US Federal Circuit sets the stage for Apple to win injunction against Samsung

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,953member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    Juries don't make the determination of willful infringement anymore. They only opine whether the evidence as presented would support such a finding. The actual determination is in the hands of the judge not the jury.


    You know this how? Any cite? Evidence? Case law?

  • Reply 62 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,953member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post



    Edit.



    I need sleep.


    Yes. You do.

  • Reply 63 of 72
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,998member
    You know this how? Any cite? Evidence? Case law?

    I searched for the answer myself. You could do the same since you apparently have doubts what I've said. That way we avoid the typical back and forth.

    Try "Does a jury or a judge determine willful infringement".

    The roots of it go back about 6 years to a Federal case involving Seagate. The actual official change in Federal Court rules dates to mid-2012, putting findings of willful infringement in the hands of the judge.
  • Reply 64 of 72
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,998member
    kdarling wrote: »
    I don't rely on fansites or Mueller.  

    Speaking of which his views on the strength of Nokia's IP have certainly mellowed over the past year. Just last May he was saying that Android vendors were rightly afraid of Nokia's patent claims:

    "By settling with Apple less than a year ago on terms that make the iPhone and iPad maker the net payer, Nokia already proved that its patent portfolio is exceptionally strong. . . Nokia demonstrated that it means business when it starts patent lawsuits. Compared to Apple, the defendants in the latest action are not only financially much weaker but they also lack Apple's retaliatory power -- if any of the three brings any somewhat useful wireless-related patents to the table, it's RIM, but the focus of these assertions is on HTC and ViewSonic anyway. I think these disputes won't take as long as the Nokia-Apple battle -- and on a per-device basis, HTC and ViewSonic will likely end up paying significantly higher royalties than Apple, which brought more IP of its own to the negotiating table."
    http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/nokias-patent-assertions-against-htc.html

    Then today, after a whole lot more patent claim losses by Nokia than Motorola has seen in the past year he says this:

    "At the same time I wish to point out that in all of the Nokia v. HTC cases I watched I haven't seen any indication of HTC deliberately infringing Nokia's intellectual property in terms of clear and reckless copying. Nokia was an industry leader at a time when hardly anybody knew about HTC (and those who did viewed it as more of a manufacturing company). As a result, Nokia owns patents that cover technologies today's devices implement, though in some cases this depends on claim construction. . . Given the breadth and depth of Nokia's patent portfolio it's unlikely that there's nothing in it that HTC needs to license -- but for the time being HTC believes it's a better choice to litigate than to sign a deal. In my opinion, both companies' actions appear legitimate."
    http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/05/german-court-unconvinced-that-htc.html

    Quite a change over the past 12 months.
  • Reply 65 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,953member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    I searched for the answer myself. You could do the same since you apparently have doubts what I've said. That way we avoid the typical back and forth.



    Try "Does a jury or a judge determine willful infringement".



    The roots of it go back about 6 years to a Federal case involving Seagate. The actual official change in Federal Court rules dates to mid-2012, putting findings of willful infringement in the hands of the judge.


     


    Will do.


     


    On the topic of finding an answer oneself, did you ever hear back from Samsung regarding your question on sales v. shipments? What did they say? (They never responded to me, but perhaps you had more luck).

  • Reply 66 of 72
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,998member
    Will do.

    On the topic of finding an answer oneself, did you ever hear back from Samsung regarding your question on sales v. shipments? What did they say? (They never responded to me, but perhaps you had more luck).

    Nope, not a peep out of them.
  • Reply 67 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,953member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    Nope, not a peep out of them.


    Surprised? I wasn't. (Off-topic: Hence adding some additional basis for my claim that they are embarrassed to admit the truth regarding actual sales; and the fact that they don't report volumes tells me they are embarrassed to admit to the pathetic ASP for their devices).


     


    Back on topic. I searched using the terms you suggested, and you are correct. The most recent case law would indeed suggest that judges are responsible for finding 'willfulness' of infringement, not juries.


     


    However, I wonder if Apple has also appealed that in this specific case, and if so, how the Federal court will rule. (A Foss Patents article that comes up in the search implies that Koh may have been stretching some criteria to come up an assessment that there was no 'objective' willfulness on Samsung's part). Do you know?

  • Reply 68 of 72
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,998member
    However, I wonder if Apple has also appealed that in this specific case, and if so, how the Federal court will rule. (A Foss Patents article that comes up in the search implies that Koh may have been stretching some criteria to come up an assessment that there was no 'objective' willfulness on Samsung's part). Do you know?

    I searched for any mention of Apple appealing Judge Koh's rejection of willful infringement and didn't find one.
  • Reply 69 of 72
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    The only problem with your 'logic' is that the jury already decided that the infringement was willful. That question is now settled.


     


    Yes, but as I wrote about in this post with the reasoning involved, willful infringement for damages requires both the jury and the judge.  To repeat the main precept:


     



    Quote:



    The Federal Circuit has laid out the relevant standard for the willfulness inquiry for patent infringement:


     


    • “A patentee must show by clear and convincing evidence that the infringer acted despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a valid patent. The state of mind of the accused infringer is not relevant to this  objective inquiry. 



    • If this threshold objective standard is satisfied, the patentee must also demonstrate that this objectively-defined risk.was either known or so obvious that it should have been known to the accused infringer.”


     


    Thus, the willfulness inquiry is a two-prong analysis,requiring an objective inquiry and a subjective inquiry. The objective inquiry is a question for the Court, and the subjective inquiry is a question for the jury.


     


    - Judge Koh (and all other courts due to precedents)




     



     

  • Reply 70 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,953member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


     


    Not sure why ......etc etc........



     


    It seems you're an "expert" on everything. You're a software engineer, hardware engineer, touchscreen specialist, lawyer...have I forgotten anything? Perhaps you're also a brain surgeon? Yet when people press you on things you never answer them. Typical troll behavior.



    You're spot on. He seems to claim a lot expertise, takes pain to present links and cites (which he often does not seem to read himself), makes grandiose points, but when pressed, just quietly disappears. Does not respond.


     


    This has happened to me numerous times with him. Which is why I pay attention, and follow up with him, when he posts in a forum in which I too have posted. 


     


    I am glad someone else has noticed this behavior of his.

  • Reply 71 of 72
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    You're spot on. He seems to claim a lot expertise, takes pain to present links and cites (which he often does not seem to read himself), makes grandiose points, but when pressed, just quietly disappears. Does not respond.



     


     


    1) I have a job and a life. Obviously I cannot spend my entire time responding to every question.  Often I'm too busy to even notice responses, especially if the thread has gotten longer. (Is there some way on this forum to search for just responses to you?)


     


    2) If someone is rude, I have no incentive to continue a discussion with them.  If they express a genuine interest, I'll try.


     


    3) I date back to the early internet days, when everyone online was fairly intelligent.  So I (shocker!) expect others to do some of their own research.  Unfortunately, a lot of people here are too lazy to do that.  They would rather sit around and snipe at other people's posts, which is so much easier than doing any work themselves.


     


    4) Like other older members here, of course I have much experience and knowledge on many topics, some of which I detailed in this post.  ,It's understandable that this would irritate some people, as now they realize that they might not get away with the shallow myths they used to repeat.


     


    5) I have no ill will toward anyone.  As a cancer survivor, I have no time for that.  Nor do I love or hate any company.  Also no time for that.  Things are just things.

  • Reply 72 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 18,953member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


     


    1) I have a job and a life. 


     


    5) I have no ill will toward anyone.  As a cancer survivor, I have no time for that.  Nor do I love or hate any company.  Also no time for that.  Things are just things.



    1) We all have jobs and lives. But the decision to wade into a debate should presumably take that into account. There have been at least three or four instances in just our posting interactions in the past few months when you jump in, post, but do not have either the patience or time or perhaps the logic to see your arguments through. (I have neither the time or interest to go back and cite what those instances were).


     


    5) I did not remotely suggest you have/had ill will toward anyone. So that's a bit pointless. Congratulations on beating cancer. I know how hard that can be.


     


    That said, you still have not answered the questions I posed here. I'll repeat: if you can't see it through, don't start an argument (at least, don't whine about how you have a job and a life).

Sign In or Register to comment.