Slashdot Mirror
Apple/Samsung Patent Case Returns To Court To Revisit Infringement Damages (macrumors.com)
An anonymous reader quotes MacRumors:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday reopened a longstanding patent lawsuit related to Samsung copying the design of the iPhone nearly six years ago...according to court documents filed electronically this week... Apple's damages were calculated based on Samsung's entire profit from the sale of its infringing Galaxy smartphones, but the Supreme Court ruled it did not have enough info to say whether the amount should be based on the total device, or rather individual components such as the front bezel or the screen. It will now be up to the appeals court to decide.
Apple last month said the lawsuit, ongoing since 2011, has always been about Samsung's "blatant copying" of its ideas, adding that it remains optimistic that the U.S. Court of Appeals will "again send a powerful signal that stealing isn't right."
Apple last month said the lawsuit, ongoing since 2011, has always been about Samsung's "blatant copying" of its ideas, adding that it remains optimistic that the U.S. Court of Appeals will "again send a powerful signal that stealing isn't right."
Since Jobs was inspired to the rounded rectangle design when he saw a street sign, shouldn't they be paying the DOT?
This story won't make much sense to younger Slashdotters without a history lesson. Years ago Apple's CEO was a guy called Steve Jobs, and under his management they used to have ideas worth copying. Also at that time Samsung made phones that were successful as communication devices rather than as incendiaries. Now go back and read the summary and hopefully it'll make more sense to you.
Finger scrolling on a touchscreen --- Stolen from IBM, US Patent 6278443
Kinetic scrolling on a touchscreen -- Stolen from Philips
Magnetic connector -- Stolen from Japanese appliance manufacturer
Landscape/portrait mode change based on phone orientation -- Stolen from the touchscreen myOrigo phone made in Finland
Browser Task switcher look & feel -- Stolen from Nokia
Large touchscreen phone idea -- stolen from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
That's not mentioning the wholesale lifting of the idea of cell phones, smartphones, and apps from Motorola, Blackberry, and others.
SCOTUS specifically said Apple is NOT entitled to all of Samsung's Galaxty profits. That ship has sailed. They'll also get a fraction of what they wanted, which is still too much. See
http://www.zdnet.com/article/s...
for details.
Steven
Court of Appeals will "again send a powerful signal that stealing isn't right." steal (v). take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. I do not think that there was any intention to permanently deprive Apple of anything so there was no theft. I would expect the Court of Appeals to understand the legal definition and not pander to the latest propaganda.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Somehow all the geeks here missed the good doctor. In fact, I'd like to sight just two examples: ... hand held device with modestly rounded corners, flat front amd flat back
Episode 1 - An Unearthly Child - William Hartnell
Episode 2 - The Daleks - William Hartnell ... hand held device with rounded corrners, flat face, slightly rounded back
Food for thought ... Woz and Jobs were who fans or at least one of them was!
Just sayin ...
It was a 'design patent'. Not something about technology or production, but rather about looks. Pretty much everyone I've ever talked to about that says the entire concept is total B.S.
Gee, bevels in glass so it doesn't have the sharp edges. Corners on rectangles to they don't poke you when in your pocket. Total obvious garbage.
If that were true, then why did Apple have to fake images of a Samsung phone to look like the iPhone?
They didn't so they didn't.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
WTF are you talking about. The iPhone was a copy of the LG Prada with a few differences
A phone that was officially announced a week after the iPhone. And was immediately called an iPhone copy. . To be fair - they actually didn't look that much alike. As for the differences: One was an overpriced, underpowered fashion accessory, the other one the iPhone.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
It was a 'design patent'. Not something about technology or production, but rather about looks
IOW something that can be very easily be avoided to violate. Thanks for confirming Samsung is guilty as hell.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
And Hillary and Obama destabilized Syria so they could build a pipline.
Why would one destabilize a country to build anything? You are confusing the theme of your conspiracy theory: they supposedly did it to stop a pipeline.But I wonder how they managed to create the drought at the heart of the destabilization- back when Dubya was still PotUS. . Or how they forced Assad to gas his people.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Think of Samsung being the knock off Rolex watch of cellphones.
Since when is the superior product a "Knock off"?
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
Think of Samsung being the knock off Rolex watch of cellphones.
Since when is the superior product a "Knock off"?
Exactly. And that's why Samsung makes "Knock offs" - thanks for the confirmation.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
One was an overpriced, underpowered fashion accessory, the other one the iPhone.
So they were the same after-all.
It was a 'design patent'. Not something about technology or production, but rather about looks....the entire concept is total B.S. Gee, bevels in glass so it doesn't have the sharp edges. Corners on rectangles to they don't poke you when in your pocket. Total obvious garbage.
The 1990's Nokia cell phones had beveled edges, should no one have ever been allowed to have a beveled edge on a phone afterward? Phones have certain functionality constraints that limit design possibilities which I think should be considered. I appreciate the patent and copyright systems to protect inventors, artists, and entrepreneurs, but we all know they are imperfect systems. IMHO, this Apple vs Samsung case has been counter to the spirit of the system and this saga should have ended long ago [I understand my opinion is worth nothing to most people].
If it came one week later, it definitely wasn't a copy. It takes a lot longer than a week to design a smartphone.
I don't know, let me know when you come across a fascist police state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
What a completely idiotic troll. Apple phones have been looking more and more like Androids every generation, why is that?
Because it's actually the other way around.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.