Slashdot Mirror
Apple Can't Block US Sales of Samsung Devices
An anonymous reader snips this good news (for Samsung fans) from Edible Apple "In April of 2011, Apple kicked off what would soon become a global and complex series of litigation disputes when it sued Samsung in the U.S. claiming that its line of Galaxy smartphones and tablets infringed upon Apple's intellectual property and were nothing more than 'slavish' copies. As part of its suit, Apple requested a preliminary injunction that would bar Samsung from selling said products in the U.S. This past Friday, Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's motion for a preliminary injunction."
Ok, I'll bite on the bait.
A Samsung fan is just a regular person who doesn't have a deeply compelling brand loyalty. Or at least in the usage in this article summary on Slashdot that is the meaning.
It means, anybody who isn't a Steve-fan.
No judgement, but a denial of a preliminary injunction that would presumably prevent Samsung from "further irreparably damaging Apple's Brand, image, copyright and patents".
Apple's contention within the case is that Samsung is misappropriating Apple's intellectual property, namely patents related to the design of the iPhone devices, user interface designs, icons, images, and methods of operation.
Samsung's contention is that "there are only so many ways to build a smartphone", and that the elements that Apple is complaining about are either "too broad" or are obvious, and thereby not enforceable.
The judge in this particular case has decided that Apple had not presented sufficient evidence in pre-trial proceedings that would show that Apple would be irreparably damaged through Samsung continuing to sell the products in question within the United States.
Thirty four characters live here.
This is similar to the recent reversal of the Apple-Samsung injunction in Australia - there, the court said that an injunction was unwarranted, but that Samsung would have to keep detailed records of every penny earned on the products, because they could be on the hook for all of them. Same thing here - if the patents are found valid and Samsung is found to have infringed, they'll owe damages to Apple... but there's no reason to preemptively make those damages $0 by stopping the sale of the product.
Maybe you didn't read all of the article either. The judge felt that Apple's patent was invalid. Meaning, the judge didn't "agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one . . . "
Nice spin though.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
The judge actually agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one that they would suffer irreparable harm.
Not really true.
To quote TFA;
"Nevertheless, Samsung raised questions of validity regarding Apple’s D’899 patent and Apple did not establish that it would likely to succeed at trial."
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Her husband was born in Mexico and lives in the US since childhood, and she was raised in Mississippi and Oklahoma. And her mother is from North Korea, only the father is from South.
Dilbert RSS feed