Apple's $119.6 million victory in iPhone utility patent battle with Samsung finally upheld...

Posted:
in iPhone
The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear a Samsung appeal over slide-to-unlock, text prediction, and other utility patents of Apple's that it was found to have used, and a $119.6 million dollar ruling is still in place.




Samsung believed that the patent court judges violated procedure as they failed to consider oral arguments, hear additional evidence, wrongfully changed a law about invalidating patents, and erred in injunction awards. The manufacturer told the Supreme Court that the Federal Circuit "tips the balance too far" in favor of patent holders.

Apple argued that there was nothing "novel or important" in Samsung's additional data regarding the case.

Samsung had little support from the industry in this matter, standing in contrast to wide support for its Supreme Court appeal over the first Apple versus Samsung trial recently ruled-upon. Only the Computer & Communications Industry Association, of which Samsung is a member, filed an amicus curiae brief, that pointed to assorted blogs and the possibility of political gamesmanship in the court or other conspiracy theories influencing the reinstatement.

In the original jury decision handed down in May 2014 both Samsung and Apple were found to have infringed on each others' patents. Samsung was still ordered to pay $119.6 million in damages to Apple for violating three patents, a far cry from the $2.2 billion Apple was seeking.

Following weeks of testimony and three days of deliberations, the eight-member Apple v. Samsung jury reached a decision awarding Apple $119,625,000 on three infringed patents and Samsung $158,400 on one patent.

The jury found all accused Samsung devices in infringement of Apple's '647 data detectors patent and partial infringement on the '721 patent for "slide-to-unlock" functionality, a contentious piece of intellectual property in the case. Presiding Judge Lucy Koh already found Apple's '172 patent for text prediction to be infringed by Samsung in a summary judgment in January. Samsung emerged victorious on allegations regarding the '959 universal search and '414 background syncing patents.

A previous appeal filed by Samsung in January resulted in the verdict getting tossed in February, and found the patents either not obvious, or infringed. On review, a full court ruled in an 8-3 vote in October to reaffirm the verdict, and the $119.6 million award.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 15
    They should tack interest onto the fine.
    peterhartcalianton zuykovrepressthiswatto_cobratallest skiljony0
  • Reply 2 of 15
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,520member
    if you think Samsung if done, we have not heard the end of this.
    peterhartjbdragonrepressthisviclauyycwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 15
    zompzomp Posts: 53member
    Sounds to me that Samsung is the Victor - 2.2 billion down to a paltry 119 million. That should cover Apple's legal fees.
    calijbdragonrepressthiswatto_cobratallest skilcornchipbrakkenjony0
  • Reply 4 of 15
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,940member
    I guess it’s a moral victory?
    GG1jbdragonrepressthiswatto_cobracornchip
  • Reply 5 of 15
    Come on, worked together for the goodness of everyone, your customers, oh wait both companies had been working together for so long....spoiled rich co. 
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 6 of 15
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,285member
    Timely verdict now that slide to unlock is basically gone
    peterhartslprescottjbdragonanton zuykovrepressthiscornchipbrakkenanantksundaramjony0
  • Reply 7 of 15
    Is this now, finally, really really over?  No more appeal avenues?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 15
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    So any company can make iPhone knockoffs with the possible penalty of 119 million after making a few billion?! 

    Wow! The legal system...

    McDonalds, Coca Cola, HP, KFC feel free to ripoff the world’s most successful product!


    jbdragonwatto_cobramcfrazierivanantksundaram
  • Reply 9 of 15
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,484member
    This is a big victory for Samsung. They ripped off Apple IP and made billions with the penalty being a rounding error of their profits. From a business standpoint it was a great move. 
    watto_cobracornchip
  • Reply 10 of 15
    Violating somebody’s patents is good for business. 
    watto_cobracornchipbrakkenanantksundaram
  • Reply 11 of 15
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Come on, worked together for the goodness of everyone, your customers, oh wait both companies had been working together for so long....spoiled rich co. 
    Companies do not work together in a free market system, especially for the "goodness of everyone". Instead, they compete! That is how we get a powerful laptop at 1.5k dollar price tag, and not at a 50k.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 15
    The lawyers (and judges) need to make it worth Samsung's while, otherwise how are they going to make any money from future patent infringement cases? The last thing patent lawyers want is for the patent process to be either clear or functional. The only winners in all this are the lawyers.
    watto_cobracornchip
  • Reply 13 of 15
    jd_in_sb said:
    This is a big victory for Samsung. They ripped off Apple IP and made billions with the penalty being a rounding error of their profits. From a business standpoint it was a great move. 
    To be fair, Sammy's phone don't just has one slide and unlock feature. It might be a minor selling point. But it is nothing compare to the UI and how the system works. But this is Google's problem. Samsung just make a body and add some lookalike thing but it has no soul. 
    watto_cobramuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 14 of 15
    brakkenbrakken Posts: 677member
    Dear Apple, Go for it! That is, if there’s anything worth taking any more... How about Office? I’m tired of the Pages-Word gap. And Google Search - Siri could use some extra algorythms. It’s nice to know that paying for things is no longer a necessity.
  • Reply 15 of 15
    brakkenbrakken Posts: 677member
    zomp said:
    Sounds to me that Samsung is the Victor - 2.2 billion down to a paltry 119 million. That should cover Apple's legal fees.
    And Apple has to keep giving them money for OLEDs now, too.
Sign In or Register to comment.