Slashdot Mirror
Apple, Samsung Face New iPhone Damages Trial (reuters.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California issued her order late on Sunday, 10 months after the U.S. Supreme Court set aside a $399 million award against Samsung, whose devices include the Galaxy. The three Apple patents covered design elements of the iPhone such as its black rectangular front face, rounded corners, and colorful grid of icons for programs and apps. Koh's order is a setback for Apple, which called a retrial unnecessary and said the award should be confirmed. The $399 million represented profit from Samsung's sales of infringing smartphones, though the South Korean company has said it deserved reimbursement if it prevailed in the litigation. It was part of a $548 million payment that Samsung made to Apple in December 2015. The legal dispute concerned whether the "article of manufacture" for which Samsung owed damages included its entire smartphones, or only parts that infringed Apple patents.
All of these existed in other prior products, just not together. In my opinion, there should be more than just 3 (potentially existing) concepts to be considered a valid design patent. Three is weak.
Table-ized A.I.
why the F**K would they owe damages for products they sold that do not infringe apple patents? Oh you infringed a couple of our patents with a couple of your products so give us the profits you made on all your products? No, F***K you Apple.
F**K design patents in general quite frankly. A patent on rectangular device with rounded corners... what a load of shit. Only in the goddamn US. This is NOT what patents and copyright were meant for.
I'm glad he's dead. Likely a fucking faggot considering who he was in a band with. If not then most certainly a junkie.
>"The three Apple patents covered design elements of the iPhone such as its black rectangular front face, rounded corners, and colorful grid of icons for programs and apps."
Ridiculous. Every full touch screen phone both before and after the iPhone has been rectangular and with a black face with rounded corners. That is so generic that it should have been immediately rejected by the patent office. What, should phones have sharp corners that cut the user? Should they had a red or purple face for the LCD screen? I have never seen anything but a rectangular phone... or was circular or triangular the norm?
And "colorful grid of icons"? Really? Hasn't ANYONE at the patent office used a computer or phone for the last zillion years? Every PalmOS phone, which proceeded the iPhone had such a screen. Even generic flip phones of the time had such colorful grids of icons for programs and launchers.
I bet both sides have paid almost as much to their Attorneys, staff, legal fees, investigations, etc. as either stand to get from the lawsuit.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
These two are like the Batman and Joker...they're destined to do this dance forever
When Apple tried to use these silly design patents in the UK courts the judge gave one of my favourite rulings:-
Samsung wins court case against Apple because it's "not as cool"
If Apple appealed the ruling would they be saying Apple was not "cool".
I can only assume that SCO's lawyers got hired at some point and are trying to drag this thing out as long as humanly possible, hoping that the other side will just get sick of things and walk away.
Fuck this country if rounded corners are worthy of a patent.
Cuz it literally hurts my brain.
Please stop.
Very impressive.
Two hypothetical stories:
A man breaks into a Ferrari dealership and steals a car. The man profits by taking the property of another person; the dealership must lose for the man to win. This is theft.
A man sees a Ferrari. He goes and buys parts from Home Depot and builds his own exact replica. No property is taken from anyone. This is not theft. Copying by definition is not theft.
This is the fallacy of patent law. Patent trolls destroy wealth and innovation, and they deserve to lose their stupid lawsuits.
This won’t be over until Samsung and Apple’s legal bills exceed the amount of the damages at issue.
There is so much prior art that existed long before the iphone was even started being developed. Blackberry and Windows Mobile come to mind. That one should definitely be thrown out.
http://phonesdata.com/en/smartphones/qtek/s200-1796/
This also looks like a black rectangular device with rounded corners. which would have a grid of colorful icons once the start menu were clicked. Released two full years before the iphone.
Bullshit!
Palm IIIc was the first to have these characteristics on a PalmOS running device, a whole 7 years before the first iPhone. (Followed shortly by similar specs from Visor)
Psion Series 7 was the first to have them on an EPOC running device, around the same time as Palm, a little bit before Sony Ericsson (same OS).
Though you might argue that the rounded corner on these devices wasn't a design choice, but a limitation to the molded plastic cases (a tiny bit more durable than plastic sharp edges), but the rest : a black screen (actual theme chosen by the user: default was often white, but lots of other colors available, including black), and a colorful grid of apps was there. (Including 3rd party apps, way before Apple even considered starting AppStore).
That's actual hardware being shipped and used back at a time when Apple didn't even had the idea to consider producing phones (having been quite recently been burned by the Newton).
---
Note: Though the Palm IIIc doesn't qualify as smartphone but only a PDA (IrDA only networking. No cell), all the other did support adding a cell modem to expand functionality into what would nowadays be considered as smartphones.
(Visor + their cell modem expansion board is what more or less bootstrapped the whole small slab form factor used by all modern smartphones).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]