Claim construction tilts toward Apple in US patent lawsuit against Samsung
Apple has won favorable terms in defining terms during claim construction for the company's original lawsuit accusing Samsung of infringing on its intellectual property.
Out of eight total terms, Judge Lucy Koh adopted five definitions from Apple and just two from Samsung, MacNN reports. She accepted a hybrid definition for the final term, "applet."
"Claim construction is often vital to a patent lawsuit, as it both frames the argument for either side's attorneys along with setting the terms by which a judge can rule on whether or not a technology is violating a patent," the report read.
Though favorable definitions by no means guarantee Apple a win in the case, they're expected to increase its chances of a ruling in its favor.
Last December, Judge Koh denied Apple's request for a preliminary injunction on certain models of Samsung's Galaxy line of mobile devices. At the time, Koh suggested that it was likely Samsung would be found to have infringed on at least one of Apple's patents, but she didn't find sufficient cause to grant an injunction.
Apple first sued Samsung last April, accusing the South Korean company of copying its iPhone and iPad products. The suit has since expanded to include eight of Apple's patents, targeting 17 of Samsung's products.
Court records show that Apple contacted Samsung in 2010 to voice its concerns over the alleged infringement. Apple's attorneys have even revealed that late co-founder Steve Jobs got involved with the issue.
Both companies are reportedly tentatively discussing a settlement. People familiar with the matter told Bloomberg late last month that top-level executives at Apple and Samsung have "communicated lately about potential settlement options."
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
But the world doesn't stand still and Samsung will soon have to deal with Apple's big screen TV and public backlash. My current Samsung TV is my last Samsung product.
My current Samsung TV is my last Samsung product.
You seem to have forgotten that Apple products are chock full of Samsung products.
Every time you buy Apple you make Samsung that much richer.
You seem to have forgotten that Apple products are chock full of Samsung products.
Every time you buy Apple you make Samsung that much richer.
So?
The fact that Apple buys products from some Samsung devisions doesn't give other Samsung divisions the right to copy Apple's products.
You seem to have forgotten that Apple products are chock full of Samsung products.
Every time you buy Apple you make Samsung that much richer.
Which explains why Samsung's the wealthiest corporation on the planet, is a household name, and is held in high regard.
Which explains why Samsung's the wealthiest corporation on the planet, is a household name, and is held in high regard.
They are one of the three...
[...] At the time, Koh suggested that it was likely Samsung would be found to have infringed on at least one of Apple's patents, but she didn't find sufficient cause to grant an injunction. [...]
I read elsewhere (in a more complete report) that Ms. Koh didn't see the need to grant an injunction due to a "lack of urgency." That's just a nice way of saying "Samsung pad sales aren't hurting Apple at all."
But copying is copying, and patent infringement is patent infringement. That's life in the big city.
So?
The fact that Apple buys products from some Samsung devisions doesn't give other Samsung divisions the right to copy Apple's products.
I neither said nor implied anything like that.
If you want to argue, then argue against things that I actually say, rather than things which I neither say nor imply.
Otherwise, you look foolish.
Which explains why Samsung's the wealthiest corporation on the planet, is a household name, and is held in high regard.
Two out of three ain't bad.
They are not the wealthiest corporation on the planet.
So this is like trying to define what 'is' is?
That would 'be' the 3rd person singular present of 'be'
You seem to have forgotten that Apple products are chock full of Samsung products.
Every time you buy Apple you make Samsung that much richer.