Samsung Appeals Apple's Injunction Against Galaxy Nexus 217
It will come as no surprise that Samsung has filed an appeal in response to the injunction granted to Apple against the Galaxy Nexus phone in the U.S.. From the article: "The motion, filed with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, seeks a stay of the injunction for the duration of the appeal.
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh ordered the preliminary injunction on Friday, granting a motion Apple made in February that alleged Samsung infringed on several of its patents. The injunction, which would keep the Samsung device from being sold in stores in the U.S., can go into effect as soon as Apple posts a bond of nearly $96 million."
Re:Injunction (Score:5, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
What I find curious... (Score:4, Informative)
I have to wonder why Samsung doesn't flip the disable bit on the features Apple is suing about(for extra credit, in some manner that allows firmware modders to oh-so-deviously flip it back, if they want) so that they can start moving units without having to clear up any legal issues, and then push a firmware update once the legal wrangling is sorted out...
You can't do that with hardware-related patents, obviously; but I would think that the financial impact of an injunction that keeps you from shipping on time(especially given the percentage of the US phone market dictated largely by what phones carriers feel like flogging today, and the carriers' distinct dislike for delay: see also Microsoft Kin's horrible death) would be overwhelmingly greater than the financial impact of having to ship without a few bullet points for whatever crap skin you are slapping on top of your Android build, especially if you can turn those back on with an update once the lawyers clear.
Re:You have to admit Samsung is pretty ridiculous (Score:3, Informative)
There's no denying that Apple's designs have permeated the industry - but that's not what this injunction is about. It's about the ability of a device to have a uniform interface to search multiple databases (implemented by Siri in iOS and by the Google search bar in Android). *This* function predates iPhones/iOS, should not be the basis of a patent, and is not Apple's "intellectual property".
Re:This is getting beyond ridiculousness. (Score:5, Informative)
This case is quite a bit different.
1 - Generally true, but this is mainly about design patents, not a very technical issue, more akin to trademark and copyright. If one looks like the other, and consumer confusion could result, there's likely infringement.
2 - This is big guy vs. big guy. One big guy thinks the other is copying. If you've seen Samsung phones and tablets before and after the iPhone and iPad, this is pretty obvious, down to the packaging and the design of the AC charger.
This injunction goes along very fair rules. Apple has to show the judge their potential harm if Samsung continues to copy, and Samsung has to show the judge their potential harm if their sales are stopped. In a patent case, Samsung raising serious questions of patent validity will also tip the balance in their favor. Samsung has apparently failed to do this for all of the patents.
In the end, the court found that Apple would suffer more harm from continued infringement than Samsung would suffer from a wrongful injunction. But to make sure Samsung doesn't get screwed, Apple has to post a bond covering any potential Samsung losses.
How much more fair can this be?
Re:You have to admit Samsung is pretty ridiculous (Score:4, Informative)
You do realize that the patent you're talking about [freepatentsonline.com] predates the launch of iOS by two and a half years and the launch of Android by four years, right? While Siri is indeed an implementation of the patent, they had it patented long before then. In fact, of the other patents [appleinsider.com] being used in this case, all but one [freepatentsonline.com] predates the launch of Android, and one of them [freepatentsonline.com] dates back to 1996. So, at least in that regard, it is valid.
As to software patents in general, well, I despise them as much as everyone else here. I just prefer that we argue against them from a solid foundation, rather than arguing out of ignorance.
Re:This is getting beyond ridiculousness. (Score:5, Informative)
Funny part is... (Score:4, Informative)
Samsung -makes- the multi-touch screens for Apple. That is, Apple never went to Samsung with plans for the screen and said "make this please".
Apple is just yelling "how dare you" while whispering the "use the stuff you make to make a phone, like you do, after we claimed to invent the stuff you make that was invented by someone totally else like twenty years ago".