Apple's Lengthy Lawsuit With Samsung Over Copying iPhone's Design Headed Back to Court

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Oct 23, 2017.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Apple's over six year old legal battle with Samsung for copying the iPhone's design is headed back to court yet again.

    U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh on Sunday ordered that a new trial is required to determine whether Apple's $399 million award for Samsung's design patent infringement should stand or whether a new damages trial is required.


    Apple and Samsung have until Wednesday to propose a retrial date, according to intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller, but he believes there is about a 30 percent chance the two parties could settle out of court before then.

    The lawsuit dates back to 2011, when Apple successfully sued Samsung for infringing upon the iPhone's patented design, including its rectangular front face with rounded edges and grid of colorful icons on a black screen.

    Apple's damages were awarded based on Samsung's entire profit from the sale of its infringing smartphones, but Samsung argued that the amount should be a percentage based on individual components like the front bezel or display.

    Last December, the U.S. Supreme Court recommended that the U.S. Court of Appeals reconsider the damages amount that Samsung owes.

    Apple's statement at the time:
    Calvin Klein, Dieter Rams, and over 100 other top designers backed Apple last year, arguing the iPhone maker is entitled to all profits Samsung has earned from infringing designs. They cited a 1949 study stating that more than 99 percent of Americans could identify a bottle of Coca-Cola by shape alone.

    Apple was initially awarded nearly $1 billion in damages, but a significant part of the decision was reversed in 2015, leaving Samsung owing $548 million. The amount was eventually lowered to $399 million in subsequent retrials.

    Article Link: Apple's Lengthy Lawsuit With Samsung Over Copying iPhone's Design Headed Back to Court
  2. polbit macrumors 6502


    Sep 18, 2002
    South Carolina
  3. 840quadra Moderator


    Staff Member

    Feb 1, 2005
    Twin Cities Minnesota
    While this case is old, it will help set precedent for cases like this going forward, and could be used to protect other companies from similar types of situations. I see a few posts even on the Android side where people claim one company copied the other, often on products within the same market.

    Hopefully it finally gets resolved though.
  4. Glassed Silver macrumors 68020

    Glassed Silver

    Mar 10, 2007
    Kassel, Germany
    I think my great great great great great grandchildren will witness the end of this battle when nobody even uses smartphones anymore but is already connected to 32G networks with implanted chips.

    Glassed Silver:mac
  5. lyngo macrumors 6502a

    Sep 10, 2007
    This is the lawsuit that’ll never end... sheesh.
  6. StevieD100 macrumors 6502a


    Jan 18, 2014
    Living Dangerously in Retirement
    Sigh. This is fast becoming SCO vs IBM mark 2. AFAIK, that still has not completely bitten the dust and that was started in 2003.
  7. HowieIsaacks macrumors regular


    Nov 22, 2013
    Addison, TX
    I wish I was one of the attorneys working on this case! What bothers me the most about this case is that it seems to be impossible for Apple to get justice in this case, but patent trolls can win much more quickly. WTF! At least Apple is producing products instead of sitting on (often outdated and vague) patents.
  8. MH01 Suspended


    Feb 11, 2008
    Anyone care to predict when the legal fees will exceed the settlement?

    Or is that now?
  9. velocityg4 macrumors 601


    Dec 19, 2004
    There needs to be a limit on retrials. At some point the system needs to set a final ruling. Lawsuits are just ridiculously long.
  10. usarioclave macrumors 65816

    Sep 26, 2003
    How do you calculate the damages? That's tough, but it should be based on a percentage of profits of the infringer, not on actual damages. Why?

    Let's put it this way: if the design wasn't copied what would the sales be? Look at blackberry and Nokia for that: they didn't copy the iPhone and they both died.

    Without the iPhone UI you wouldn't be able to sell a phone, period.

    One question is: why is samsung the culprit, not google? Did google not indemnify android licensees?
  11. RuffyYoshi macrumors regular


    Feb 18, 2014
    They can drop it, Samsung made a much better looking smartphone with the S8 than the X.
  12. robeddie Suspended


    Jul 21, 2003
    The coca-cola example is one thing, but Apple is essentially saying they’ve got a patent on something the shape of a rectangle with a screen covering most of one side.

    Somthing needs to be done about the patent system.
  13. Avieshek Suspended


    Dec 7, 2013
    Is there a Guinness Book of records for this?
  14. roland.g macrumors 603


    Apr 11, 2005
    One mile up and soaring
    Typical response outside logical language.
  15. WannaGoMac macrumors 68020


    Feb 11, 2007
    By the time its done will be $0 to Apple, and once again it's the lawyers who win :p
  16. ghostface147 macrumors 68030


    May 28, 2008
  17. foobarbaz macrumors 6502a

    Nov 29, 2007
    So, if I copy Coke's bottle design, and say the bottle is free with the purchase of the contained liquid, I don't have to pay any damages.

    Brilliant argument.
  18. gsmornot macrumors 68030


    Sep 29, 2014
    I can predict Samsung (nor anyone else) will copy the notch. Apple took care of the issue by making something no-one wants to copy. I'm all for OLED but a thin chin would have been just fine. Maybe we settle this by copying a little in the reverse direction.
  19. Superhappytree macrumors 6502a


    Sep 10, 2015
    Well I’ll give Samsung this; at least their phones look a whole lot different from iPhones these days which even die hard Apple fans seem to praise. I still think their curved ‘Edges’ are ergonomically horrible though and are nothing but a nuisance from the experience I’ve had with them.
  20. Wondercow macrumors 6502a

    Aug 27, 2008
    Toronto, Canada
    What do patent trolls have to do with this case?
  21. Jsameds macrumors 68040

    Apr 22, 2008
    Regardless of the outcome, Samsung have already won. The fine (if there ever is one) will be utterly eclipsed by the profits they have made in the smartphone industry in the last decade and going forward.

    It was a business strategy and sadly it worked.
  22. convergent macrumors 68030


    May 6, 2008
    There was a generation of Samsung phones that it was clear they were trying to mimic the iPhone. I recall seeing photos of a store they setup that was almost a mirror copy of an Apple Store. But, sticking with the phone design, it was uncharted territory at that time. What exactly can be patented in a visual design for a phone, when they all look so similar? The court settled that, punished Samsung, and they've moved on... clearly.

    Samsung and Apple have sued each other back and forth, and also partner on things. Given that for several generations now Samsung phones, as well as their UI, look nothing like Apple's design, and have surpassed Apple in many areas. Time to move on. Of course it helps when Apple does several generations of phones that look nearly identical and Samsung changes their design ever cycle. I just hope Samsung doesn't lose their mind and try to copy any part of the X design.
  23. fireguy286 macrumors 6502


    Sep 15, 2014
    NY'er trapped in Philthadelphia
  24. NachoGrande macrumors 6502a

    Mar 30, 2010
    Ahh.... the patented rectangle.. TV business it going to go crazy apparently they all copy each others design.
  25. Aleh macrumors member


    Sep 11, 2013
    Changes the design at every cycle? The S6 and S7 were identical basically and the S8 is more similar to the S7 than the X is to the 7
  26. jhs571 macrumors newbie


    Oct 23, 2017
    That "rectangle" with an all-glass front and no physical keyboard was a radical phone design that Apple took a HUGE risk on in 2007... and was deemed doomed to fail when Steve Jobs revealed it. The design is rightly patented and any company that copies that design SHOULD PAY hefty licensing fees to use it. No idea why it's taking so long for justice to be served.

Share This Page