Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by BeauHD on from the surprise-ending dept.

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.

33 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. I'm going to slide right on this one by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

    I don't even know what it means. I hear it on TV and movies often lately.

    1. Re:I'm going to slide right on this one by vux984 · · Score: 1

      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.

  2. It just shows how arbitrary it is. by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They might as well flip a coin.

    1. Re:It just shows how arbitrary it is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:It just shows how arbitrary it is. by Barsteward · · Score: 1

      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

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  3. Flip/Flop? by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    How does this verdict align with the one reported earlier today?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:Flip/Flop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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...

  4. Apple Patent Trolling + Biased Juries = PROFIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > "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?... https://www.law.umich.edu/cent...

    My Challenge to Crapple: Contest that same patent in Korea and see how far you get.

    1. Re:Apple Patent Trolling + Biased Juries = PROFIT by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      No traditional jury in this case though. This was an appeals court with a panel of judges.

  5. What's the point now? by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 2

    The iphone starting from iOS10 doesn't slide to unlock anymore!!

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:What's the point now? by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      Damn, that change took COURAGE! /s

    2. Re:What's the point now? by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      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 it is on, it's going to show green, and off, will show red or black. There is something wrong in the appeals court thinking.
       

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  6. Re:WTF? by coastwalker · · Score: 1

    The whole idea that 'slide to unlock' is a significant feature worthy of a patent makes me laugh. If that is all that distinguishes the famous Apple from some other brand I wouldn't buy Apple shares if I were you.

    --
    Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
  7. Slide to unlock is ?back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

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

    #worstupgadeever

  8. Stupid patents hinder competition by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Stupid patents hinder competition by skam240 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    2. Re:Stupid patents hinder competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    3. Re:Stupid patents hinder competition by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      The slide-to-unlock patent covers a design that appears to be novel- no one ever did it before Apple

      That's because they typically had physical buttons that could be used instead.

      My LG phone uses an expanding liquid vagina to get around the slider patent.

      Meanwhile, the telephone recognition is just taking existing rules and applying them "on a computer". That's pretty unarguably terrible in all ways.

      Phone number recognition is just implementing a reg-ex expression that's been around forever.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    4. Re:Stupid patents hinder competition by Whorelander · · Score: 1

      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.

  9. We Love Samsung! by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Samsung: Feel The Burn Now?

    Feel the burn. He He!

    Keep on doin' what chur doin'.

    Love,

    -Tim

  10. Re:There is always a hidden agenda by skam240 · · Score: 2

    It's a bit shocking to me that this article was modded up at least twice to get the "interesting" tag. The purpose this press release serves is to inform us about a patent dispute. It has literally nothing to do with the FBI.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  11. Apple is a patent troll by zedaroca · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Apple is a patent troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      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 Samsung have to copy it? They were found guilty, and they aren't even appealing that aspect which is tantamount to admission. There's plenty of other android OEMs out there that didn't copy it - don't you think that Apple would have named them in lawsuits as well? There's clearly other ways to implement this functionality that work just as well.

      Regardless of if it's a shit patent, Samsung should have recognized that the patent was granted and not willfully violated it. Or, they should have tried to invalidate it as their defense in the original trial, which they didn't bother to do.

    2. Re:Apple is a patent troll by zedaroca · · Score: 2

      Patent troll

      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

      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.

    3. Re:Apple is a patent troll by zedaroca · · Score: 1

      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 the meaning of those words/expressions more to your preferences. While I don't approve of such tactics, in this case I think it is a lost battle, because of the weight the two words carry by themselves.

      note: I posted my full comment in two parts because of Slashdot's new "Lameness filter encountered", since nothing in the content was the issue, after all it was posted when in two parts, I must assume it is about length. Great way to disrupt the dialogue.

  12. Re:There is always a hidden agenda by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    Stop and think for a moment.. what purpose did this press release serve?

    This was not a press release.

    Why would the FBI inform the public that they have an iPhone that they cannot unlock?

    You do know that the FBI isn't involved here, right? This is about a patent.

    Do you see what's really happening here?

    I'm not entirely sure but I'm beginning to suspect you forgot to fill your prescription. ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  13. Re:apple is just but hurt.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

    >Apple is just but hurt

    So they are hurt even though they are a just company?

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  14. Patent this, Apple! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

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

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  15. Software Patents MUST DIE by Plortzod · · Score: 1

    I can't think of a better example

  16. Re:apple is just but hurt.. by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

    Interesting theory, but I don't understand how it's supposed to work. Are you saying that your phone would only work with certain types of headphones, or something? What exactly would Apple prevent here? No-one was copying music via the headphone jack, it's not exactly a pathway that needs any copy protection on it. When people want to copy MP3s, they just press Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.

  17. Re: WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My Sony W380 had a slide to unlock switch on the phone to enable the touch sensitive media controls on the front of the device.

    This was about 15 years ago. Yes, the W380 is a flipphone.

  18. Useless feature, responsible for most ... by FirstOne · · Score: 1

    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.

  19. Medtronic N'Vision® model 8840 clinician pro by vovin · · Score: 1

    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 for 2001 model.
    Couldn't find any vidoes.