Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Handhelds Patents The Courts Apple

After Knocked-Down Damages Claim, Apple Again Seeks to Ban Some Samsung Phones 114

Posted by timothy
from the literally-anti-competitive-behavior dept.
Bloomberg reports that after Apple's patent victory in court last week over smart-phone rival Samsung, Apple is seeking a sales ban on several specific phones from Samsung; none of them are currently flagship devices. "The nine devices targeted by Cupertino, California-based Apple for a U.S. sales ban include the Admire, Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Note, Galaxy Note 2, Galaxy S2, Galaxy S2 Epic 4G Touch, Galaxy S2 Skyrocket, Galaxy S3 and Stratosphere." Getting the competition blocked from the marketplace over patent claims is something that Apple's tried before in connection with its beef with Samsung, and the company has had mixed results, depending on jurisdiction. Last week's decision in favor of Apple hints that the jury didn't think the company deserved the entire $2.2 billion it was seeking, awarding (a mere) $120 million, instead.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

After Knocked-Down Damages Claim, Apple Again Seeks to Ban Some Samsung Phones

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 25, 2014 @10:39AM (#47087155)

    Ban the fruit company!

    • by ganjadude (952775)
      seriously, i mean you would think with how the apple culture is they would live and let be while continuing to look down upon those cretins who use android instead of the OBVIOUS superior ios. but nope, cant do that, have to try and get the courts to ban the competition
      • seriously, i mean you would think with how the apple culture is they would live and let be while continuing to look down upon those cretins who use android instead of the OBVIOUS superior ios. but nope, cant do that, have to try and get the courts to ban the competition

        Hey, be glad they want to prevent you guys from buying copies of their designs - else somebody might think your phone is an overly expensive Apple product.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Apple should open its own law school. They gotta be running out of lawyers by now.

    • Apple opening a law school, how silly.

      They'll just lobby to get a new kind of H1 visa. Much cheaper!

  • by Ksevio (865461) on Sunday May 25, 2014 @11:23AM (#47087331) Homepage
    What ever will Samsung do if they aren't allowed to sell their Galaxy S2 anymore? Their customers will have no choice but to get the latest model.
  • Last week's decision in favor of Apple hints that the jury didn't think the company deserved the entire $2.2 billion it was seeking, awarding (a mere) $120 million, instead.

    The jury decision does not "hint" any such thing. It states as a finding of fact in a court of law. Dipshit.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Actually, since the jury awarded $120 million instead of the $2.2 billion, it says there was a reason the jury didn't think it was necessary to award the entire amount. "Deserve" is speculative. Nothing "dipshit" about guessing without polling the jury's motive. Comments like this (and most articles these days) are why I left Slashdot. I come back from time to time to see if Slashdot returned to "News for Nerds"... but it hasn't.

  • by fufufang (2603203) on Sunday May 25, 2014 @01:22PM (#47087971)

    If Apple is indeed competitive, because it has more lawyers than engineers.

    • by fufufang (2603203)

      I was trying to say that these days Apple probably has more lawyers than engineers... I can't delete/edit my comment...

    • by gnupun (752725)
      To be fair, if the iPhone/iPod touch had not been invented, would any of the Samsung touchscreen smartphones exist in the market today? Please answer honestly.
      • by fufufang (2603203)

        From Wikipedia:
        "The IBM Simon Personal Communicator, ca. 1993, the first touchscreen phone."
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... [wikipedia.org]

        Touchscreen phone running Windows Mobile was quite common in Asian market before iPhone. It is true that they weren't as polished.

        • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

          by BasilBrush (643681)

          It is true that they weren't as polished.

          And that's the point isn't it? Prior to Apple releasing the iPhone, Android resembled the Blackberry. iPhone caused them to change who they were copying. There never was anything original about it. Without others to copy, it's spec team wouldn't have known what to do.

          • by dj_nme (3515255)
            No, you are wrong. They all copied the form-factor of the LG Prada, just like Apple did.
            • The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.

              • by exomondo (1725132)

                The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.

                Which shows that nobody had to copy anybody to come up with a form factor like that, it was obvious as is proven by the fact that Apple and LG both ended up developing the same form factor device in parallel without influence from eachother.

                • Which would be significant if it was simply the form factor that Apple sued for. Apple was successful, so you're arguing against what already proved.

                  • by exomondo (1725132)

                    Which would be significant if it was simply the form factor that Apple sued for.

                    Why? All you said was that designs for the iPhone existed before the LG device was announced and since the LG device was announced before the iPhone it shows that the current form factor for smartphones was not some innovative thing Apple invented but was obvious. I don't know what else you're arguing but I'm only talking about the form factor, just like the original post you replied to.

                    • I don't know what else you're arguing but I'm only talking about the form factor, just like the original post you replied to.

                      I don't believe the post I replied to was talking about the form factor only.

                    • by exomondo (1725132)

                      I don't believe the post I replied to was talking about the form factor only.

                      No, you are wrong. They all copied the form-factor of the LG Prada, just like Apple did.
                      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5199901&cid=47090883 [slashdot.org]

                      I'm not quite sure why you want to read things that aren't there to argue against a point nobody was making. In any case I was talking about the form factor and it has been proven that the form factor was obvious.

                    • That was not "the original post [I] replied to". It was a response to my reply. The "original post [I] replied to" was earlier in the thread.

                    • by exomondo (1725132)
                      Yeah and it specifically called out form factor and nothing else. Why are you trying to make up stuff that isn't there?
                    • What makes you imagine that one particular person, answering my message somehow defined the parameters of the thread. Was it a sock puppet of yours or something? At no stage was this thread limited to form factor. Now stop being a twat.

                    • by exomondo (1725132)
                      Why did you bother to respond to my post when I clearly wasn't talking about anything other than form factor then? Are you trying to rebut my point or discuss something else?
                • The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.

                  Which shows that nobody had to copy anybody to come up with a form factor like that, it was obvious as is proven by the fact that Apple and LG both ended up developing the same form factor device in parallel without influence from eachother.

                  Similar is not the same. Form factor is not design. A copy is a copy.

                  • by exomondo (1725132)

                    Similar is not the same.

                    Obviously, and Android is similar to iOS, but not the same. The Galaxy S2 was similar to the iPhone when viewed from the front, but not the same (and not even really similar from any other angle).

                    • Only similar enough to violate the design patent. And don't pretend Samsung doesn't have thousands of them.
                    • by exomondo (1725132)

                      Only similar enough to violate the design patent.

                      Apparently so (well the court case is ongoing) but why are you talking about design patents? What's that got to do with the fact that the form factor was obvious? I specifically said form factor [slashdot.org], as did the GP to the post. Not design, not design patents but form factor. Is that unclear to you?

                      And don't pretend Samsung doesn't have thousands of them.

                      Why would I pretend that?

        • by gnupun (752725)

          Simon looks like a prototype... no consumer would touch that thing. The reality is Apple designed the iPhone, without which the smartphone market would not exist today. Apple is pissed at Samsung for copying its phone to the tiniest details and stealing its profits. Unfortunately, the iPhone has many design innovations but not many (strong) patentable innovations which means it's easy prey to companies in the mobile phone field that can clone a phone's design.

          I think the tech field needs a combination desig

          • by Rich0 (548339)

            For example, a smartphone combination patent would claim: touchscreen only UI + rectangular case + fast CPU + lots of RAM + phone functionality. The period of protection would only be 5 to 7 years since it's not as innovative as a utility patent.

            The iPhone was hardly the first phone that had this combination of features.

            Also, the iPhone was leading in market share for quite a while after Android came along, and is still the most profitable phone on the US market, despite the fact that Apple's patents have basically done little to deter others from developing features.

            A 7 year patent would mean that we'd be seeing our first android phones in a month. Apple sells something like 30-40M phones per quarter, making quite a bit of profit on each.

            Also, co

          • by thegarbz (1787294)

            Congrats you just described my Motorola world traveller. Oh wait did you think apple invented touch screens, or smart phones, or internet capable devices without keyboards? I had the phone you described before color screens were introduced. Guess your patent is invalid on prior art then. Better stick to the usual stupidly finely worded and questionable patents like round corners or slide to unlock instead.

            • by gnupun (752725)
              Link, please. I wasn't able find anything any motorola touchscreen released prior to 2007 (iphone release year).
              • by thegarbz (1787294)

                Apologies. Ericson world traveler. Can't find exact reference to it but it was similar to the R380. When flipped closed it looks like a phone with buttons but the buttons flip aside to reveal a large touchscreen to use as a PDA. Best of all if you're ballsey enough or clumsy as in my case you can snap of the buttons completely and use it just as a touchscreen device. I had one in 2001. Fondly remember that phone. It was way ahead of its time.

      • by timeOday (582209)
        I see remarkable continuity from the current crop of iPhone clones back to the Sony Clie TH55 I had 10 years ago.

        I'm something of a Rip Van Winkle when it comes to smartphones because I had several Palm Pilots and PocketPCs, but I don't like how cell service is sold here in the US and I am normally near a phone at work anyways. So my wife and I just had blackberry clones until I recently got her a standard-issue Android. To me, it feels immediately very familiar to the Palm Pilot, especially that Sony

      • by drolli (522659)

        Yes.

        Android development started a long time before the iphone was released. Taken into account the first target market for any mobile company back in that day (Japan), it seems indeed likely that there were *many* other devices which influenced the design of samsungs mobile phones. (Most notably the huge amount of PIM devices in japan like the Sony Clie Series).

        What indeed was manifested by the Iphone is that even mobile phones should not be designed as PIM devices but as media players (thus the loss of bu

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Apple is patent trolling so that they don't have to make better products

  • It seems Apple is trying to be to phones, what Microsoft was to PCs, right before the DOJ went after Microsoft for antitrust *irritated sigh*

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

Working...