Apple doesn't have a monopoly. Not even close. Plus, there are definitely other non-infringing operating systems out there (Windows Phone, anyone?). Samsung even has some of its own under development (Bada, Tizen).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple doesn't have a monopoly. Not even close. Plus, there are definitely other non-infringing operating systems out there (Windows Phone, anyone?). Samsung even has some of its own under development (Bada, Tizen).
Congrats to Apple. Quick question for anyone that might know: when Samsung appeals and let's say they lose, are they also paying interest and Apple's legal fees on top?
Actually, you are wrong. As laid out in the United States Constitution, they have the power to interpret the law (including the Constitution) and by extension, as established in Marbury v. Madison, review the constitutionality of the law. An example of a civil case before SCOTUS is In re Bilski.
Good news for attorneys in IP.
But on a serious note, this IS unfortunate in the sense of wasting TAXPAYER money. Apple and Samsung were, are and will be closely lined businesses. They should have to pay for their own dumbass negotiating by binding arbitration (just as these companies force on consumers).
The Jury doesn't actually seem to know what it is doing. It's had to go away and rethink two statements it has made:
http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/
About a Galaxy tab being too square with round corners and one of the phones.... it awarded Apple damages but stated no infringements were made?
5:00:53 PM PDT
The court is back in recess until we hear from the jurors. Apple attorney Michael Jacobs said he was going to stay in the courtroom. "I wouldn't go far," Koh says.
4:59:36 PM PDT
Michael Jacobs shoots right up, cutting her off: "No your honor."
4:59:25 PM PDT
Koh asks if the parties would rather the jury show up on Monday to settle this instead.
4:59:07 PM PDT
The jurors are headed down to the usual haunts on the 4th floor to go over the form.
4:58:30 PM PDT
Koh is asking the jurors to go back and make any changes in red.
4:58:08 PM PDT
Intercept: "The jury found no direct infringement but did find inducement" for the '915 and '163 utility patents. If a device didn't infringe, it would be rather hard for a company to induce said non-existant infringement.
4:56:53 PM PDT
Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE. "It was accused of infringing the design patent 889 and there was an allegation of inducement of infringement... and there was also a claim of iPad and iPad 2 trade dress infringement."
http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/
About a Galaxy tab being too square with round corners and one of the phones.... it awarded Apple damages but stated no infringements were made?
5:00:53 PM PDT
The court is back in recess until we hear from the jurors. Apple attorney Michael Jacobs said he was going to stay in the courtroom. "I wouldn't go far," Koh says.
4:59:36 PM PDT
Michael Jacobs shoots right up, cutting her off: "No your honor."
4:59:25 PM PDT
Koh asks if the parties would rather the jury show up on Monday to settle this instead.
4:59:07 PM PDT
The jurors are headed down to the usual haunts on the 4th floor to go over the form.
4:58:30 PM PDT
Koh is asking the jurors to go back and make any changes in red.
4:58:08 PM PDT
Intercept: "The jury found no direct infringement but did find inducement" for the '915 and '163 utility patents. If a device didn't infringe, it would be rather hard for a company to induce said non-existant infringement.
4:56:53 PM PDT
Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE. "It was accused of infringing the design patent 889 and there was an allegation of inducement of infringement... and there was also a claim of iPad and iPad 2 trade dress infringement."
The problem is not the patents are there, the problem is that patents are too long. You're right the small can benefit from patents, but largely only because they get bought out for their idea. But that is an artifact of the current laws (as is the oligopolies in general), not a necessity of innovation in general. The problem is that the small can not make something iPhone-ish + a handful of other useful additions. Protecting a one time windfall profit from a single patent is small potatoes relative to consumers have a large amount of choice in purchases, which is the best driver of innovation.
I'm not saying to hold the trial in another country, but to have the trial in San Jose was a big advantage for Apple.
Don't do the Crime if you can't Pay.
And now, Apple can go back to the table and concentrate on building better products.
And now, Apple can go back to the table and concentrate on building better products.
Now for ALL crapdroid users in this forum: feel free to step forward and buy your new iPhones in September.
No more copycat supporters here, please.
AHHH MEN brother! Stupid crapdroid will never be IOS lol.....android=terrible segmentation and battery life and the manufacturers throw us alpha quality hardware like gumballs in a dollar store!
Now for ALL crapdroid users in this forum: feel free to step forward and buy your new iPhones in September.
No more copycat supporters here, please.
Agreed. Hopefully now the nonsense comments from the fragementoid crowd will cease.
...what a stupid jury. No offense, but shouldn't they have got technologists as jurors for this trial?
One thing that people here are missing aswell is that LG, Google, Motorola, HTC and several other companies are in violation of the same patents.
What do you think will happen when Apple goes after LG? Who will they get components from?
LG, Samsung and Sony control almost all patents to build LCD screens for an example what would apple do when they don't want apple to use them. Well I guess this might be the last Macbook Pro i can buy since Apple might get a shortage of materials to build me a new glorious Retina mac. Not sure I want the new cathode ray screen on next version
What do you think will happen when Apple goes after LG? Who will they get components from?
LG, Samsung and Sony control almost all patents to build LCD screens for an example what would apple do when they don't want apple to use them. Well I guess this might be the last Macbook Pro i can buy since Apple might get a shortage of materials to build me a new glorious Retina mac. Not sure I want the new cathode ray screen on next version
Apple did try to play nice with samsung
AHA! BUT APPLE DID!! Samsung chose to fight apple over this instead! The irony is it cost SAMSUNG way more in legal fees than it would have had they just accepted Apple's offer.
MICROSOFT went about it the right way... they have already worked out all the details with Apple, and that is why they are releasing their tablet with no issues from Apple. Lesson for SAMSUNG? Should have known you were out-designed, and should have paid for the licensing when it was offered!
AHA! BUT APPLE DID!! Samsung chose to fight apple over this instead! The irony is it cost SAMSUNG way more in legal fees than it would have had they just accepted Apple's offer.
MICROSOFT went about it the right way... they have already worked out all the details with Apple, and that is why they are releasing their tablet with no issues from Apple. Lesson for SAMSUNG? Should have known you were out-designed, and should have paid for the licensing when it was offered!
Yeah, and that money seems to have been wasted on analysing Apple's iphone right down to the sunflower icon of their photos app and debating whether it should be copied, rather than actually slogging on find the natural successor to pinch-to-zoom.
Wrong. In re Bilski only went up to the US Supreme Court because it involved constitutional issues. Unless Samsung is able to find a similar argument here, the Supreme Court won't bother to hear it.
If Apple sues everyone and the courts tell them to stop selling their products, Apple will have a monopoly. Because Apple is going to use the fact that they won this case to sue other people. Eventually, Apple will be the only smartphone provider.