Samsung vs. Apple, v2.0

April 1, 2013

    Samsung-vs-Apple

    Did you know Apple and Samsung are locked in a vicious legal battle? It slipped under everyone’s radar, right?! Well, they have been, and the newest round of legal wrangling promises to heat things up again.

    The previous (Dr. Evil-esque) verdict of $1.049 billion was reduced by Judge Lucy Koh to about $598 million, citing jury error in calculating damage. While many companies in a similar situation would just pay the fine, find ways to mitigate their losses, and go on about their business… Samsung is cut from a different cloth. The second trial between Apple-Samsung, which encompassed 14 Samsung devices Apple claimed violated their patents, will be re-opened at Samsung’s request, and will be much like the first one. Samsung wishes the jury in the new trial to re-hash the same argument, which is whether or not the devices in question actually violate Apple patents.

    The new trial will also bring a fresh verdict, one that could end up biting Samsung right in the apples. Samsung realizes that the $598 million adjusted verdict could disappear, be greatly reduced… or jump far beyond the original $1 billion mark. It’s a risk that Samsung has, undoubtedly, calculated carefully.

    Samsung has no intentions of letting this skirmish die gracefully, and that’s okay. This isn’t so much about 14 devices from the past, as it is an untold amount of future technology. Both companies clearly feel this sets a very distinct precedent, so we’ll be sure to keep an eye on this new trial.

    0 26 112

    Comments

    • Mike Snyder

      Perhaps this time the jury foreman won’t be a complete and utter tool…

      • http://www.AndroidAuthority.com/ Darcy Alexander LaCouvee

        Perhaps…

      • IHATEHIPSTERSSS

        Samsung needs to stop copying Apple.

        • McPear

          That’s why Apple’s (in)famous user interface patent slide-to-unlock has been INVALIDATED in Germany today April 4th. Not by a goofing amateur jury led by a goofing foreman but by Germany’s Federal Patent Court’s panel of five judges of which two judges with an engineering background,

    • hoggleboggle

      this website really doesn’t have much love for Samsung. – regardless, this will be entertaining to watch

      • William

        I thought it was strange when he mentioned that Samsung is cut from a different cloth. Didn’t he mean to say Apple instead?

      • Jelly Bean

        Um, this website is effectively a Samsung fansite at the best of times…

    • duck Apple

      I hope apple losses

    • http://www.facebook.com/Trent8381 Trent Richards

      This retrial should be held in a state other than California.

      • MoogleStiltzkin

        or another country other than the US. maybe Europe (possibly switzerland) cause their neutral ?

        • http://www.facebook.com/Trent8381 Trent Richards

          Being a US patent case, it should remain in the USA. However, not in one of the parties’ backyard. It is safe to say that most if not all of the jurors in the first trial were either tied to Apple or had relatives or friends tied to Apple. I also agree with McPear that non technical jurors shouldn’t be deciding the outcome of a case that effects an entire industry.

      • McPear

        Utterly ridiculous legal system whereby a jury, by definition consiting of legally and technically incompetent people, decide on extremely complicated patent matters resulting into far reaching consequences. The US should take an example of how German Courts handles the same legal pattent battles. Germany’s Federal Patent Court’s panel of five judges, of which two judges with an engineering background, invalidated April 4th Apple’s user interface patent slide-to-unlock.

    • MoogleStiltzkin

      i think apple is acting disgracefully. even their co founder steve jobs admitted that copying is the biggest form of flattery, and he even admitted to doing it himself when he was running apple while back.

      It’s not that i am saying patents for some of the stuff they have is irrelevant, but i find many of them to be deeply flawed whether they can be patented, and especially apples claim to design for anything remotely looking like a smartphone even so far as to say they own the rectangular shaped smartphone with rounded edges.

      their claims are just too wide ranging, and someone either the jury, the judge or samsung needs to put a stop to it and put some limitations on apples excessive claims.

      The Iraq war was about oil, and apples fight against samsung is about anti competitive behaviour because they are afraid of the rise of the Samsung Galaxy S3 and now S4 which is a way superior product most parts compared to their Iphone 5.

    Popular

    Latest