The Apple Lawsuit Thread

A place for all tech stuff that doesn't really belong anywhere else.
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

In a laughable post over at LawPundit, Andis Kaulins makes an argument that Apple’s landmark $1 billion win against Samsung for patent infringement is at least partially bogus.

Why? Because Apple’s patent for bounce-back scrolling isn’t an original idea, but was, in fact, stolen from Pong, a game first released back in 1972. There are just a few problems with this idea…

Read more
Image
GreyWolf
Registered User
Posts: 4754
Joined: 06 Aug 2003, 02:00
Processor: PHENOM II 945
Motherboard: Asus M4A78
Graphics card: HIS ICEQ 4850 1GB
Memory: 4GB CORSAIR XMS II 1066
Location: , location, location!

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by GreyWolf »

Stuart wrote: You cannot seriously complain about someone seeking to protect rights granted to him by law.
Of course I can, because the foundation of those rights is total BS! If something is built on a lie, then everything that comes after is a a lie too!
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist that black flag, and begin slitting throats."
- H. L. Mancken
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

GreyWolf wrote:
Stuart wrote: You cannot seriously complain about someone seeking to protect rights granted to him by law.
Of course I can, because the foundation of those rights is total BS! If something is built on a lie, then everything that comes after is a a lie too!
Then the foundation needs to be rectified. You can't start give the walls a facelift if the foundation needs to be repaired.

I would think that, if only for the benefit of its shareholders, a company is almost obligated to protect its patents.

I'm not disputing that there were a wide range of problems with this case from the outset, but Apple's intention to protect what had been legally granted it was not one of those problems.
Image
Anakha56
Forum Administrator
Posts: 22136
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 02:00
Processor: Ryzen 1700K
Motherboard: Asus X370
Graphics card: Asus 1060 Strix
Memory: 16GB RAM
Location: Where Google says

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Anakha56 »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19433019
Tokyo court gives win to Samsung after US loss

A court in Tokyo has ruled that Samsung Electronics did not infringe on patents held by Apple, a victory for the South Korean company.

The patent was related to transferring media content between devices.

It comes after Samsung lost a key patent case in the US last week and was ordered to pay more than $1bn (£664m) in damages.

This is one of many cases brought to courts around the world by the two smartphone market leaders.

"We welcome the court's decision, which confirmed our long-held position that our products do not infringe Apple's intellectual property," said Samsung in a statement to the BBC.

Tokyo District Judge Tamotsu Shoji dismissed the case filed by Apple in August, finding that Samsung was not in violation of Apple patents related to synchronising music and video data between devices and servers.

Sales ban
On 24 August, a US court ruled Samsung had infringed Apple patents for mobile devices, including the iPhone and iPad.

The company has vowed to continue to fight against Apple saying it will appeal against the US ruling.

Apple is now seeking a ban on sales of eight Samsung phones in the US market.

On 6 December, US District Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the initial trial, will hear Apple's plea for an injunction against the Samsung phones, although it does not include the most recent Samsung phone to hit the market, the Galaxy S3.
Its only the US that is insane in the membrane...
JUSTICE, n A commodity which is a more or less adulterated condition the State sells to the citizen as a reward for his allegiance, taxes and personal service.
Anakha56
Forum Administrator
Posts: 22136
Joined: 14 Jun 2004, 02:00
Processor: Ryzen 1700K
Motherboard: Asus X370
Graphics card: Asus 1060 Strix
Memory: 16GB RAM
Location: Where Google says

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Anakha56 »

And the jury foreman goes even further out of his way to show just how ignorant he was as to what role was...

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?stor ... 4190933195

Apple v Samsung Foreman Gets More Things Wrong ~pj

Tuesday, September 04 2012 @ 07:29 PM EDT

This is in the believe it or not category, but the foreman in the Apple v Samsung trial is *still* talking about the verdict and why the jurors did what they did. And the more he talks, the worse it gets for that verdict.
Gizmodo asked him to sit today for live questions. And believe it or not, he did it. And when asked if the jury was ever asking whether or not a patent should have issued, he claims that they never did because that wasn't their role and the judge told them to assume the patents issued properly and not to second guess that determination.

That is so wrong it's not even just wrong. The verdict form [PDF] and the jury instructions [PDF] specifically asked them to address that very question.

Here's what he said, starting with the question from Demon-Xanth:
Demon-Xanth:
Did you have the opportunity to ask "Is this something that should be patentable?" during the trial?
Velvin Hogan @Demon-Xanth
No, however it was not the function of this jury to ask that. We were bound to use the law as it is today. The patents were issued the judge instructed us not to second guess the current patent system.
The law is that the jurors are supposed to decide whether or not a patent is infringed, which *includes* whether or not the patent is valid, because if it is not valid, it can't be infringed.
What a mess this jury made of things. IF you are ever on a jury, please use your common sense. The function of a jury is to decide facts, not just be little patent fascists. The USPTO issues patents that have the benefit of certain weight, but it is a challengeable assumption that they are valid. The USPTO leaves that to the courts. If in turn the jury leaves it to the USPTO, nobody ever decides whether or not a patent is valid.

And that is exactly what happened with this jury. They failed to fulfill their function.

He goes on to say that he understands prior art, but I think not. When asked, "Do you honestly believe that companies should be allowed to patent basic geometric forms?" he answers, Yes. He repeats the false claim that the prior art didn't count because it was not "interchangeable":
Wanhang:
Why did you choose to ignore prior art despite it being a legitimate claim?
Velvin Hogan @Wanhang
I is not ignore prior art yes it was legitimate, however it was not interchangeable therefore it did not invalidate Apples patents....Under the current law the prior art must be among other things interchangeable. the prior art sighted even Samsung does not currently use. Read the law and the statues covering Prior art.
Back at you, Mr. Hogan. Back at you. But someone calling himself Firewheels responded much more effectively:
Firewheels @Velvin Hogan
You're suggesting, then, that the patent is on the particular implementation, not the overall concept? In that case, isn't it clear that in many of the patents no infringement is possible, as clearly an implementation in Java (Android) is distinct from an implementation in Objective-C (iOS)?
If, however, you're suggesting the patent is on the concept, then clearly there IS prior art, and therefore the patents are invalid.

Either way, Samsung should not have been charged the exorbitant punitive damages you clearly believed were due.
Mr. Hogan has not replied, and it's been 4 hours. As another questioner, Bazzatoyou, phrased it after waiting an hour for a response that never came, "Looks like The Hogan has left the room ...!"
I hope Mr. Hogan's thinking deep thoughts about Firewheels' question.

One thing is for sure, this is going to be one fascinating appeal.
Something tells me he just woke up and realized how badly he stuffed up...
JUSTICE, n A commodity which is a more or less adulterated condition the State sells to the citizen as a reward for his allegiance, taxes and personal service.
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

I never initially realised that they were supposed to consider prior art. That should have been the clincher in this case.

The Foreman claims that the judge instructed them to ignore prior art. I would be very interested to know the truth behind that claim.

This just goes to show once again how outdated the jury system is. Particularly in this type of case.
Image
doo_much
Registered User
Posts: 26022
Joined: 13 May 2004, 02:00
Location: Getting there...
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by doo_much »

Agreed Ratso - and I really think most (UIS) court cases are becoming so technical (both in points of law and and 'factually') that a layman or the general man on the street isn't able to properly make a call on guilt.

Although this foreman does seem to be particularly clueless. Wonder if they're paying him to do the speaking circuit thing?

*edit

If I was a Samsung exec I'd pay for him to do the speaking circuit thing!
MOOD - Thirsty

A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific.
Timothy Casey
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

doo_much wrote:If I was a Samsung exec I'd pay for him to do the speaking circuit thing!
He probably kept his Galaxy SIII well-hidden throughout the trial. :lol:
Image
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

In the end, the court saw Sam­sung throw­ing a pity-party, claim­ing their mul­ti­touch is just ter­ri­ble, and then Apple com­ing over try­ing to boost them up and tell them how awe­some their mul­ti­touch is, just so they can turn around and slam them with the ban-hammer. Killing ‘em with kind­ness. What a beau­ti­ful way to win a patent case.

Read more
:lol:
Image
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

In "Things that make you go hmmm?", an analysis of Apple's Facebook page suggests that even its own fans were critical of the company after the court case. Or were they?

Read more
Image
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

In a preliminary move, a judge at the International Trade Commission has ruled that Apple doesn't violate four Samsung patents.

It's another setback for the South Korean company in a globe-spanning legal battle where Apple and Samsung accuse each other of violating patents.

The ITC judge in Washington also ruled on Friday that the patents don't apply to any domestic industry.

That will make it harder for Samsung to press its case before the full trade commission, says patent litigation expert Florian Mueller.

A jury in California last month ruled that Samsung owes Apple $1.05bn for violating patents on features of the iPhone and iPad.

Apple started taking orders for its new iPhone on Friday.

Source
Edit: Somewhat OT, but has anyone else noticed how News24 frequently adds these little complete-out-of-context final sentences to so many of their articles? I mean, Apple's pre-orders for the iPhone 5 hardly has anything to do with this particular legal battle. :?
Image
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

Apple Inc. (AAPL) asked a judge to award the company an extra $535 million in its U.S. patent case with Samsung Electronics Co., in addition to its requested permanent injunction against sales of Samsung’s infringing products.

“The harm to Apple was deliberate, not accidental,” Apple attorneys said in court papers filed Sept. 21 in the U.S. District Court in San Jose, California. Samsung “willfully diluted its trade dress, taking billions in sales in the fast- growing U.S. smartphone market at a key moment in the transition between feature phones and smartphones,” attorneys said.

Read more
Image
petrivanzyl
Registered User
Posts: 195
Joined: 31 Aug 2012, 18:29
Location: Klerksdorp

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by petrivanzyl »

If Apple keeps pushing Samsung, Samsung is gonna push back and then Apple is gonna k@k
"I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not sure"
(Intel i5-3570K; ASRock Z77 Extreme 6; GSkill Ares DDR3-1600 16GB; Gigabyte 670 GTX OC Edition; OCZ Vertex 4 128GB SSD; 2TB & 1TB Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM HDDs; CM 690 II Advanced USB 3.0; LG E2770 27" LED)
Image
User avatar
hamin_aus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18363
Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
Processor: Intel i7 3770K
Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by hamin_aus »

petrivanzyl wrote:If Apple keeps pushing Samsung, Samsung is gonna push back and then Apple is gonna k@k
Oh snap dawg!
For real :?:

Samsung is gonna get served.

No need to qualify the statement or back it up with any reasons why or how... true dat!
Image
petrivanzyl
Registered User
Posts: 195
Joined: 31 Aug 2012, 18:29
Location: Klerksdorp

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by petrivanzyl »

We shall see....

What will Apple do if Samsung stop supplying to them.

What will Apple do if they can sell only in the US? And Samsung/HTC/Android the rest of the world?
"I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not sure"
(Intel i5-3570K; ASRock Z77 Extreme 6; GSkill Ares DDR3-1600 16GB; Gigabyte 670 GTX OC Edition; OCZ Vertex 4 128GB SSD; 2TB & 1TB Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM HDDs; CM 690 II Advanced USB 3.0; LG E2770 27" LED)
Image
User avatar
Tribble
Registered User
Posts: 88465
Joined: 08 Feb 2007, 02:00
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K CPU@3.50GHz
Motherboard: ACPI x64-based PC
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 780 Ti
Memory: 16GB
Location: Not here
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Tribble »

I find this fight tiresome. I love my SII and can see why iPhone loves love theirs - I just cannot get how someone can patent a screen size, a way of accessing apps, how the phone operates. Yes it is fantastic that they can think of such things - but if others can mimic without stealing their technology - I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to - especially if they improve it.
Surely this is what competition is all about!
Image
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

petrivanzyl wrote:We shall see....

What will Apple do if Samsung stop supplying to them.

What will Apple do if they can sell only in the US? And Samsung/HTC/Android the rest of the world?
Yes, Samsung is just going to sommer cut off a revenue stream like that.

Sounds legit.
Image
ADT
Registered User
Posts: 19503
Joined: 07 Oct 2009, 08:34
Location: West of the desert

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by ADT »

jamin_za wrote:
petrivanzyl wrote:If Apple keeps pushing Samsung, Samsung is gonna push back and then Apple is gonna k@k
Oh snap dawg!
For real :?:

Samsung is gonna get served.

No need to qualify the statement or back it up with any reasons why or how... true dat!

keep it in the ghetto plzzzz :P
Image
Kanete naki mi koso yasukere yuki no michi
Spoiler (show)
AMD Phenom II 3.47ghz ~ Gigabyte GA-890GPA-UD3H ~ XFX Radeon HD 5770 ~ CM eXtreme Power Plus 600W PSU ~ Samsung P2370H ~ Corsair 4GB DDR3 2000 Mhz ~ Win 7 64 Bit Ultimate ~
User avatar
hamin_aus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18363
Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
Processor: Intel i7 3770K
Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by hamin_aus »

Don't be a hater...

Also
Tribble wrote:if others can mimic without stealing their technology - I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to - especially if they improve it.
Surely this is what competition is all about!
What planet are you from :?:
Image
Hman
Registered User
Posts: 28520
Joined: 06 Oct 2003, 02:00
Processor: Intel i5 650
Motherboard: Asus P7H55-M LX
Graphics card: Gigabyte 7850 2GB OC
Memory: 8GB Kingston DDR3
Location: In my skin
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Hman »

jamin_za wrote:Don't be a hater...

Also
Tribble wrote:if others can mimic without stealing their technology - I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to - especially if they improve it.
Surely this is what competition is all about!
What planet are you from :?:
Triblarzia
"Every thinking man is a drinking man."


Member of the Barberton Tigers
User avatar
Tribble
Registered User
Posts: 88465
Joined: 08 Feb 2007, 02:00
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K CPU@3.50GHz
Motherboard: ACPI x64-based PC
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 780 Ti
Memory: 16GB
Location: Not here
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Tribble »

I may be alien - but I was born here :twisted:

How else do you think competition works? Someone invents something - like the TV. Someone else makes it better and sells that one. Then the first people think "Hey that was smart - what if we tweaked this and that" and they do and sell that. Then someone else says I can do it better and cheaper and does it. So the other two have to make a plan and do it and something else too. So we went from black and white box sets to plasmas, widescreens, LEDs etc. Now even cellphones can control your TV. And TVs can show you the internet. Without competition we would not have what we currently have. Patents get in the way of progress. As a fan of Linux you actually have to agree with me - open source FTW
Image
User avatar
Stuart
Lead Forum Administrator
Posts: 38503
Joined: 19 May 2005, 02:00
Location: Home

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Stuart »

George Orwell once said something to the effect of, "Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious." It has also, it seems, become the first duty of intelligent men to ask the obvious.
The fact of Apple’s having filed such a claim at all calls into question whether the company is becoming too litigious, making unreasonable claims to stir up negative press for competitors rather than because of real infringement issues.

Read more
Image
StarBound
Registered Pervert
Posts: 6879
Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
Processor: Intel i7 4790k
Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
Location: The Greater Unknown
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by StarBound »

Samsung sues Apple over iphone 5 ...lolz

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Samsun ... 18077.html
My Steam Screenshots

I lived the dream ...then my PC died.
DeathStrike
Registered User
Posts: 2663
Joined: 29 Jul 2004, 02:00
Location: hidden deep in the depths of the underworld is my home.
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by DeathStrike »

TL;DR anyone want to post on what points they filing for? I'd like to see Samsung win some back for the Android guys.
Spoiler: (show)
Image
SIG by HMAN 8)
Member of The Pride Of Darkness
DeathStrike on Twitter
About me
Spoiler: (show)
Asus P5KPL-CM motherboard, 4 GIG RAM, Q6600 @ 2.88GHz (Thanks Anthro), GeForce 8600GT, Samsung 2333 23" + CRT 17" Monitors. 500GB + 1.5TB HDD, Compro TV tuner, 350 WATT PSU
User avatar
Tribble
Registered User
Posts: 88465
Joined: 08 Feb 2007, 02:00
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K CPU@3.50GHz
Motherboard: ACPI x64-based PC
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 780 Ti
Memory: 16GB
Location: Not here
Contact:

Re: Samsung loses to Apple: Google next?

Post by Tribble »

I read from one article to the next and cannot actually see what they are suing Apple for. Now following the writer of the article on Twitter. Perhaps that will shed more light. @FOSSpatents
Image
Post Reply