“Long after Apple’s victory over Samsung in a patent suit, the two companies met again today in court as a panel of judges decides whether to issue a sales ban on over two dozen Samsung devices,” Adi Robertson reports for The Verge.
“These phones and tablets were found to use features and designs patented by Apple, but so far, that decision has only resulted in a major fine for Samsung — in December, Judge Lucy Koh found that damages were enough for Apple to recoup its losses, so an out-and-out ban wasn’t warranted,” Robertson reports. “Now, Apple has brought its case to the Federal Court of Appeals, which is set to make what could be a near-final call on the issue.”
MacDailyNews Take: Ooh, “near final.” Be still our hearts. A snail in reverse is more expedient than the U.S. legal “system.”
Robertson reports, “Though it decisively won the original case, Apple is on the defensive here. Koh decided Apple hadn’t proved its patents were a driving factor in how customers chose phones. For Apple to get its injunction, it first has to convince the court that this bar was set far too high, then make a case for why it meets a different, lower standard… ‘I don’t think that anybody in Apple’s position’ could absolutely prove a major link between a single feature or collection of features and sales, said Apple attorney William Lee. Companies can be required to prove ‘irreparable harm,’ but holding Apple to this standard would be a ‘fundamental change in American patent law,’ he argued.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Apple asks U.S. appeals court to halt Samsung’s slavish copying – August 9, 2013
Apple seeks sales ban on Samsung mobile devices in U.S. ITC, court cases – August 9, 2013
Apple faces three major legal showdowns Friday – August 8, 2013
Samsung has kidnapped Judge Lucy Koh’s relatives and is holding them in a Korean secret service safe house in Seoul. As part of Samsung psyops they have been made to listen to Psy’s Gangnam Style blasting at maximum volume 24/7 until Koh capitulates and rules Apple’s patents invalid.
I’m unable to understand how an original implementation of an idea is not patentable or said invalid when no similar thing exist before somebody claim its patent.
Doesn’t matter if the consumer choose their phones based on some specific feature or if shamedungs’ phones didn’t cause Apple to lose sales, the matter is, if shamedung is gilt it has to pay for that. Period!
Apple’s patented technology enables a completely different paradigm for the configuration, functions, and interaction modes of a smartphone. Without Apple’s patented technology, other manufacturers’ smartphones were only as good as the ones we had before the iPhone. With Apple’s patents, other manufacturers’ smartphones are just like we have now (copies of the iPhone), which are so much better than their predecessors that they completely replaced the old-style smartphones in the marketplace.
I don’t see how the dots can’t be connected in the courtroom.
Apple iPhones are what nearly every modern smartphones and certainly every popular android smartphone is a copy of. Microsoft has a cross license agreement, HTC also pays for usage of Apples patents. Samsung however copies Apple without permission nor license. Same with Google.
Ahhhh. Didn’t know that about Microsoft and HTC. Thanks for clarifying the difference between Samsung and others.
Nor can I prove that the 3/4 tablespoon of Tumeric in my barbecue recipe is why party-goers resoundingly say it’s the best sauce they’ve ever tasted. Because just maybe it’s the dash of Hawaiian prune powder I add. But let’s agree that while my consumers can’t articulate why my product is the best, they know it when they taste it. And if others duplicate my recipe my consumers might get confused and stop attending my backyard barbecues causing irreparable harm to my avocation.
Granted, since the distance between my backyard and Seoul is great, perhaps you won’t go so far to get my tasty product!