or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple faces long day in court on Friday with ITC ruling, Apple v. Samsung appeal, DOJ e-book talks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple faces long day in court on Friday with ITC ruling, Apple v. Samsung appeal, DOJ e-book talks

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Friday is set to be an important date for Apple as the company heads for the courtroom in three separate cases, two pertaining to its ongoing patent fight against Samsung and another regarding the U.S. Justice Department's e-books antitrust suit.

ITC


Of Apple's Friday lineup, the hearing carrying the most immediate weight involves the U.S. International Trade Commission, which is expected to yield a final ruling that could see the sales ban of certain Samsung devices alleged to have infringed on four Apple patents.

The Commission was originally slated to hand down its decision on Aug. 1, but pushed that date back last week for unspecified reasons.

The ITC issue stems from a countersuit Apple first lodged in July 2011 as a countersuit to Samsung's own patent infringement allegations against the iPhone, iPad and iPod.

Apple's ITC complaint was heard by Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender, who initially ruled against Samsung in October 2012. Both parties were unsatisfied with the jurist's initial determination, however, and requested a review from the ITC. In January, the trade body agreed, subsequently remanding two Apple patents-in-suit back to Judge Pender for further review.

After taking receipt of the remand initial determination in March, the Commission invited comment from both Apple and Samsung, as well as interested businesses, government bodies and the public. With the statements heard, the ITC will issue a final decision on Friday.

It should be noted that the Obama administration, via U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman, vetoed the ITC's most recent ruling, which banned older Apple devices like the iPhone 4 for infringing on Samsung's declared standard essential patents. Because the patents leveraged in Apple's case against Samsung are non-SEP, a veto of an injunction would be highly unlikely.

Samsung Phones


Also on tap for Friday is a hearing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where both parties will argue what actions, if any, should be taken as a result of 2012's Apple v. Samsung jury trial.

Apple is appealing U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh's decision to not award preliminary injunctions against Samsung products a jury found to be in infringement of its patents. Samsung, on the other hand, has been seen as trying to prolong the judicial process through multiple appeals, including a retrial request on Apple's "rubber-banding" patent.

Judge Koh has already vacated $450.5 million, or 40 percent, of $1.05 billion in damages awarded to Apple last year, citing uncertainty over jury findings on 14 Samsung products. The jurist ordered a new trial to decide the issue.

The panel of CAFC judges hearing Friday's case will decide whether Apple's claims rank further discussion. If they do, the full court will be called to hear arguments from Apple and Samsung lawyers at a later date.

DOJ


Finally, Apple is scheduled to meet with the U.S. Department of Justice to discuss the repercussions for being found guilty of colluding with HarperCollins, Hachette, Simon & Schuster, Penguin Group and Macmillan to fix the price of e-books in the iBookstore.

The DOJ was successful in its antitrust case against Apple as District Court Judge Denise Cote found the company liable for "facilitating and encouraging" illegal trade with the five major U.S. book publishers, all of which settled before the trial began. Judge Cote's ruling was handed down in July, but damages have yet to be determined.

Last week, the Justice Department issued its proposed settlement, consisting of the immediate termination of "agency model" agreements with the five publishing houses, a mechanism that allows publishers to link out of the iBookstore to their own digital storefronts, and the hiring of an antitrust monitor for a minimum term of five years.

Despite already settling, the publishers took umbrage with the DOJ's suggestion of discontinuing existing agency model deals, arguing in a court filing on Wednesday that such a clause would punish them more than it does Apple.

Additionally, the DOJ seeks to bar Apple from entering similar arrangements with providers of "music, movies, television shows or other content that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple's competitors may sell that content," a stipulation extending the proposal's scope far beyond the iBookstore.

For its part, Apple finds the proposed settlement a "draconian and punitive intrusion" on its iBookstore business and promised to appeal Judge Cote's ruling.

AppleInsider will be covering all three cases as they develop on Friday.
post #2 of 16
Anyone capable of predicting the outcomes of these cases yet ?

Is the case happening on August 9th Friday ?
Edited by nikilok - 8/9/13 at 3:49am
post #3 of 16

Why does Apple always have to resort to litigation to achieve their nefarious ways?

 

Oh.

 

Google's homepage right now:

 

 

 

(Yes, it's frikkin' joke!)


Edited by GTR - 8/9/13 at 6:41am
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
Reply
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
Reply
post #4 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Why does Apple always have to resort to litigation to achieve their nefarious ways?

Oh.

Google's homepage right now:


 


(Yes, it's frikkin' joke!)






Fill me in on the joke One is a photo of the Andromeda galaxy with a tardis superimposed on it while the Google doodle is a photo or painting of a completely different galaxy. Are you so besotted with Apple you think they should have exclusive use of images of galaxies just because they used an altered photo of one for a desktop?
post #5 of 16
AI should clarify the part about the judgement being partially vacated. First the amount is wrong. It was changed to $400 million from $450 million. Second, Samsung's guilt is already decided. The new trial is only to calculate damages - this was the part Koh thinks there was an error with. So Apple could get the same, more or less.
post #6 of 16
"Judge Koh has already vacated $450.5 million, or 40 percent, of $1.05 billion in damages awarded to Apple last year, citing uncertainty over jury findings on 14 Samsung products. The jurist ordered a new trial to decide the issue."

The uncertainty was only on the calculation of the money awarded to Apple. There is no question about the jury's finding that Samsung was guilty of illegally copying Apple's designs and patents. The new trial is only to reconsider the damages award, which on retrial has a good chance of being more than the original amount.

Edit: Oops, Eric said it first.

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #7 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Fill me in on the joke One is a photo of the Andromeda galaxy with a tardis superimposed on it while the Google doodle is a photo or painting of a completely different galaxy. Are you so besotted with Apple you think they should have exclusive use of images of galaxies just because they used an altered photo of one for a desktop?

It takes a great leap of imagination, but perhaps he means to suggest that Google plans to take over the Galaxy, and that is why Apple has all these lawsuits?

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #8 of 16
What will happen to Apple if Apple loses the case tonight ?
post #9 of 16

It's getting so we need a FAQ to keep track.  For those who are interested:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Of Apple's Friday lineup, the hearing carrying the most immediate weight involves the U.S. International Trade Commission, which is expected to yield a final ruling that could see the sales ban of certain Samsung devices alleged to have infringed on four Apple patents.

 

The four patents in the ITC case are about headphone jack type detection, a design patent for a flat face with a speaker slot, and the commonly asserted Apple patents on scroll direction lock and translucent keyboard overlay.

 

The accused devices are the Galaxy S 4G, Fascinate, Transform, Captivate, Intercept, Infuse 4G, Galaxy Tab (original) and Galaxy Tab 10.1 (second model).   I don't think any of those are sold any more.

 

Quote:
Also on tap for Friday is a hearing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where both parties will argue what actions, if any, should be taken as a result of 2012's Apple v. Samsung jury trial.

Apple is appealing U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh's decision to not award preliminary injunctions against Samsung products a jury found to be in infringement of its patents.

 

It might have been better to put those sentences together, to make it clear that the appeal is only about the sales injunction denial, not about the jury decision, trial awards, or any invalidated patent that might change the award.

 

The denial was a result of following the usual eBay four prong test, to determine that monetary compensation was sufficient.  This test is used all the time by courts to decide if an injunction is available over a patent. 

 

Judge Koh's injunction denial also noted that 23 of the 26 infringing devices were no longer sold, and the remaining three had patent workarounds coming.  So a ban would've had zero market affect.

 

The reason why Apple keeps pursuing the above two seemingly meaningless bans on old products, is because they want to set a precedent that they can use on current products.

 

Quote:
Finally, Apple is scheduled to meet with the U.S. Department of Justice to discuss the repercussions for being found guilty of colluding with HarperCollins, Hachette, Simon & Schuster, Penguin Group and Macmillan to fix the price of e-books in the iBookstore.

 

This is not about software patents, so I have not followed.  Perhaps someone else has thoughts to share on the topic.


Edited by KDarling - 8/9/13 at 10:22am
post #10 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_mac_lover View Post

What will happen to Apple if Apple loses the case tonight ?

Hopefully they invest in a military and invade South Korea. Heck, they could probably just buy North Korea itself. Jong Un likes Macs, anyway.
post #11 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_mac_lover View Post

What will happen to Apple if Apple loses the case tonight ?

Nothing.

Case #1 is Apple's ITC complaint against Samsung. If Apple loses, things go on as they are now - Samsung continues to import products. If Apple wins, they block the sale of some older Samsung devices - which would have little immediate impact, but might send the message and slow down Samsung's copying.

Case #2 is the Apple-Samsung case handled by Koh. Same thing as #1. Apple loses - nothing changes. Apple wins and a few obsolete Samsung products are banned.

Case #3 is the DOJ. Since today is just a meeting to discuss the case and not a hearing, it's not particularly relevant. In any event, it's not going to matter since that decision is almost certain to be overturned.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #12 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Why does Apple always have to resort to litigation to achieve their nefarious ways?

Oh.

Google's homepage right now:


 


(Yes, it's frikkin' joke!)




 

Fill me in on the joke One is a photo of the Andromeda galaxy with a tardis superimposed on it while the Google doodle is a photo or painting of a completely different galaxy. Are you so besotted with Apple you think they should have exclusive use of images of galaxies just because they used an altered photo of one for a desktop?

Hmmm.... a search for the term 'galaxy' in www.images.google.com brings up thousands of pics: the first couple of hundred, especially in their colors, look nothing like Apple's desktop image (I gave up scrolling after that).

 

Try it out yourself.

post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Case #1 is Apple's ITC complaint against Samsung. If Apple loses, things go on as they are now - Samsung continues to import products. If Apple wins, they block the sale of some older Samsung devices - which would have little immediate impact, but might send the message and slow down Samsung's copying.

Case #2 is the Apple-Samsung case handled by Koh. Same thing as #1. Apple loses - nothing changes. Apple wins and a few obsolete Samsung products are banned.

Case #3 is the DOJ. Since today is just a meeting to discuss the case and not a hearing, it's not particularly relevant. In any event, it's not going to matter since that decision is almost certain to be overturned.

The Federal Circuit whacks ITC in Apple v. Motorola: http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/08/09/60164.htm

 

One judge partially dissents, saying he would have gone much further than the majority did!

post #14 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

The Federal Circuit whacks ITC in Apple v. Motorola: http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/08/09/60164.htm

One judge partially dissents, saying he would have gone much further than the majority did!

To be fair, in that case, the Federal court simply remands the case back to the original judge with instructions to fully consider ALL the evidence which wasn't done the first time around. There's no guarantee that the final outcome will change.

However, it is interesting that the majority of cases where Apple 'lost' have been stricken down on appeal.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #15 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Hmmm.... a search for the term 'galaxy' in www.images.google.com brings up thousands of pics: the first couple of hundred, especially in their colors, look nothing like Apple's desktop image (I gave up scrolling after that).

 

Try it out yourself.

 


That's because your search was too imprecise.  I mentioned that Apple's desktop was an altered image of Andromeda.  Had you searched for Andromeda Galaxy you would have found multiple examples with similar colouration to Apple's desktop.

 

Just one example:

post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Fill me in on the joke One is a photo of the Andromeda galaxy with a tardis superimposed on it while the Google doodle is a photo or painting of a completely different galaxy. Are you so besotted with Apple you think they should have exclusive use of images of galaxies just because they used an altered photo of one for a desktop?

 

(Yes, it's frikkin' joke!)

 

Edited for cnocbui alone.

If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
Reply
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple faces long day in court on Friday with ITC ruling, Apple v. Samsung appeal, DOJ e-book talks