Apple, Samsung drop 'impressive' number of patent claims against each other
In their California lawsuit, Apple and Samsung have greatly reduced the number of patent infringement claims against one another, although there is no indication that the companies are any closer to settling their differences.
Late on Monday, Apple made a filing in the suit that roughly cut the number of patent infringement claims in half. Intellectual property expert Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents said Apple's move was "a truly impressive narrowing of its infringement claims."
Five hours after Apple reduced the scope of its complaint, Samsung responded in kind, and offered to drop five of its 12 asserted patents. The reductions came after Judge Lucy Koh last week ordered the companies to cut down the number of claims they are making against each other.
"I think that's cruel and unusual punishment to a jury, so I'm not willing to do it," Koh said of the multitude of patents and products included in the case. "If you're going to trial in July, this is not going to be acceptable."
Though a significant number of claims were dropped from the case, two companies remain strongly at odds, as Apple feels Samsung has not been cooperative, and Samsung believes Apple's case is too big to go to trial this summer.
Apple also continues to assert that Samsung has made "copycat products" that infringe on its own designs, while Samsung has contended that its devices are "innovative, independently developed technologies."
"Between these two companies here, there can be no doubt about who's copied from whom, just like there can be no doubt about who singlehandedly revolutionized an industry," Mueller wrote. "The only question left to be answered is about scope: which of the asserted rights are both valid and infringed?"
Apple believes that Samsung's alleged infringement has allowed the company to become the worldwide leader in smartphone sales. Because of that, Apple has argued that Samsung's damages "reach billions of dollars."
Samsung's continued success was cited by Apple as a key reason that its patent infringement trial needs to start on July 30. By holding the trial this summer, the court will be able to "put an end to Samsung's continuing infringement," Apple said.
For its part, Samsung has said that Apple is "seeking to compete through litigation" rather than in the market. The company also said in court that Apple has only cited "utility patents covering extremely minor user interface features, and design patents and trade dresses that offer far narrower protection than Apple urges."
Late on Monday, Apple made a filing in the suit that roughly cut the number of patent infringement claims in half. Intellectual property expert Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents said Apple's move was "a truly impressive narrowing of its infringement claims."
Five hours after Apple reduced the scope of its complaint, Samsung responded in kind, and offered to drop five of its 12 asserted patents. The reductions came after Judge Lucy Koh last week ordered the companies to cut down the number of claims they are making against each other.
"I think that's cruel and unusual punishment to a jury, so I'm not willing to do it," Koh said of the multitude of patents and products included in the case. "If you're going to trial in July, this is not going to be acceptable."
Though a significant number of claims were dropped from the case, two companies remain strongly at odds, as Apple feels Samsung has not been cooperative, and Samsung believes Apple's case is too big to go to trial this summer.
Apple also continues to assert that Samsung has made "copycat products" that infringe on its own designs, while Samsung has contended that its devices are "innovative, independently developed technologies."
"Between these two companies here, there can be no doubt about who's copied from whom, just like there can be no doubt about who singlehandedly revolutionized an industry," Mueller wrote. "The only question left to be answered is about scope: which of the asserted rights are both valid and infringed?"
Apple believes that Samsung's alleged infringement has allowed the company to become the worldwide leader in smartphone sales. Because of that, Apple has argued that Samsung's damages "reach billions of dollars."
Samsung's continued success was cited by Apple as a key reason that its patent infringement trial needs to start on July 30. By holding the trial this summer, the court will be able to "put an end to Samsung's continuing infringement," Apple said.
For its part, Samsung has said that Apple is "seeking to compete through litigation" rather than in the market. The company also said in court that Apple has only cited "utility patents covering extremely minor user interface features, and design patents and trade dresses that offer far narrower protection than Apple urges."
Comments
This is all just starting to get a little ridiculous. The Galaxy SIII looks like an amazing device, the 6th gen iPhone will also be an amazing device. Steve Jobs said before that Microsoft didn't have to lose in order for Apple to win. There was enough room for both of them. Substitute Microsoft for Samsung/Google here, and it's the same situation.
Arguably, as long as the two companies innovate it is not a zero-sum game. The lawsuits may have had that effect, as Samsung phones no longer look like iPhone clones.
While true this about infringement not simply about both competing fairly. Plus, MS and Apple focus on very different aspects of the same business which always made it an odd comparison which I think could be a reason for Jobs statement.
It's hard to be certain but there does seem to be a huge shift in mirroring Apple's HW design cues.
And Samsung could have avoided all of this by not slavishly imitating Apple's products for year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I hope future patent cases will become more surgical. I am not a fan of throwing every out that you can and hoping something is deemed relevant.
Good timing. I don't know if you saw the related article this morning where the judge in another Apple/Samsung ITC case tossed a 3000 page response submitted by Apple. They were supposed to file one single page. Surely their counsel was aware of that as it's not the first time dealing with the ITC.
Perhaps as you wrote, they figured they'd list everything they could and hope something stuck. In this case the only thing that stuck was the legal bill for writing up the thousands of pages.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/itc-judge-throws-out-3000-pages-of.html
Considering Samsung is the only vendor using Android that is successful and to the point of bringing in 1/3 the profit of the iPhone I have to say that Samsung's method, despite being unethical, was the best move to make from a business standpoint. I can't imagine any feasible patent penalty that could put them in a worse position than the other vendors using Android.
Have to agree on that. They built brand relevance fairly quickly with phones that were practically indistinguishable, and are now trying to push different designs given that added clout.
But, I have to admit to having no sense on how all of this is going to end up in 3 years: what will be left of RIM, Nokia, HTC? Will Samsung stick with Android, or diversify? What will happen with Mooogle in the mobile space? What about Chinese knock-offs? It is really hard to imagine which path we will take.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
Have to agree on that. They built brand relevance fairly quickly with phones that were practically indistinguishable, and are now trying to push different designs given that added clout.
But, I have to admit to having no sense on how all of this is going to end up in 3 years: what will be left of RIM, Nokia, HTC? Will Samsung stick with Android, or diversify? What will happen with Mooogle in the mobile space? What about Chinese knock-offs? It is really hard to imagine which path we will take.
My best guess sir? I think at least Nokia and HTC will not be dead, but must rethink whether staying in North America is really worth it.
Nokia will have to pull out of North America and learn how to live without it, this time for good. This will require Nokia to stop playing Apple's game of relying on App store to sell your ware. Will app store business model stay cactus on the other side of the Atlantic forever like it is now?
For HTC. Is Oppo now it's parent company? Oppo is a fighting brand in China while HTC is a premium version, like Lincoln is to Ford. So Oppo feature phones will stick around the U.S. for a bit but HTC will need to think soon whether staying in North America is well worth the image they cannot pay bills with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01
This is all just starting to get a little ridiculous. The Galaxy SIII looks like an amazing device, the 6th gen iPhone will also be an amazing device. Steve Jobs said before that Microsoft didn't have to lose in order for Apple to win. There was enough room for both of them. Substitute Microsoft for Samsung/Google here, and it's the same situation.
Their charger cord for the Galaxy Tab has a nearly identical look to apples, even if it's black and cheapy plastic instead of the trademark white look from apple. Their first phone looked nearly identical to the iPhone and has arguably been stealing market share from apple since it's introduction based on it's design similarities. I'd say that's grounds for settlement at minimum. This case is pertaining to the infringements and subsequent harm that was imposed, not whether they're currently still copying apple (which in some ways they definitely are). Apple has a strong case for sure. I'd like to see the outcome just to see how this thing settles out.
I'll accept settlement if it's $40 for every infringing phone sold since the start of the infringement and on every phone going forward that continues to infringe.
Otherwise, just break them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Good timing. I don't know if you saw the related article this morning where the judge in another Apple/Samsung ITC case tossed a 3000 page response submitted by Apple. They were supposed to file one single page. Surely their counsel was aware of that as it's not the first time dealing with the ITC.
1 the ITC is not the courts so no matter who the ITC sides with and why, the loser will go to the courts
2. Apple may have done this move on purpose to help build their court case. They could then turn around when they are judged against by arguing that the ITC was lazy and out of line for telling them to reduce everything to what fits on one page when the matter is far more complex. And even if the first judge disagrees, the second might side with Apple that key issues were totally ignored when they shouldn't have been
it's classic moves for this time of case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
Their charger cord for the Galaxy Tab has a nearly identical look to apples, even if it's black and cheapy plastic instead of the trademark white look from apple. Their first phone looked nearly identical to the iPhone and has arguably been stealing market share from apple since it's introduction based on it's design similarities. I'd say that's grounds for settlement at minimum. This case is pertaining to the infringements and subsequent harm that was imposed, not whether they're currently still copying apple (which in some ways they definitely are). Apple has a strong case for sure. I'd like to see the outcome just to see how this thing settles out.
While I agree with you on all of that and I feel that it is 100% obvious that Samsung is not innovating at all but just copying, I can't agree that the courts are the place to deal with that issue. Not in the way that this copying has currently happened. Stealing code etc sure, but this is on a looser more petty level that I feel doesn't outweigh the negative PR that Apple is getting over it. The FRAND crap, nail Samsung on that sure. The other tech patents, nail Samsung on that, definitely. The design stuff, I think Apple needs to remove the stick on that. So what if Samsung copied the basic shape etc. Use that against them. Point out that innovation means doing something totally new, not doing what everyone else does. Take it to the Court of Public Opinion where the real money lies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Take it to the Court of Public Opinion where the real money lies.
Unfortunately the verdict from court of public was 'Galaxy is close enough, we will buy this and keep the change.'
On this side of the Pacific where price differences between iPhone and Galaxy is 30% or more, and incomes for freshgrads are frozen for 20 years due to inflation, that is enough to tip the scale. High-flying professionals and boomers are as tapped out as their U.S. counterparts an those who wants iPhone have bought theirs already. With gray imports sucked away all stragglers from Thai carriers.
I say that's how Samsung made their way into the market here; forget parents who can buy iPhone, we will catch their kids.
I hate to say this, but the perfect world Jobs envisioned in 2007 with the first iPhone has gone in 2010 and then came recession. Suddenly budget and money becomes just as important overnight. Billions of young professionals who planned to buy iPhone in 2009 woke up in 2010 and found they can't, not yet. Galaxy sneaked in as the next best thing, they agreed and stay on ever since. If there is no recession, Samsung may never get this opening.
Was it the same in 1972 Oil Shock that knocked Detroit Three off their feet and open the door for Corolla, Civic, Sunny and Colt? I think something similar is happened here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fairthrope
Unfortunately the verdict from court of public was 'Galaxy is close enough, we will buy this and keep the change.'
On this side of the Pacific where price differences between iPhone and Galaxy is 30% or more, and incomes for freshgrads are frozen for 20 years due to inflation, that is enough to tip the scale. High-flying professionals and boomers are as tapped out as their U.S. counterparts an those who wants iPhone have bought theirs already. With gray imports sucked away all stragglers from Thai carriers.
I say that's how Samsung made their way into the market here; forget parents who can buy iPhone, we will catch their kids.
I hate to say this, but the perfect world Jobs envisioned in 2007 with the first iPhone has gone in 2010 and then came recession. Suddenly budget and money becomes just as important overnight. Billions of young professionals who planned to buy iPhone in 2009 woke up in 2010 and found they can't, not yet. Galaxy sneaked in as the next best thing, they agreed and stay on ever since. If there is no recession, Samsung may never get this opening.
Was it the same in 1972 Oil Shock that knocked Detroit Three off their feet and open the door for Corolla, Civic, Sunny and Colt? I think something similar is happened here.
That would be a fair point EXCEPT, the three main Samsung phones GS2, Note and G Nexus, are NOT CHEAP TO BUY. Of course, prices have come down now as they have with the iphone. Although, the note is still expensive. The GS3 will also be expensive. And its the GS2 that was the bread and butter selling over 20 million units by year end 2011 and the note sold over 5 million. Samsung clearly have a foot in the high end as well. Thats something no other iphone rival can say.
And the interesting thing is, they are willing to push the envelope where all analysts and bloggers say they will fail. Remember what the 'experts' said about the note. a 5.3" screen? a Stylus? This thing won't sell.
Samsung went ahead and did it anyway, and blazed a new trail that other android makers are looking to follow.
The most important thing that Samsung learned from Apple after all these years though is that its about the experience. And you are seeing that with the GS3. Things like smart actions, pop out video, eye tracking, etc. They finally realise that the guy on the street doesn't care about specs. he cares about cool features that he most probably will never use, but is super cool to have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It's hard to be certain but there does seem to be a huge shift in mirroring Apple's HW design cues.
I didn't think so at first, but after reading this article, I can't help but be convinced that they designed the GS3 to specifically avoid Apple's design claims.
That said, I do think the new design is much improved over the i9000, I just wished they used better materials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
Arguably, as long as the two companies innovate it is not a zero-sum game. The lawsuits may have had that effect, as Samsung phones no longer look like iPhone clones.
While the Galaxy model pictured above does look similar to a iPhone the Galaxy II and III don't even come close.
Can you imagine is every other industry acted the same as these guys:
Television manufacturer - "Hey, you copied our TV design. Your TV is rectangular with channel/volume/power button on the right-hand side. I'm suing you!!!"
Laptop manufacturer - "Hey, you copied our laptop design. You have a rectangular housing that folds open with a keyboard on the bottom, and screen on the top. Your power button is just above the keyboard on the left like ours. I'm suing you!!!
Refridgerator manufacturer - "Hey, you copied our refridgerator design. You have a dual compartment refrigerator with freezer on the left and cooler on the right. You even copied the water dispenser on the freezer side. I'm suing you!!!
I'm sure some brilliant individual will point out how phones didn't look like they do now before the iPhone came out. Hey, news flash, TVs used to be gigantic boxes until someone came out with the first flat screen. Let's just move on already....
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas
Can you imagine is every other industry acted the same as these guys:
YEAH! How weird would it be if everyone protected their intellectual property. What a worthless world that would be.
Quote:
Laptop manufacturer - "Hey, you copied our laptop design. You have a rectangular housing that folds open with a keyboard on the bottom, and screen on the top. Your power button is just above the keyboard on the left like ours. I'm suing you!!!
You realize that Apple invented the modern laptop, right? They probably could have protected their designs in this fashion.
Quote:
I'm sure some brilliant individual will point out how phones didn't look like they do now before the iPhone came out. Hey, news flash, TVs used to be gigantic boxes until someone came out with the first flat screen. Let's just move on already....
Thanks for the completely and utterly irrelevant comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
YEAH! How weird would it be if everyone protected their intellectual property. What a worthless world that would be.
You realize that Apple invented the modern laptop, right? They probably could have protected their designs in this fashion.
Thanks for the completely and utterly irrelevant comparison.
Exactly how is pointing out that most other electronic components look virtually IDENTICAL across brands, but yet they manage to not sue each other over design 'irrelevant'??? I'm sorry that you seem to be having some difficulty making the connection