Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Patents The Courts Businesses The Almighty Buck United States Apple

Appeals Court Reinstates Apple's $120 Million Slide-To-Unlock Patent Win Over Samsung (bloomberg.com) 70

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Apple Inc. won an appeals court ruling that reinstates a patent-infringement verdict it won against Samsung Electronics Co., including for its slide-to-unlock feature for smartphones and tablets. In an 8-3 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said a three-judge panel was wrong to throw out the $119.6 million verdict in February. Instead, it ordered the trial judge to consider whether the judgment should be increased based on any intentional infringement by Samsung. In this case, Apple claimed that Samsung infringed patents for the slide-to-unlock feature, autocorrect and a way to detect phone numbers so they can be tapped to make phone calls. The bulk of the award, $98.7 million, was for the detection patent that the earlier panel said wasn't infringed. The February decision also said the other two patents were invalid. That was a wrong decision, the court ruled Friday, because it relied on issues that were never raised on appeal or on information that was beyond the trial record. "The jury verdict on each issue is supported by substantial evidence in the record," Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore wrote for the majority.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Appeals Court Reinstates Apple's $120 Million Slide-To-Unlock Patent Win Over Samsung

Comments Filter:
  • I don't even know what it means. I hear it on TV and movies often lately.
    • by vux984 ( 928602 )

      I thought that was related that Tinder, where you swipe one way to 'accept' a prospective match/hookup/whatever, and the other way to 'reject' them.

      I couldn't tell you whether left or right is accept or reject, but its probably obvious from the context.

  • by h33t l4x0r ( 4107715 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @07:32PM (#53035443)
    They might as well flip a coin.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      It goes to show if you're big enough you can copy anybody's patents, tie them up in court for years, until no one remembers why.

    • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      More accurately, they might as well flip corrupt judges to see whose off shore tax haven retirement bonuses those judges will accept. Has ever failed to be aware of how many poor politicans and government officials suddenly become rich overseas holiday jet setters when they retire, gotta travel to those tax havens to spend that money.

      • you would have thought the judges were smart enough to see that this is a crap patent in the first place with hundreds of years of prior art
  • How does this verdict align with the one reported earlier today? [slashdot.org]
    • by Anonymous Coward

      It doesn't,

      The legality of all of this is BS and it comes down to what the political/other leanings of the judges of the day are.

      Which usually means the law is terrible and needs refining.

      Good luck with that political hot potatoe. They can't even help people with state induced lead poisoning...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07, 2016 @08:10PM (#53035603)
    > "The jury verdict on each issue is supported by substantial evidence in the record," Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore wrote for the majority.

    Oh Rubbish. Now take that headline:
    BEFORE: "Apple Appeals Court Reinstates Apple's $120 Million Slide-To-Unlock Patent Win Over Samsung"
    AFTER: "AMERICAN APPEALS COURT Reinstates AMERICAN COMPANY'S Apple's $120 Million Slide-To-Unlock AMERICAN Patent Win Over KOREAN COMPANY Samsung"

    When American companies step outside off American soil and try and launch patent suits overseas they almost always fail. Look at some of the patents that trolls like Apple have been celebrating in the US, but when they tried to do the same with patents in Europe and Asia they lost. American patent juries are notoriously biased towards American companies. That's how the whole East Texas Patent Troll County thing came about: Companies knew the judges and juries would give them the result they wanted. The courts can dress it up however they like, but the judicial bias in East Texas has been terrible: https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com] https://www.law.umich.edu/cent... [umich.edu]

    My Challenge to Crapple: Contest that same patent in Korea and see how far you get.
    • No traditional jury in this case though. This was an appeals court with a panel of judges.

  • by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @09:02PM (#53035785)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Damn, that change took COURAGE! /s
    • What is the difference between a radio button, a toggle representation or a slide to unlock. All do the same thing. Its only the copyright.
      On or off can be done horizontally, vertically, by toggle appearance, by radio button, by toggle between adjacent buttons.

      There should never be a patent for Apple's image. A on-off is a function, and why should there be a patent if there is a slide switch for it's representation.

      I would have Samsung use the slideswitch, and attach a color to it, and a sound. So, if

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Great! Now Apple can restore slide to unlock to iOS 10.0.x.

    #worstupgadeever

  • by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @09:24PM (#53035861) Journal

    Stupid patents. Sliding locks have been around since Roman days, and Apple didn't invent auto-correct nor Intellisense.

    • by skam240 ( 789197 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @10:29PM (#53036021)

      Mod up please. The fact that Apple was able to patent these things is beyond absurd. Our patent office needs to learn to say "no" in a big way.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08, 2016 @12:17AM (#53036301)

        Apple didn't even patent sliding to unlock, that was rejected dozens of times. But Jobs kept pressing and revising the application. The "innovation" that finally got granted was "continuously pressing your finger down while sliding to unlock". I'm not fucking kidding, the $120M innovation was "continuously" pressing your finger while sliding it across a screen.

        • So they were able to patent an on-drag event, but because it was with a touch-screen it's some how special? That really makes me sick. This is no more innovative than any of the projects I've built over the years that relied on a mouse for similar functionality.
  • Samsung: Feel The Burn Now?

    Feel the burn. He He!

    Keep on doin' what chur doin'.

    Love,

    -Tim
  • by zedaroca ( 3630525 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @10:54PM (#53036097)

    Apple is a patent troll. They really hurt both the market and innovation with their practices. Buying from them is bad for humanity's future.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Wrong.

      Patent trolls don't actually make products. Apple patented this (whether you think the patent is valid or not is absolutely up for debate), and then used it in products ranging over 8 years of time. Words and phrases have meanings, and they are only fungible over long periods of time. You may not like Apple, so call them bastards and shitheads - both of which probably apply in this case. But don't repurpose a moniker that means something else just because it has the word "patent" in it.

      And why did

      • Patent troll [wordnik.com]

        A person, company, etc. that holds and enforces patents in an aggressive and opportunistic manner , often with no intention of marketing or promoting the subject of the patent. (bold is mine)

        Patent troll [wikipedia.org]

        In pejorative usage, a patent troll is a person or company that attempts to enforce patent rights against accused infringers far beyond the patent's actual value or contribution to the prior art. Patent trolls often do not manufacture products or supply services based upon the patents in question.(bolds are mine)

        The point you make is that I shouldn't call them patent trolls because "patent trolls don't actually make products". I copied two definitions (the first two on duckduckgo). They both mention your point, but use the word "often". Often they don't actually use the patents, but sometimes they do.

      • Part 2 of comment...
        You said I shouldn't re-purpose a moniker just because it has the word patent in it. Well, in this case I'm not re-purposing, I'm using it in a way that is accepted by many; I guess that one of the reasons patent troll is used also for companies that use their patents is because they are also trolling with their patents.

        English is a living language, so the meaning of words and expressions can change. If you keep "correcting" people to limit their use of words/expressions, you might mold

  • Samsung's new unlock screen will feature dragging a bucket of water icon over a burning Note 7 icon.

  • I can't think of a better example
  • Pocket Dialing, how many times have you pocket dialed, or received a pocket dial? Blame it all on the slide to unlock feature.

    After my pocket dialing episode ~5 years ago, I switched to pattern unlock on my Andriod phone (NO more packet dials). It's also helped a couple of times retrieving my misplaced phone. Definiitly reduces desiriblity for the finder to keep a lost or misplaced phone.

  • Used slide to unlock.

    It's a bit of an ugly brick powered by AA batteries but even used the words "Slide to unlock" and translated for EFIGS (English, French, Italian, German and Spanish).

    FCC ID: https://fccid.io/LF58840 [fccid.io] for 2001 model.
    Couldn't find any vidoes.

Keep up the good work! But please don't ask me to help.

Working...