Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Patents The Almighty Buck The Courts Apple

Samsung Ordered To Pay Apple $290M In Patent Case 219

Posted by timothy
from the not-in-nickels-this-time dept.
itwbennett writes "After 3 days of deliberations, a jury has ordered Samsung to pay $290 million to Apple for infringement of several of its patents in multiple Samsung smartphones and tablets. The verdict is the second victory for Apple in its multiyear patent fight against Samsung in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Last year a jury in the same San Jose courtroom ruled Samsung should pay just over $1 billion for infringement of five Apple patents in multiple Samsung phones and tablets. But afterward, Judge Lucy Koh ordered a new trial to reconsider $450 million of the damages after finding the previous jury had applied an 'impermissible legal theory' to its calculations. Thursday's verdict is the result of that new trial."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung Ordered To Pay Apple $290M In Patent Case

Comments Filter:
  • by i kan reed (749298) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @05:02PM (#45485421) Homepage Journal

    From wikipedia:

    On August 20 2013 an article appeared on Groklaw saying it was to be closed down due to government monitoring of the internet, particularly e-mail.[6] Jones wrote "What I do know is it's not possible to be fully human if you are being surveilled 24/7... I hope that makes it clear why I can't continue. There is now no shield from forced exposure."

    The NSA scared them out of business.

  • Re:Have you noticed? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Pinhedd (1661735) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @05:34PM (#45485707)

    Samsung can't argue that they didn't infringe on the patents, that was already settled in the case. This was simply a retrial on assessment of damages. Samsung can (and is) appealing the original verdict and will most likely appeal the new damages as well.

  • Re:Thermonuclear war (Score:5, Informative)

    by amicusNYCL (1538833) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @05:58PM (#45485919)

    Market share is only relevant because Samsung and other Android phone makers have dumped countless cheap worthless phones on the market, and get to claim market share.

    Hyperbole aside, another way to state that would be to say that many many people find Apple's price point too high for what they get. You can make a blanket statement to make it seem like all Android phones are cheap and/or worthless, but that is demonstrably untrue. The top 10 smart phone list [zdnet.com] is a good microcosm of the market in general. The highest ranked phone is the iPhone 5S, and likewise the iPhone is also the single best-selling phone. Out of the other 9 places on the list, 8 of them run Android and 1 is Windows Phone. That sounds about accurate. Out of those 8 Android phones, not a single one can be described as either "cheap" nor "worthless" by anyone without a large anti-Android bias.

    yes in fact people really do want their phones and tablets.

    Some people do, sure. My mom and dad both use iPhones, in fact they work great for older people. But in this market the iPhone is starting to look like the cookie-cutter option, it is the Toyota Prius of smart phones. The iPhone has lost its status symbol luster, it's no longer the phone that people buy to be seen with like it was during the first couple models. Samsung and HTC phone have replaced the iPhone in that regard. The iPhone is just the phone for people who are already locked into the Apple environment. I have the HTC One, which is second on that top 10 list. My phone has a quad-core 1.7GHz processor, compared with the 5S's dual-core 1.3GHz chip. My phone has twice as much RAM as the 5S. My phone has a larger screen (4.7 in), higher resolution (1920x1080), and higher pixel density (468ppi vs 326ppi) than the 5S. My phone can also stream native HDMI. It is objectively a better device. The only part of the 5S that you might consider to be superior is the software, and that is completely subjective. You might think iOS is fantastic. Quite obviously, a large segment of the market does not agree with you. I was not lamenting the lack of iOS when I paid $600 to buy the One outright.

  • Re:Thermonuclear war (Score:4, Informative)

    by amicusNYCL (1538833) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @06:06PM (#45485965)

    Yeah so there's this giant market called "China"....

    The largest smart phone market, actually. Samsung has a market share of 21%, while Apple has a market share of 6%. [wsj.com] China has several domestic vendors [china.org.cn] also.

  • by gnasher719 (869701) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @06:50PM (#45486293)
    Originally Samsung was ordered to pay about a billion dollars. Then it turned out that the jury had made mistakes in the calculation of damages. Therefore about $400 million of that billion had to be tried again, while $600 million of the judgment was deemed correct. So in reality Samsung is now ordered to pay $600 plus $290 million.
  • by TsuruchiBrian (2731979) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:01PM (#45486367)

    It's not productive because nothing is being produced. It's just taking money from one group of people and giving it to another. It's redistributive rather than productive.

    Making phones is productive. Advancing technology is productive.

  • Re:Have you noticed? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:02PM (#45486381)

    that case was rife with problems - the jury foreman has admitted to swaying the jury with incorrect interpretations of law, didn't admit to having previous legal issues with seagate, now partially owned by samsung, etc. On top of that the jury decided to never actually inspect the patents for obviousness (and thus invalidate them) even though it was part of their responsibities.

  • Re:Thermonuclear war (Score:5, Informative)

    by Tough Love (215404) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:24PM (#45486533)

    A lot of Apple's product stasis comes down to the idiotic decision (from Jobs?) to go with fixed pixel resolution which really limits their room to manoeuver on screen resolution and aspect. While Android scales everything on the fly, Apple apps have to be recompiled, probably the source code has to change too. To dig out of that mess Apple needs to bite the bullet and go to variable resolution just like Android. But the logistics of doing that are apparently just too scary for pencil pusher Tim Cook.

    Look, even Steve Wozniak says this is stupid. [phonearena.com] I say, totally typical Apple. When Jobs died Apple lost the mojo but kept the hubris.

    Tim Cook: wears the turtleneck, but doesn't fill the shoes.

  • by interkin3tic (1469267) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:29PM (#45486609)
    Probably a terrible way of PHRASING it. "What functions did groklaw carry out that were compromised by NSA spying?" was maybe closer to what he meant. That was my first reaction when I heard that news: I thought they just explained laws to anyone who was curious, didn't make a whole lot of sense why they needed secrecy for that.

    I remember asking a similar question, and I forget the answer. I think it was something like "lawyers could talk to Jones and about their cases confidentially."

    There was also something about the original point of the blog, exposing SCO bullshit, was finished.
  • by msobkow (48369) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:31PM (#45486617) Homepage Journal

    No surprise there. Samsung apparently wins the cases overseas, Apple wins them in the US. The whole system is rigged, flawed, and useless. Down with software and "design" patents!

  • by Smauler (915644) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:34PM (#45486635)

    If everything Apple designed was so obvious, then why is it that no one made the iPhone before Apple did?

    LG Prada. Go look it up. Look what it looks like.

  • worst summary ever (Score:5, Informative)

    by vux984 (928602) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @07:41PM (#45486671)

    "After 3 days of deliberations, a jury has ordered Samsung to pay $290 million to Apple for infringement of several of its patents in multiple Samsung smartphones and tablets."

    Ok.

    "The verdict is the second victory for Apple in its multiyear patent fight against Samsung in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Last year a jury in the same San Jose courtroom ruled Samsung should pay just over $1 billion for infringement of five Apple patents in multiple Samsung phones and tablets."

    So, first they one a billion in court, then this win for 290 million.

    "But afterward, Judge Lucy Koh ordered a new trial to reconsider $450 million of the damages after finding the previous jury had applied an 'impermissible legal theory' to its calculations."

    Oh... ok... so not really a billion. 450million is being reconsidered, but there is this 290 million win. Still good for apple, though right?

    "Thursday's verdict is the result of that new trial."

    Wait what? So this isn't new money they won, but rather that of the 450M of previous win they we're fighting to keep, they've just lost 160M.

    Wouldn't that have been the correct way to start?

    Something like "Trial to reconsider $450M of previous $1B settlement has been reduced by $160M to $290M."

    And that's assuming the patents stand up long enough for the checks to get written, something I understand may not happen as the patents themselves are facing invalidation.

    Seriously, this article made it sound like another big win for apple, when in reality its really news that their one big win has been cut down...yet again.

  • by Smauler (915644) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @10:21PM (#45487683)
    Here [archive.org] is an announcement, here [engadget.com] is an image. Both of these date from 2006.
  • Re:Thermonuclear war (Score:4, Informative)

    by _merlin (160982) on Thursday November 21, 2013 @11:02PM (#45487871) Homepage Journal

    It isn't. Apple acquired PA Semi a few years back, whose main claim to fame was designing low-power PPC cores. The two most recent generations of the iPhone/iPad SoC have used ARM cores designed in-house by former PA Semi employees. It isn't used in any other devices. But I think you're missing my point - the CPU performance isn't even close to the top of my list of priorities for a mobile phone.

"In matters of principle, stand like a rock; in matters of taste, swim with the current." -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...