Appeals Court Overturns Sales Ban on Samsung Galaxy Nexus

[samcraig]

I I know people that use Samsung or Android based products and they aren't that happy with them. They would rather use an Apple product. I just think the only people that like the Android platform are typically kids or younger adults that want the eye candy and bigger screens and tons of features when they many times don't even use all of those "features", they just like to say they have them.

You mean like the iPhone. There are a ton of features that are on the iPhone that many people don't use. There are many features of many electronic devices that people don't use. My dad has (probably) a better computer setup that I do and he pretty much just surfs the web and does some light word processing. I do audio/video editing, use the entire office suite daily, the adobe suite, aperture, etc. Just as a single example.

Also kind of funny to reference young people as typical Android users when on this website there was just a report/article that "iPhone Usage Among U.S. Teens Hits 40%" - now sure, 40% isn't a majority. But it's quite a base.

Now I'm in my 40s. And a lot of my friends and colleagues are around the same age. While a lot of us have/had iPhones. A lot of us now either switched or also now use an Android phone. Bigger screens aren't just for young kids or adults who want to game. Reading on my Samsung Skyrocket - whether it's email, an e-book, a website, or whatever is far more enjoyable to me (and my colleagues) than reverting back to the iPhone. We still love our iPhones and the apps (as we do on Android).

In short (or long) - people should avoid sweeping generalizations like you just posted. It's just not accurate. It's forum stereotyping.

 

[DeathChill]

Reading all the filings by Samsung's legal team, it's starting to look like they will go for a mistrial on the entire verdict too, based on all the interviews by the Jury foreman where he basically said they based their decision on non-trial evidence, didn't respect jury instructions from the judge, and on an undeclared relationship with one of the players in the trial, mainly an affair with Seagate technologies which led him to file personal bankruptcy in the 90s, and might have tainted his views (giving him an anti-Samsung, pro-Apple bias).

It's outstanding the amount of dirt Samsung's legal have dug up on this guy. Remains to be seen how either Koh or appellate court sees all of this and eventually rules.

It's been hard to follow what has and hasn't been said by the foreman, but what evidence did they use that was from outside of the trial?

I keep hearing "ignored jury instructions", but I'm not exactly sure what they ignored. It seems to me that it's based off the quote that they didn't need to hear the instructions again when they had to fix their error on the sheet, as the judge read the instructions to them and they referred back to them while making decisions, apparently.

The Seagate thing is interesting. I can't find anything where they asked for specific information about trials but I don't think they've released it (or it doesn't exist, not sure). Here's a longish post about what was actually said and asked of the jury, apparently:

Groklaw coverage is a convenient place for the latest links, but their commentary is beyond biased. They attempt to color what you're about to read.
Here's a particularly obvious example:

Commentary:
Hogan did not mention the case brought against him by Seagate in voir dire, significantly enough, even though he was specifically asked by the judge, as were all the prospective jurors, to list all cases any of them was ever involved in as a witness or a party. Hogan told Reuters (see 2012 [PDF]) that he wasn't asked about all cases. But he was, as you can see for yourself in the transcript [PDF] of the voir dire.

No, Hogan was not "specifically asked ... to list all cases" according either Samsung's filing or the linked transcript.

At least Samsung's filing gets it right:

Asked by the Court whether “you or a family member or someone very close to you [has] ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff, a defendant, or as a witness?” he disclosed one such lawsuit but failed to disclose two others...
Sorry, Groklaw, Hogan was not "specifically" asked to "list all" cases. The actual question, including sentences before and after for context (all caps in transcript):

LET'S CONTINUE WITH THE QUESTIONS. THE NEXT QUESTION IS, HAVE YOU OR A FAMILY MEMBER OR SOMEONE VERY CLOSE TO YOU EVER BEEN INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT, EITHER AS A PLAINTIFF, A DEFENDANT, OR AS A WITNESS? LET'S SEE. ON THE FIRST ROW, WHO WOULD RAISE THEIR HAND TO THAT QUESTION? ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO TO MR. HOGAN.

The question "specifically" asks about the singular, "a lawsuit". Note the phrase "who would raise their hand to that?" It's a binary question.

At the time of the question, it wasn't about patents, it was to determine if jurors have encountered the court system as a participant, yes or no. The followup questions did drill into the nature of the case Hogan mentioned, but the judge didn't follow up further because that wasn't the purpose of the original question.

Skipping down in the transcript a bit, the judge tells us the purpose of the "have you been involved in a lawsuit" question:

WE'LL TALK FURTHER ABOUT WHO'S BEEN ON JURY DUTY, BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, STANDARDS OF PROOF IN DIFFERENT CASES, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE -- YOU ALL HAD CIVIL CASES, SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT YOU ALSO HAD, YOU KNOW, PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE. DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR?

This makes it clear the question wasn't how many cases the juror was involved in, but whether the juror had been exposed to concepts around rule of law in different types of cases. The judge continues:

AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT LATER ON, BUT IN DIFFERENT TYPES OF CASES, THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT STANDARDS OF PROOF, AND ALSO THE LAW MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE WHENEVER YOU WERE A LITIGANT. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BOTH MR. HOGAN, AND MS. ROUGIERI, THAT YOU WOULD APPLY THE LAW AS I INSTRUCT YOU AND NOT BASED ON YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW BASED ON YOUR OWN CASES.

So no, Hogan was responsive and accurate and the question was not asking for an itemized list of cases. It was to set up the point about standards of proof and judicial instructions.

 

[KnightWRX]

What source are you using that's calling Groklaw biased ? Groklaw has basically all the unredacted filings from the case. How can it get less biased than the actual unredacted filings ?

And then they justify Hogan's evasiness... Are you quoting FOSSpatents or something ?

 

[samcraig]

It's been hard to follow what has and hasn't been said by the foreman, but what evidence did they use that was from outside of the trial?

I believe he's referring to the discussion point where the foreman brought his own "test" on what would validate or invalidate a patent (paraphrasing) into the jury room and "convinced" others to follow his line of logic. I could be wrong.

 

[KnightWRX]

I believe he's referring to the discussion point where the foreman brought his own "test" on what would validate or invalidate a patent (paraphrasing) into the jury room and "convinced" others to follow his line of logic. I could be wrong.

That was the point yes. The "haha" moment where the foreman completely misunderstands what is "Prior art" or not.

 

[Bezetos]

And Copernic Desktop Search came out in the late 90's, which basically does the same thing as what's described in the patents, which were filed after 2000.

Patents aren't about protecting IP, specially when it comes to software. It's about being lucky enough to patent an idea first so you can charge everyone else for it afterwards.

That's unfortunately true.

The patent system is fundamentally flawed and is used by big companies (who can afford to patent every single thing they think off) to retain their position. Even Steve Jobs admitted to doing so, he especially wanted to patent everything Apple could think of, even if the idea wouldn't be built, so that they can use those patents offensively.

----------

If Samsung and Android OS is so good, then why aren't they getting better grades in customer satisfaction?

The Samsung GSIII is getting brilliant reviews. Some Android users just seem harder to please, which is probably why they went for Android in the first place, where they have more choice.

 

[jimi78]

Copy the current iPhone ? You mean the one that copied the original Galaxy S which had a 4" screen... not to mention all the other 4" 16:9 phones Samsung released since the last 2 years...



Yeah, definitely, they are copying the iPhone.

Not in the originality sense, but why are they releasing an S3, that is supposed to be their flagship phone with a smaller form factor when they have already surpassed that size. Like you said they have released it already; so why make another one now w/ the hardware of the S3? the phone that is in direct competition with the iPhone 5? That's all I am sayin...no need for the 'tude.

 

[KnightWRX]

Not in the originality sense, but why are they releasing an S3, that is supposed to be their flagship phone with a smaller form factor when they have already surpassed that size. Like you said they have released it already; so why make another one now w/ the hardware of the S3? the phone that is in direct competition with the iPhone 5? That's all I am sayin...no need for the 'tude.

2 things :

- This phone is not a flagship phone. It's a mid-range.
- Samsung never "surpassed" that size, they've kept shipping 4" phones all this time after the original Galaxy S release.

So your whole premise is simply wrong. No need for the 'tude. Some of you just seem to want everyone and everything to copy Apple all the time. Open your minds : Apple isn't the source of every device in the industry.

 

[devilstrider]

I love my Galaxy Nexus. It serves me well.

 

[ChazUK]

Not in the originality sense, but why are they releasing an S3, that is supposed to be their flagship phone with a smaller form factor when they have already surpassed that size. Like you said they have released it already; so why make another one now w/ the hardware of the S3? the phone that is in direct competition with the iPhone 5? That's all I am sayin...no need for the 'tude.

Samsung have been releasing modestly specced midrange 4 inch screened devices in the past few generations.

We had the Galaxy S i9000 released June 2010 and the Omia 7 i8700 released October 2010.

Following that was the launch of the Galaxy S II i9100 released April 2011, shortly followed by the 4 inch Galaxy S Plus i9001 in July 2011. That was then followed up with the Galaxy S II inspired Galaxy S Advance i9070 in April this year.

This year we had the Galaxy S III i9300 released May 2012 and now we have the 4 inched Galaxy S Mini i8910 due in a few weeks.

The only thing that has changed this round is Samsung cashing in on the Galaxy S III's popularity by sharing the same title.

>

i9000 to i9001

>

i9100 to i9070

>

i9300 to i8190
Notice how each midrange solution looks like the current high end solution?

 

[lazard]

Not in the originality sense, but why are they releasing an S3, that is supposed to be their flagship phone with a smaller form factor when they have already surpassed that size. Like you said they have released it already; so why make another one now w/ the hardware of the S3? the phone that is in direct competition with the iPhone 5? That's all I am sayin...no need for the 'tude.

Because Samsung built a 4" phone in the past they can't build another one? Even though their flagship line continues to grow larger, they still continue to crank out phones in smaller form factors (3.5", 3.7", 4", 4.3").

 

[samcraig]

It's also a way for Samsung to have Jellybean on a 4" phone right now to be competitive.

Samsung have been releasing modestly specced midrange 4 inch screened devices in the past few generations.

We had the Galaxy S i9000 released June 2010 and the Omia 7 i8700 released October 2010.

Following that was the launch of the Galaxy S II i9100 released April 2011, shortly followed by the 4 inch Galaxy S Plus i9001 in July 2011. That was then followed up with the Galaxy S II inspired Galaxy S Advance i9070 in April this year.

This year we had the Galaxy S III i9300 released May 2012 and now we have the 4 inched Galaxy S Mini i8910 due in a few weeks.

The only thing that has changed this round is Samsung cashing in on the Galaxy S III's popularity by sharing the same title.

Image > Image
i9000 to i9001
Image > Image
i9100 to i9070
Image > Image
i9300 to i8190
Notice how each midrange solution looks like the current high end solution?

 

[opeepingtomo]

comments like this always boil my blood.
He/she made a comment based on personal opinion and so suddenly it's "ok bye" like they are leaving some illustrious club? The never said they were leaving macrumors or other areas of apple products.
Come on people, it's a phone. Get over yourselves.

/rage

this!

 

[Ryan John]

I know people that use Samsung or Android based products and they aren't that happy with them. They would rather use an Apple product. I just think the only people that like the Android platform are typically kids or younger adults that want the eye candy and bigger screens and tons of features when they many times don't even use all of those "features", they just like to say they have them.

The people that I know that use a Samsung phone aren't that crazy about them after a few months. Some of them want to throw them against a brick wall and get an iPhone.

What an utterly ridiculous and bigotted thing to say. I use Android as a middle aged man. My kids use Android or Blackberry as it's their preference, and you might be surprised to learn that I have no desire to throw my high end droid at a wall and rush out to buy an iPhone. I'm over the whole "my phone makes me cooler than you" stage, obviously you are not.

People use Android, Blackberry, Nokia or Joe Bloggs phones, because they can and it suits them, it's called personal choice. Not because of some ridiculous perceived iPhone envy.

 

[the read]

If Samsung and Android OS is so good, then why aren't they getting better grades in customer satisfaction? I know people that use Samsung or Android based products and they aren't that happy with them. They would rather use an Apple product. I just think the only people that like the Android platform are typically kids or younger adults that want the eye candy and bigger screens and tons of features when they many times don't even use all of those "features", they just like to say they have them.

The people that I know that use a Samsung phone aren't that crazy about them after a few months. Some of them want to throw them against a brick wall and get an iPhone.

The most disappointing factor is the battery, but that goes for ALL smartphones. They need to come up with a device that doesn't need charging as often and can be small and lightweight.

I know many people who also feel the same way about iOS. People who have apple phones and are dissatisfied with the limitations that iOS impose.

Using iOS for work is a nightmare. It's horrid at managing data and modifying them. Android provides much better freedom for you to do what you want with your data.

If I want to play angry birds or some other game then iOS is great. If I want to modify a business document and send in an email, or if I want to play media relivent to my business (media industry) then iOS is a fail. It either does not support the format or it does not allow apps to communicate with each other and exchange data.

iOS is horrid for the professional ussr and it's not getting any better as it evolves.

 

[AllieNeko]

"Nobody wants our product; therefore, a ban is unnecessary."

The Nexus isn't a popular phone. I love mine, sold my iPhone 4S to buy it, but it sure isn't popular. Even at $350, people see it as expensive. They're too used to signing contracts

 

[rendevouspoo]

I just think the only people that like the Android platform are typically kids or younger adults that want the eye candy and bigger screens and tons of features when they many times don't even use all of those "features", they just like to say they have them.

Lol, wut? Most kids and young adults like the iPhone because the iPhone represents the cool, in-crowd, and popular crowd. Sad, I know, but true.

 

[jimi78]

2 things :

- This phone is not a flagship phone. It's a mid-range.
- Samsung never "surpassed" that size, they've kept shipping 4" phones all this time after the original Galaxy S release.

So your whole premise is simply wrong. No need for the 'tude. Some of you just seem to want everyone and everything to copy Apple all the time. Open your minds : Apple isn't the source of every device in the industry.

according to Samesungs press release it sounds like a smaller version of their flagship phone:

"Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, a global leader in digital media and digital convergence technologies, today unveiled the GALAXY S III mini, a compact version of the flagship smartphone GALAXY S III."


I didn't see anything that said it is a "mid-range" or entry level phone. It seems the only difference is the screen size. I know that they have been making 4" phones the whole time, but when they have been banking on "bigger is better" and "the next best thing is already here" yet they go to a smaller screen size of a phone that already is over 4" in size, that just seems weird to me.


I am not jaded by the Apple kool aid. I actually wish there were some features from Jellybean in iOS.

 

[jimi78]

Samsung have been releasing modestly specced midrange 4 inch screened devices in the past few generations.

We had the Galaxy S i9000 released June 2010 and the Omia 7 i8700 released October 2010.

Following that was the launch of the Galaxy S II i9100 released April 2011, shortly followed by the 4 inch Galaxy S Plus i9001 in July 2011. That was then followed up with the Galaxy S II inspired Galaxy S Advance i9070 in April this year.

This year we had the Galaxy S III i9300 released May 2012 and now we have the 4 inched Galaxy S Mini i8910 due in a few weeks.

The only thing that has changed this round is Samsung cashing in on the Galaxy S III's popularity by sharing the same title.

Image > Image
i9000 to i9001
Image > Image
i9100 to i9070
Image > Image
i9300 to i8190
Notice how each midrange solution looks like the current high end solution?

thanks for illustrating your point. I guess my initial inclination stands to be corrected

 

[KnightWRX]

according to Samesungs press release it sounds like a smaller version of their flagship phone:

"Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, a global leader in digital media and digital convergence technologies, today unveiled the GALAXY S III mini, a compact version of the flagship smartphone GALAXY S III.

The pricing and specs solidely place it as a mid-range or entry level device. Just like Apple doesn't state outright the same about the 4 and 4S.

 

[ChazUK]

thanks for illustrating your point. I guess my initial inclination stands to be corrected

No problems! I do think the Galaxy S III moniker will confuse consumers and possibly tarnish the Galaxy S III name if performance is poor. I personally think it should have been a replacement for the Galaxy Ace II (even though the Ace II isn't bad spec wise). I do see this as a definite cash in on the S III name.

 

[axual]

Almost as well ...

"In other words, it may very well be that the accused product would sell almost as well ..."

So what exactly is the definition of "almost as well". Just some simple math but 1% of 100 million units is 1 million units. Is 1 million units fall under the category of "almost as well"?

 

[glowdragon]

Excellent. I sold my iPhone 4 for a Galaxy Nexus and have never looked back. I love it.

All other things being equal, I'm paying $30 a month on T-Mobile for unlimited (throttled after 5gb) web usage, unlimited texts, and a measly 100 minutes that i never come close to using up. Try that with any iPhone carrier!

Though if T-Mo gets the right spectrum to make it worthwhile to bring an iPhone on their network, I imagine that'd be good as well.

But I do enjoy a diversity of operating systems. And Swype is fantastic.

 

[LordVic]

Funny how Apple is always shown in the right no matter what they do, the company which can do no wrong.

When Apple tries to assert dominance/control over the markets, they file lawsuits to prevent even the competitors which really pose no real threat over their sales, from making any profit.

Microsoft was considered evil as it went about similar goals not through lawsuits but rather the acquisition of competing companies. The idea of the Microsoft "Borg" comes to mind here.

I laugh at the modern irony of Apple everyday when I think back to Microsoft of the 90s.

If anyone doesn't remember, Microsoft in the 90's got into huge legal trouble accross the world for "antitrust and anticompetitive business practices".

You know what the biggest "crime" they were accused of? Windows 95 and 98 shipped with Internet Explorer defaultly installed and set to the Default Internet browser upon initial installation.

The Courts found this was anti-competitive and a breach of consumer trust. Windows even received a ban in Europe until they provided Windows without Internet Explorer built in as default, and provide links to all competitors browsers for choice.

Fast forward 15 years. Apple does the exact same business practice. Safari is #1 on all Apple devices. You have no choice in iOS in most cases but to run Apples browser. Where's the court system on this one?

Apple is being treated very well by governments around the world in compared to Microsoft back then. And the only reason is today, corporations have far more control over governments and their rule making than they ever did before.

 

[larne]

Its really a shame that the public is so incredibly ignorant. Somehow Samsung managed to become the poster child for Android when HTC's phones are so much better than both Samsung and Apple. The public lines up in queues for days like minions from 1984 (ironic) only to put down incredible amount of cash, but not for Apple's best product, which is OS X (and any computer that goes along with it).

The public has it completely backwards.... I almost wonder why people STILL aren't switching over to OS X and sticking to Windows... but iPhones? They're obsessed with them. Apple's poorest, lousiest and limiting product (iOS) gets the company to a degree where the stock is at a record high but OS X, the Mac Pro, a proper MacBook basically get ignored.

Couldn't agree more