Apple says second Samsung patent suit 'must proceed now'
Claiming that delay would cause it "continuing harm," Apple on Thursday filed an objection to a Samsung motion to put another patent infringement trial, scheduled for 2013, on hold while the first trial is under review.
Apple filed its objection on Wednesday in federal court, according to Bloomberg. U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh has been considering delaying proceedings for the second case, as the first case is still being appealed.
"This case must proceed now," Apple counsel said in a filing, "in order to stop the ongoing sales ? and relentless launch ? of Samsung's latest infringing devices, which have caused, and every day continue to cause, continuing harm to Apple."
Apple filed the second suit in February of 2012, and it was scheduled to go to trial in March of 2014. This second case covers technologies in newer smartphones such as Samsung's Galaxy S III and Apple's iPhone 5.
The first case, in which Apple won a $1.05 billion verdict, is still in the appeals process, and Judge Koh has vacated 40 percent of the damages awarded in that decision. The roughly $400 million has been set aside for a new trial, as the jury based its award on incorrect legal theory. Koh has encouraged the companies to appeal her vacating that portion of the damages before any additional damages trial begins.
Samsung in a filing agreed with Koh's inclination to stay the second trial until the first is resolved. Doing so, the South Korean company said, would "allow the parties to attempt to reach a business resolution of their disputes."
Apple filed its objection on Wednesday in federal court, according to Bloomberg. U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh has been considering delaying proceedings for the second case, as the first case is still being appealed.
"This case must proceed now," Apple counsel said in a filing, "in order to stop the ongoing sales ? and relentless launch ? of Samsung's latest infringing devices, which have caused, and every day continue to cause, continuing harm to Apple."
Apple filed the second suit in February of 2012, and it was scheduled to go to trial in March of 2014. This second case covers technologies in newer smartphones such as Samsung's Galaxy S III and Apple's iPhone 5.
The first case, in which Apple won a $1.05 billion verdict, is still in the appeals process, and Judge Koh has vacated 40 percent of the damages awarded in that decision. The roughly $400 million has been set aside for a new trial, as the jury based its award on incorrect legal theory. Koh has encouraged the companies to appeal her vacating that portion of the damages before any additional damages trial begins.
Samsung in a filing agreed with Koh's inclination to stay the second trial until the first is resolved. Doing so, the South Korean company said, would "allow the parties to attempt to reach a business resolution of their disputes."
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
"continue to cause continuing harm".
I feel your pain.
Legalese and business-speak continue to treat the english language like a penny-hooker.
Of course the new trial needs to go ahead. It involves different patents and claims. Why whould Apple have to wait?
It's beyond belief Samsung thinks that all their trials should be "sequential".
Samsung has had its day in the sun. My prediction is sales of the Galaxy S 4 will be below expectations. Samsung is only good for one cycle of half-decent products. Let's see how they innovate on their own.
I own a Samsung TV, fridge and DVD player. None of them have broken down, but they're not the kind of products that really excite me. Since they started suing Apple, I told myself I will never buy a Samsung product again.
Originally Posted by KDMeister
Apple will have a hard time convincing anyone that it is being "harmed", what with sales of iOS devices still growing in market share.
On the contrary. It's a piece of frigging cake to show that, even with continually growing sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Of course the new trial needs to go ahead. It involves different patents and claims. Why whould Apple have to wait?
It's beyond belief Samsung thinks that all their trials should be "sequential".
The judge is the one who brought up the idea of delay, not Samsung.
She apparently wants to see the outcome of Apple's appeal of her reason for not granting a sales injunction. If the appeals court upholds her decision, and says that monetary damages are a sufficient remedy, then there's no need for a speedy trial for the other patents, which also involve relatively small-contribution features.
For that matter, Apple already tried for an injunction on the Nexus over these other patents and was denied partly because Samsung had sent out workarounds for most of them. That pretty much negates Apple's claim of "continued harm" if the trial isn't held right away.
I gave Samsung a try and bought a Samsung TV. The color of the tv image was horrible and could not be adjusted to anything close to normal. Samsung offered no help and suggested I hire someone (e.g. Computer Geeks) to do the adjusting. I laughed at that idea for two reasons. First because, as a computer support person for my office and a photographer, I know how to do that and the color adjustment options just didn't allow for the range that was needed to correct the colors. The second reason I laughed was that the cost of hiring someone was more than the cost of the 20 inch TV!
I returned the TV to the store. Target was great in that respect. I ended up with a Sony which has decent color right out of the box.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDMeister
Apple will have a hard time convincing anyone that it is being "harmed", what with sales of iOS devices still growing in market share.
Samsung has had its day in the sun. My prediction is sales of the Galaxy S 4 will be below expectations. Samsung is only good for one cycle of half-decent products. Let's see how they innovate on their own.
I own a Samsung TV, fridge and DVD player. None of them have broken down, but they're not the kind of products that really excite me. Since they started suing Apple, I told myself I will never buy a Samsung product again.
The issue is no longer just about compensation for Apple: It's morphed into a question of sufficient punishment for a lawbreaker to deter them from continuing to break the law.
Indeed. Apple approached Samsung before ever getting the law involved. And they didn't have to do that.
Samsung could have resolved everything then.
They chose to milk it while they could, got favorable help from a judge of Korean decent (even AFTER a very competent jury vote), and now are spending even more money to lobby our government to help them continue to cheat an American company of their hard earned R&D, design, and IP right to protection.
This isn't china where knock offs are on every corner. This is the U.S. where there is law, and government that us "supposed to" protect people from getting ripped off.
Some of Samsung's sales numbers would be Apple's if not for the willful, flagrant plagiarism by Samsung.
That is harmful to Apple. Just because Apple products sell extremely well has nothing to do with it. There are many MORE sales Apple should be making due to the fruits of their R&D. A company that simply copies (even if they change something here or there to slightly differentiate) shouldn't be benefitting from that. Nor should Apple be harmed.
What's funny is that now Samsung is encouraging LG to copy too. And they are copying Samsung's Note 2 with their new LG Optimus Pro G. LOL. You look at both phones and you can't tell them apart except LG has an easy to handle back of the case. They are nearly identical.
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/21755/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
What goes around comes around...
The problem that Apple is concerned about is that every lost sale to Samsung potentially represents eco system lock in, and it is harder to get a customer after he is locked into a particular system.
Samsung has changed the look of its product around since Apple first filed these suits, and I expect Apple's latest grievances have to do with interface design. Yet, when Samsung's first products came out, I saw Best Buy think they were iPhones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
The problem that Apple is concerned about is that every lost sale to Samsung potentially represents eco system lock in, and it is harder to get a customer after he is locked into a particular system.
Samsung has changed the look of its product around since Apple first filed these suits, and I expect Apple's latest grievances have to do with interface design. Yet, when Samsung's first products came out, I saw Best Buy think they were iPhones.
When Galaxy S came out, I did a double-take as it sure looked like the iPhone 3G in the display window.
Actually, it's not easy at all.
The legal standard is that Apple must show that they've been harmed and exactly how much they've been harmed SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE INFRINGEMENT. With something as complicated as a cell phone, how do you determine how much copying the outer appearance affected your sales? How many handsets were sold SOLELY due to pinch-to-zoom.
Apple attempted to prove the harm in one trial (at least) but weren't able to do so to the court's satisfaction.