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."

Comments

Re:The damages weren't enough

[sjames]

Since Jobs was inspired to the rounded rectangle design when he saw a street sign, shouldn't they be paying the DOT?

What about what Apple stole?

[backslashdot]

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.

Re:What about what Apple stole?

[notsteve]

The things you list are not nearly as simple as you make them out to be - there's not "one thing" that generated these ideas. Each of these "ideas" is, fact, hundreds of different ideas, refined, combined, and cross-influenced. Look up some peer-reviewed papers on these topics—you'll find hundreds of papers on even very specific topics, usually representing small, evolutionary steps. User interface interface research is a complex science.

Re:What about what Apple stole?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, mods, the +5 Insightful rating for the Parent simply points out (once again), the unbridled Apple Hate that manifests itself in Slashdot's asinine and broken "moderation" system.

It isnt Apple "hate", you just characterize it that way because you can't understand that people can view companies objectively rather than emotionally. In TFS you see Apple's motivation for this is to push the idea that copying is wrong, which GP is pointing out is rather hypocritical given their history of not really inventing anything but rather producing a collection of copied ideas. This usually results in brilliant products from the company but nonetheless is copying of other peoples' ideas.

I'm a fan of what they produce and I think the fact that they copy others to do it is just fine, but it's obviously hypocritical for them to say nobody is allowed to copy them.

Bull

[sjvn]

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

Re:The damages weren't enough

[meerling]

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.