@KDarling wrote, “That's why it's not been fair to either side, that rule changes are being applied in the middle of cases.”
Maybe you've not had kids, and/or your parents never told you: Life isn't fair. Deal with it.
Anti-trust and pro-competition laws have been in flux since they first went on the books, over a century ago. We're not going to stop with the trust-busting that worked against Standard Oil. I personally felt that dropping the absolutely rock-solid case against Microsoft was a disservice both to consumers and also Microsoft. (Although the chickens took a decade to come home to roost, Microsoft got lazy and settled into being comfortable dominating the Enterprise and desktop, causing it to miss the last three tech revolutions that its skills could've addressed.)
The same for Samsung. Two years ago, astute analysts wrote that SEPs were like parking meters: great for collecting some money day-in and day-out, but not the bazookas you needed to block competition. Those guidelines have been in effect in Europe for a while, and Samsung is damn well aware of them — they withdrew their SEP claims for injunctions there.
In the good ole US of A, we've morphed rather more erratically toward the same understanding, that injunctions over SEPs are harmful and can be tolerated only in VERY limited circumstances (circumstances that don't apply with Apple). Samsung pretends as if it never got the memo, but that's just PR/propaganda/lawyering; they've known for a while this was coming, just hoped they could keep it up a bit longer.
Boo hoo for no longer being allowed to abuse SEPs.