just pay up
The big issue is whether the design patents are valid or not, as the USPO seems to go by the theory of awarding any patent applied for then letting it be tested in the courts. The key word from your post is innovative, most of these design patents are obvious and have prior art and therefore shouldn't have been awarded in the first place. The problem in this particular court case was that the jury allowed themselves to be guided by a member of that jury who acted in a way that broke the rules and had a personal agenda.
I did start typing an analogy from a very different area (not cars for a change!) but decided it was a waste of time as you clearly haven't read all the comments on previous articles on this subject and just parrot "Apple have a patent" ignoring the validity or not of that patent.
* Note I am not a fan of either company. I own an iPOD, I have some other Samsung household devices, and I don't have a smartphone.
Re: Just pay up
...and that discourages the tidal wave of stupid patents of the trivia and legal battles hoping for big payouts how exactly?
Re: Just pay up
It's pretty irrelevant and almost 20 years ago and with a different company that Samsung (more recently) have a link with - but then I imagine Apple do as well (as a customer).
Re: Just pay up
You make out like Apple are the only ones doing to suing a would you really just bend over if someone just copied your product...?
Why is Samsung still pushing this 20 year old conflict with the foreman, if anything THEY were the ones who knew about it since it was Samsung who were directly involved in that deal. It makes it seem a lot like it was Samsung who kept that fact hidden as an option to declare a mistrial, the judge should pick up on that.
They should just settle like HTC did, they've even seen that settlement agreement in full now.. Guess the only catch is it doesn't let them copy Apple's designs.
Fail: HTC was Technology Patents, Samsung was Design Patents
<<They should just settle like HTC did, they've even seen that settlement agreement in full now.. Guess the only catch is it doesn't let them copy Apple's designs>>
Oh, and HTC androids look radically different to Apple and Samsung don't they? Don't they?!?
effin' rounded corners, better take a look at HTC Desire, and just about every other phone if you think that's valid, as well as the laptop I'm typing this on.
As for the foreman, if you went for a job interview and started raving about all this experience that was valuable, but had neglected to put it on your CV, would you expect the boss to be a bit curious as to your motives? He failed to tell the judge, but used it as leverage to the rest of the jury as a reason to follow his lead, which is a dubious strategy at best.
Re: Fail: HTC was Technology Patents, Samsung was Design Patents
HTC phones do look different from Apple ones and you can tell them easily, I own an HTC HD2. The Samsung S2 wasa rip off of the iPhone4 and you have to be blind to not notice that.
Strangly enough the s3 Looks nothing like the iPhone5 nothing like a lwasuit , to make people actualy get off thier arses and design their own stuff for a change!
I'd be more worries about Mr Hogan's other cockups.
Like him acting as technical advisor to the rest of the jury, and his understanding of prior art being fundamentally flawed.
Surely this makes HIM (and him alone) judge, jury and executioner, and it was never a trial by jury, but a trial by a single juror, one that had previous grievance with Samsung, and didn't understand fundamental legal and technical terminology...
Re: I'd be more worries about Mr Hogan's other cockups.
This the second time in the last three months that I have felt obliged to upvote one of your post. This is so embarrassing that I feel that I have to hide my identity to avoid completely destroying my street-cred.
Re: I'd be more worries about Mr Hogan's other cockups.
I gave my upvote to you, rather than Baz.
Sounds like she's trying to overcompensate for being of the same descent as Samsung. We understand,but Apple has used this to their advantage too long. And to the detriment of the industry. The behind the scenes shenanigans Apple pulls, makes those in the know, avoid Apple's products.
Apple should be known as the Teflon Company.
@rogerpjr
That is so fucking ignorant you should be fined for even uttering it.
Fuck I am tired of the arrogant, ignorant, juvenile drivel in these forums.
The average mental age of The Register commentards is about 11, AFACT
Seems this judge likes to take her frustration with the stupidity of the law out on legitimate companies trying to protect their business interests, and that of their shareholders. She should be replaced. Period.
So Samsung wins the ...
Christmas sales season.
And with the profits accumulated, they are making hay. And all the models complained of by Apple are in a past catalogue.
Could it be the Courts are getting tired of all these patent claims and will simply give them short shrift as some judges have done already?
Perhaps 'cool' evaluations, as awarded in the UK, will keep Apple happy?
I'm curious -
How much have the law firms made out of this debacle so far - anyone?
Re: I'm curious -
probably more in a month than the whole of the El Reg commantards make in a year. Sadly
Re: I'm curious -
that is the problem with these cases the only ones sure to win are the lawyers . . .
Re: I'm curious -
Probably more than the sum the entire El Reg commentard corpus will make in their lifetimes
The one and only?
Is there really only one judge in California?
I went to the toilet in the dark..
And whipped my plonker out and aimed then listened to the splashing noise for guidance. There was the sound of tutting in the dark background and being disturbed I missed and hit the seat. They sniggered.
Picking up the toilet roll and using touchy feely gestures I noted the previous user had left the plies out of synch so, going for a clean tear, I unwound the first ply and used it to mop up and then proceeded to....
At this point the bathroom was flooded by arc-lamps and they screamed.
'We've got patents on that!!!!'
Re: I went to the toilet in the dark..
"Whipped my plonker out"...posted by Camilla.
Um. Is there something you would like to tell us?
We wont judge. Honest.
Whats funny
is reading all these posters going nuts becuase the Judge refuses to side with them, She's a judge and your some nerd sitting in your mums basement in his underpants, obviously you know more about this case than her! lol
Re: Whats funny
Actually LPF many of these posters DO know more about the subject than the judge - they are professionals in the tech industry, wheres she's a legal specialist.
Re: Whats funny
> your some nerd
> your
Hey spotty, how's life? You out of neet-ness yet?
Re: Whats funny
@LPF - Exactly that...
@Corinne - hmmm yeah right, sure, some do, the majority seem to have an eq level of a 4 year old. Just start your sentence with Ap...and they flock to the thread with negative comments. But besides that, none of them on this these pages, myself included, have access to the real details in the case. Like yourself with the conclusion that the forman has influenced the others...Sorry but that is just a theory and I'd rather leave it to the courts to decide on the facts opposed to some people on here speculating and mistaking to take their own baseless opinions for facts.
@AC 07:49 Re: Whats funny
Actually the foreman himself announced to the press the details of how he influenced the rest of the jury, he seemed quite proud of himself for managing that.
Regarding your comment "Just start your sentence with Ap...and they flock to the thread with negative comments", there's also people like you who flock to the thread with defensive comments whatever the evidence. I came into the subject neutral with NO axe to grind, I'm not an Apple "fan" nor an Android/Samsung fan, but not only the facts of the case as published internationally but also the attitude of some of the commentators has driven me to conclude that Apple is royally taking the piss with their design pATENTS.
Re: Whats funny
Being a professional in the tech industry (and I am one as well) does not make you (or I) in any way more knowledgeable on the law than a judge sitting in a Californian court. And court cases are about the legality or otherwise of the behaviour of the parties involved in the litigation.
There is some possibility that some of the commentards actually know something about technology, but it is very difficult to spot in the barrage of puerile nonsense that is written here. It is also possible that some of them might know more about smartphones than the judge. But the problem with that is, that the commentards apparently think that their knowledge is somehow unique and relevant. It's not. IT generally is an astoundingly trivial and simple subject area populated by an astounding number of simple minded people capable of pushing a set of buttons in the correct sequence with egos far bigger than their intellect can support. This forum is full of them. You, Corinne, demonstrate here that you among that group.
I'm a bit confused
The judge says why not just settle.
Lets see if you where Samsung would you settle for paying out that amount of cash and also accept a ban on sales?
I know I wouldn't (Oh wait Samsung aren't a US company)
trial by tech
let both companies build a robot.
both robots enter ring.
one robot leaves. The most innovative leaves and thus the case is settled.
Samsung may have an edge since they are more involved in death tech.
Some extra fun facts from the hearing...
1. The chance of Apple getting an injunction is falling; the Judge made a point of noting that the iPhone 3 and 3GS are no longer on sale, so there's no need to "protect" them with an injunction.
2. The judge suggested she was inclined to invalidate one of the patents.
3. The judge made it clear she agreed that some of the jury's "calculations" for damages were totally bogus.
4. The judge knows damn well that no matter what, UNLESS they settle, then some or all of the issues will go to appeal, so why should she spend too much time on them?
Predictions:
a) no injunctions are needed.
b) a new trial for damages (only) is more likely than a full retrial.
c) Judge Koh may try to orchestrate a reduction in damages to something low enough that Samsung will pay up rather than fight an appeal.
d) Samsung may still fight the appeal because the patents in question are too vague/indefinite/broad/obvious.
A solution
Perhaps the US patent office should declare no future patents since EVERYTHING has been invented and patented already.
Stop all innovation and competition, it's wasting the courts time.
Stop any new companies coming into any market, they are harming established companies.
Stop anyone having a free thought since that thought probably belongs to a large tech company or a patent troll..... there we go, fixed it all up.... now stop thinking and go and buy an [ insert officially approved handset for your country ] you worthless consumer.
This topic is closed for new posts.
