Apple wins lawsuit vs Samsung

[Spartan212]

So, the case is over with (appeal notwithstanding). Apple has won the patent battle with Samsung to the tune of $1.05 billion. It took the jury just two days to review the 700 patent-specific questions to come to their conclusion. For more details:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3266391/apple-samsung-patent-damages-verdict

Escapist: What do you think? Has patent litigation gone overboard, or did Apple deserve what they received? I'm not going to interject my opinion here, but I'm curious as to what everyone else thinks

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Every single Apple patent was upheld, and the 5 counter-claims Samsung made were all dropped. And this was all reviewed in just 2 days?

How do you review 705 individual patents in 2 days, that's a bit mad.

 

[Spartan212]

Every single Apple patent was upheld, and the 5 counter-claims Samsung made were all dropped. And this was all reviewed in just 2 days?

How do you review 705 individual patents in 2 days, that's a bit mad.

On top of that, the jury had to place a value on how much the patents were worth, and assign the amounts to each individual Samsung device. Will be interesting to see how this affects smartphones and tablets in the future (besides making everything more expensive)

 

[Weaver]

Every single Apple patent was upheld, and the 5 counter-claims Samsung made were all dropped. And this was all reviewed in just 2 days?

How do you review 705 individual patents in 2 days, that's a bit mad.

Well, if the jury were large you could divide up the patents in such a way each individual could do one. Though I'm not sure if that's how juries are supposed to work.

 

[MysticToast]

Every single Apple patent was upheld, and the 5 counter-claims Samsung made were all dropped. And this was all reviewed in just 2 days?

How do you review 705 individual patents in 2 days, that's a bit mad.

Well, if the jury were large you could divide up the patents in such a way each individual could do one. Though I'm not sure if that's how juries are supposed to work.

From what I understand about the case, this was 9 people who all had to pore over the patents and come to a consensus on each one.

 

[GrimTuesday]

Yeah, this case was bullshit. The entier thing took place in silicon valley where Apple is based, and Steve Jobs is considered a god. I hope Samsung appeals and crushes Apple. I'm not saying Apple did anything illegal or unethical, but I think it would have been hard for Samsung to win.

Also, I bet some of these patents are shit like unlocking your phone wit finger swiping of some sort, yeah, Apple owns a patent on that.

 

[yuval152]

I'm calling bullshit, they jury are giving apple a monopoly.

 

[Signa]

I'm not saying Apple did anything illegal or unethical,

I can pretty much guarantee you they did, this is Apple we are talking about.

I think it's about time someone hits Apple with an anti-trust lawsuit. At least when Microsoft got hit with one there were alternatives to the things they were sued for. If Apple keeps going as they are, they will own the entire market through patents, and no one will be able to choose otherwise.

 

[FEichinger]

Yeah, this case was bullshit. The entier thing took place in silicon valley where Apple is based, and Steve Jobs is considered a god. I hope Samsung appeals and crushes Apple. I'm not saying Apple did anything illegal or unethical, but I think it would have been hard for Samsung to win.

Also, I bet some of these patents are shit like unlocking your phone wit finger swiping of some sort, yeah, Apple owns a patent on that.

I'm calling bullshit, they jury are giving apple a monopoly.

You're two well-informed persons with great insight into this trial. I am glad you could share your valuable opinion with us.

And now back to serious:

You can't tell me Samsung didn't blatantly copy both appearance and functionality of Apple's products. Neither can you tell me "THEY COPIED AS WELL!!!!" and "BUT THIS IS NECESSARY!" is an appropriate defence. Neither can you tell me Samsung's lawyers even looked like they were trying to win that trial.

Apple presented a strong case of various patents Samsung knowingly and willfully infringed, which was depicted by Samsung's own documents.
Why does the TouchWiz App drawer need to look almost exactly like the iPhone homescreen?
Why do so many Samsung phones need to look that much like iPhones, while other manufacturers can avoid it?
Why do various TouchWiz App icons closely resemble iPhone icons? Why is the rounded square icon "obvious" when all it has to do is provide a target for the finger (which is more of a circle, not a goddamn square)?

Samsung's case on the other hand consisted of "There was a totally different product aeons ago that offered a seemingly similar functionality!" - which was then proven pretty damn wrong when the actual device was presented - and "What they patented is obvious, of course everyone does that!" - which is ridiculous, since it never appeared as a collective experience prior to the iPhone, and has various alternatives even now.

 

[ohnoitsabear]

Yeah, this case was bullshit. The entier thing took place in silicon valley where Apple is based, and Steve Jobs is considered a god. I hope Samsung appeals and crushes Apple. I'm not saying Apple did anything illegal or unethical, but I think it would have been hard for Samsung to win.

Also, I bet some of these patents are shit like unlocking your phone wit finger swiping of some sort, yeah, Apple owns a patent on that.

I'm calling bullshit, they jury are giving apple a monopoly.

You're two well-informed persons with great insight into this trial. I am glad you could share your valuable opinion with us.

And now back to serious:

You can't tell me Samsung didn't blatantly copy both appearance and functionality of Apple's products. Neither can you tell me "THEY COPIED AS WELL!!!!" and "BUT THIS IS NECESSARY!" is an appropriate defence. Neither can you tell me Samsung's lawyers even looked like they were trying to win that trial.

Apple presented a strong case of various patents Samsung knowingly and willfully infringed, which was depicted by Samsung's own documents.
Why does the TouchWiz App drawer need to look almost exactly like the iPhone homescreen?
Why do so many Samsung phones need to look that much like iPhones, while other manufacturers can avoid it?
Why do various TouchWiz App icons closely resemble iPhone icons? Why is the rounded square icon "obvious" when all it has to do is provide a target for the finger (which is more of a circle, not a goddamn square)?

Samsung's case on the other hand consisted of "There was a totally different product aeons ago that offered a seemingly similar functionality!" - which was then proven pretty damn wrong when the actual device was presented - and "What they patented is obvious, of course everyone does that!" - which is ridiculous, since it never appeared as a collective experience prior to the iPhone, and has various alternatives even now.

The important question isn't whether or not Samsung infringed on Apple's patents, but whether or not Apple should be able to have those patents in the first place. I'm guessing a lot of these patents were software patents, which shouldn't exist in the first place. All Apple winning this case does is legitimize patent trolling, which is a practice that can only hurt the industry.

Also, I would be just as mad if Samsung, or anybody else, won a similar case against Apple.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yeah, this case was bullshit. The entier thing took place in silicon valley where Apple is based, and Steve Jobs is considered a god. I hope Samsung appeals and crushes Apple. I'm not saying Apple did anything illegal or unethical, but I think it would have been hard for Samsung to win.

Also, I bet some of these patents are shit like unlocking your phone wit finger swiping of some sort, yeah, Apple owns a patent on that.

It was pretty much a kangaroo court in the first place.

 

[FEichinger]

The important question isn't whether or not Samsung infringed on Apple's patents, but whether or not Apple should be able to have those patents in the first place. I'm guessing a lot of these patents were software patents, which shouldn't exist in the first place. All Apple winning this case does is legitimize patent trolling, which is a practice that can only hurt the industry.

Also, I would be just as mad if Samsung, or anybody else, won a similar case against Apple.

And if Samsung won, every single phone would look and behave exactly the same, since obviously there are no such things as the patents that protect those very specifics. I'm sorry, but I don't buy the "patent trolling" argument in light of this.

 

[Legion]

They are ignoring the reason why patents were invented in the first place: To stop entrepreneurs from being screwed over by having somebody with better funding/contacts stealing their ideas and selling them on themselves.

Everybody knows Apple, everybody has heard of the iPhone, and what it has. It's not like Samsgung can take the exact same idea and try and sell it as their own one, everybody knows Apple came up with it first and they have made billions from it.

 

[seditary]

Holy christ, 2 days?

How can anyone think that everything was considered fairly and evenly in that timeframe?

 

[Antari]

So, the case is over with (appeal notwithstanding). Apple has won the patent battle with Samsung to the tune of $1.05 billion. It took the jury just two days to review the 700 patent-specific questions to come to their conclusion. For more details:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3266391/apple-samsung-patent-damages-verdict

Escapist: What do you think? Has patent litigation gone overboard, or did Apple deserve what they received? I'm not going to interject my opinion here, but I'm curious as to what everyone else thinks

Its pretty obvious that they did their deliberations on Ipad's. As you can see the use of such devices has greatly speeded up the process.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Interesting how the court that presided over the case in Korea found both companies guilty of copying each other and told them both to STFU...

Sorry, no source, but BBC R4 seems reliable enough...

 

[FinalFreak16]

'Picasso had a saying, he said good artists copy, great artists steal. We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.' - Steve Jobs, 1996

'Im going to destroy Android, because its a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this!.' - Steve Jobs, 2010

http://www.ted.com/talks/kirby_ferguson_embrace_the_remix.html

Software patents are completely against innovation and encouraging creativity. The best work comes from building upon what others have already made. If thats not possible how can progress be made?

 

[dyre]

Like others have said, this jury of common peers seems to be exceptionally well-versed in patent literature if they were able to go through all that material in two days. That, or they were sick of reading that shit and just wanted to go home

 

[FEichinger]

Software patents are completely against innovation and encouraging creativity. The best work comes from building upon what others have already made. If thats not possible how can progress be made?

Innovation is perfectly fine. Implementing the exact same thing pretty much the exact same way is not. Progress can still be achieved by actually sufficiently altering the feature you adapt. Isn't that the whole point of innovation? Something new?