Ondrej Holzman A clear verdict was delivered today by the jury that ruled in the biggest patent dispute of the last decade. Nine jurors unanimously agreed that Samsung copied Apple, and awarded the South Korean giant $1,049 billion in damages, which translates to less than 21 billion crowns.
A jury of seven men and two women reached a verdict surprisingly quickly, bringing the protracted legal battle between the two tech giants to an earlier end than expected. The debate lasted just under three days. However, it was a bad day for Samsung, whose representatives left the courtroom presided over by Judge Lucy Koh as clear losers.
Not only did Samsung infringe Apple's intellectual property, for which it will send exactly $1 to Cupertino, but it also failed the other party's own accusations at the jury. The jury did not find that Apple had infringed on any of Samsung's submitted patents, leaving the South Korean company empty-handed.
So Apple can be satisfied, even though it did not reach the amount of 2,75 billion dollars that it originally demanded from Samsung as compensation. Nevertheless, the verdict clearly shows a victory for Apple, which now has a court confirmation that Samsung copied its products and patents. This gives him advantages for the future, since the Koreans were far from the only ones with whom Apple was at war for all sorts of patents.
Samsung was convicted of infringing most of the patents presented to the jury, and if the judge finds the infringement to be willful, the fine could be tripled. However, such significant amounts are not awarded in additional compensation. Still, the $1,05 billion, if not changed by the appeal, will be the highest amount awarded in a patent dispute in history.
With regard to the outcome of the closely watched trial, Samsung is at risk of losing its position in the US market, where it has been the number one smartphone seller in recent years. It may happen that some of his products will be banned from the American market, which will be decided on September 20 at the next hearing by Judge Lucy Kohová.
The jury has already agreed that Samsung infringed all three of Apple's utility model patents, such as double-tap to zoom and bounce-back scrolling. It was the second mentioned function that Samsung used on all the accused devices, and even with other utility model patents, things were not much better for the Korean company. Almost every device violated one of them. Samsung received further blows in the case of design patents, as here too, according to the jury, it violated all four. The Koreans copied the appearance and layout of the icons on the screen, as well as the appearance of the front of the iPhone.
[do action=”tip”]Individual patents that Samsung infringed are discussed in detail at the end of the article.[/do]
At that point, Samsung had only one horse left in the game - its claim that Apple's patents were invalid. If he had succeeded, the previous verdicts would have been rendered unnecessary, and the California company would not have received a cent, but even in this case the jury sided with Apple and decided that all the patents were valid. Samsung only avoided a fine for infringing design patents on two of its tablets.
In addition, Samsung also failed in its counterclaims, the jury did not find that even a single one of its six patents should be infringed by Apple, and thus Samsung will not receive any of the $422 million that it demanded. That being said, the next hearing is scheduled for September 20th, and we certainly can't consider this dispute over just yet. Samsung has already declared that it is far from saying the last word. However, she can also expect a ban on the sale of her products from the mouth of Judge Kohová.
NY Times already brought reaction of both parties.
Apple spokeswoman Katie Cotton:
“We are grateful to the jury for their service and the time they invested in listening to our story, which we were excited to finally tell. A large amount of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung went much further with the copying than we thought. The whole process between Apple and Samsung was about more than just patents and money. He was about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and dedicate our lives to creating the best products in the world. We create these products to please our customers, not to be copied by our competitors. We commend the court for finding Samsung's conduct intentional and for sending a clear message that theft is not right.”
Samsung statement:
"Today's verdict should not be taken as a victory for Apple, but as a loss for the American customer. It will lead to less choice, less innovation and possibly higher prices. It's unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly on a rectangle with rounded corners or a technology that Samsung and other competitors are trying to improve every day. Customers have the right to choose and know what they are getting when they buy a Samsung product. This is not the last word in courtrooms around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer the customer a choice.”
Devices that infringe on Apple's patents
The '381 patent (bounce back)
The patent, which in addition to the "bounce" effect when the user scrolls down, also includes touch actions such as dragging documents and multi-touch actions such as using two fingers to zoom.
Devices infringing this patent: Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Fascinate, Galaxy Ace, Galaxy Indulge, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy S, Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S II (AT&T), Galaxy S II (Unlocked), Galaxy Tab, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Gem, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, Vibrant
The '915 patent (one finger scroll, two to pinch and zoom)
A touch patent that differentiates between one and two finger touch.
Devices infringing this patent: Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Fascinate, Galaxy Indulge, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy S, Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S II (AT&T), Galaxy S II (T-Mobile), Galaxy S II (Unlocked) , Galaxy Tab, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Gem, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, Nexus S 4G, Transform, Vibrant
The '163 patent (tap to zoom)
A double-tap patent that zooms and centers different parts of a web page, photo or document.
Devices infringing this patent: Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Fascinate, Galaxy Ace, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy S, Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S II (AT&T), Galaxy S II (T-Mobile), Galaxy S II (Unlocked), Galaxy Tab, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, Replenish
Patent D '677
A hardware patent relating to the appearance of the front of the device, in this case the iPhone.
Devices infringing this patent: Epic 4G, Fascinate, Galaxy S, Galaxy S Showcase, Galaxy S II (AT&T), Galaxy S II (T-Mobile), Galaxy S II (Unlocked), Galaxy S II Skyrocket, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, Vibrant
Patent D '087
Similar to D '677, this patent covers the general outline and design of the iPhone (rounded corners, etc.).
Devices infringing this patent: Galaxy, Galaxy S 4G, Vibrant
Patent D '305
Patent related to the layout and design of rounded square icons.
Devices infringing this patent: Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Fascinate, Galaxy Indulge, Galaxy S, Galaxy S Showcase, Galaxy S 4G, Gem, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, Vibrant
Patent D '889
The only patent that Apple has not been successful with is related to the industrial design of the iPad. According to the jury, neither the Wi-Fi nor the 4G LTE versions of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 violate it.
Fuck me..:-D Long live the competition..!! :D
what competition? if you are not able to admit the reality where Samsung completely copied everything from the appearance of the device, the appearance of the icons, the design of the application, chargers, accessories, then you are a spiritually blind person all your life and you have definitely never created anything. this is the satisfaction of all western societies, which have the whole of China cruelly on the hook. no one criticized them for the fact that their tablet is flat and has a screen, it's just idle catchy headlines and boastful nonsense in discussions. they were hunted for pigsties that were simply too dirty.
I'm a big fan of Apple, but all those patents are total nonsense. Things like taps for approximation MUST NOT be patentable. Half of the programmers will become criminals and half of the customers will be poor (except Apple customers). I know that Samsung (or Google) copied everything, but Apple also copied a million things before
point to one single thing that apple copied in this style, I don't know of any. first i macy? airy from sony? seriously. I do not insist that they are saints. I say that Samsung has simply gone too far and it was necessary to do things like this. I well remember the time when they were full of discussions of crap "iPhone sucks, it doesn't have a memory card, a replaceable battery, a big brick, the store can't work" crap crap crap. and now there isn't a company that wouldn't take the completely opposite IT course than it was set up. a reversal like that of an ocean-going ship "full steam ahead"
why should programmers become criminals? damn, if I didn't invent something, why should I use it? how serious do you all want to develop Angry Birds only with different faces ala samsung model? Well, I see a different trend, I see heaps of innovative applications, unconventional solutions and open creative work of people who have been allowed to do so by the app. I also point out the cursed sandboxing.
honor work to everyone who goes his own way!
I programmed the double-click for zooming in 10 years ago and there were tens of thousands of people like me... simply general procedures cannot be patented. Of course, a double-click is not like a double-click, and Apple processes it perfectly, and that is also its advantage.
You are smart :-D
You probably mean a double-click on the computer (capturing the double-click action -> enlarge the image), when the object is enlarged according to the center of the click. This is absolutely not the subject of the court.
It is a double-tap on the touch display (or did you program that 10 years ago?), which is already quite a big deal. The other thing is that it is not a classic zoom (when the zoom takes place according to the center of the tap), but a smart zoom that must first understand what type of object you have tapped on, find its size accordingly and center it on the display. It's not an ass anymore. So it doesn't matter which part of the object you tapped on, the zoom will always take place the same way. Because no one did 10 years ago.
So I hope you understood where he divided them between you and ten thousand (as you say) others and what you had Apple patent. Because it is decidedly innovative and complex enough.
Well, I originally wanted to write something similar to Honzo, but then I left it up to you :-) maybe he will understand. I recommend to everyone like that to go into the garage and come up with something, and then we'll watch together over popcorn and a Coke as the Koreans steal his idea :-) of course he'll generalize over time and he'll never be satisfied.
Or you need a basic concept of a laptop, tablet, keyboard,...
Apple copied most of the things themselves, touching and unlocking movements were already there a long time ago, zooming with 2 clicks, etc., when they patented such things. I think everyone knows what an Apple device is and what a Samsung device is. Patenting a shape that is used as a standard is nonsense. I am happy about the app, but in the end it will only be a minus for you, limited competition, lower motivation for Apple to innovate, so congratulations you will get less innovation and more expensive products.
and once in your life you will invent something wonderfully simple that you will sell and you will have worldwide success with it - and someone steals it from you... come back here, read your contribution and slap yourself.
Neonik: But competition doesn't have to be created by stealing what someone else has invented. And it's not enough to just invent, you also need to have the courage to take the risk and come up with something completely new (iPod, iPhone, iPad), put money, your reputation into it and be able to produce it and bring it to the market so that it is successful.
No, you shouldn't steal. Only here in the Czech Republic is it already standard, so many people don't even notice that not stealing could be normal - as TGMasaryk already said (Don't be afraid and don't steal).
And there you have it, manufacturers of clothes!
Well, I don't know, Apple has gone too far, it's going to be very hard to get through Google, let's all come to an agreement and all the customers will have a profit
I think this picture says it all...
http://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/apple_samsung1.jpg
The way it looks, the next Samsung tablet will have to have a triangular shape, pointed corners, a HW keyboard or a software one where the characters will be pentagonal, we will view the web like a newspaper (no magnifier, no zoom), and Apple will still sue him for having a touch screen that is controlled by the fingers on the hand and not exclusively on the foot. Apple is afraid of competition, so it removes them through courts, which are not at all neutral... (the trial was held in the USA and the jury was made up exclusively of US citizens)... This is how a monopoly is made... And it doesn't even need to
You'd better not comment, they can see that you don't know what this is all about. The problem is not in the shape, it doesn't matter if it will be a rectangle or a square, this is about desing. Look, for example, at a tablet from Microsoft, you can see that it is going its own way. And not how Samsung copies a successful design and software and writes its logo on it. This is how competition should be created in the market. Not what samsung does. And as for finger gestures, no one stopped Samsung from inventing its own gesture. He didn't immediately take over the gestures that Apple has. (respectively google took over and samsung uses it)
DESING are you…
DESING are you…
I don't understand that you are still flaunting your ignorance of the whole thing. Fascinating.
Samsung should focus on improving the LCD panels for TVs because you can't look at their gerberas... they are obviously betting on thin shiny frames and 150 functions that nobody will use in the end. Leave smartphones to Apple
Hmm, TV sets from Samsung... I would like to see a better one, e.g. LED 140 cm at the same price level from any competitor... You certainly have a fantastic overview, everything from Samsung is bad, yes... Beeeee
55PFL8007K vs. 55ES8000....definitely Philips, insurmountable difference in image, Ambilight Spectra XL, Perfet Pixel HD and it's cheaper too
that's right, Samsung should invest in something of their own, the billion dollars they pay Apple for that could really pay some great innovators who could create a truly combat-capable product for them and not be a monkey according to Apple, the fine could really be enough for the rich
I believe that it is a matter of principle.
We should realize that the Chinese and Koreans steal ideas like magpies, and for years it was almost impossible to get the rights and prevent the most gross copying - from rags, cars, watches, electronics to who knows what. They copied the Japanese, the Americans, the Germans, us - and they damaged and even destroyed many companies that invested a lot of money in research and development.
I am glad that there is a precedent of such importance.
I also think it's nonsense that the developers would be endangered because of the milky tap on the screen. It seems that Apple is only suing those it knows are blatantly copying and behaving arrogantly - similar to Samsung or Mr. Google with Android, who misused the information he got as part of Schmidt's tenure on Apple's supervisory board... By the way - South Korean the court ruled in favor of Apple in the case of copying the "bumper" feature when reaching the bottom of the page. That must mean something, right?
Another question is, and I would really be interested in this too, how many disputes has Apple caused and how many are sued themselves. Also, does anyone know how many other lawsuits Samsung, Google, Sony, Nokia and vice versa are being sued in without Apple being involved. No one mentions that here, as if Apple is the only one still protecting its patents - however, you only need to search for a moment and it is immediately clear that Samsung is no saint in other fields either. And that companies are still being sued for patents, long before Apple, currently and will be sued, that's simply why patents are there, to protect intellectual property...
And anyone who has read the course of the trial and familiarized themselves with at least part of the evidence presented cannot possibly view Samsung as an innovator in any way, so clear evidence of plagiarism with personal notes from the heads of Samsung's development and business must have made their lawyers sweat. And I think that the judge was still kind to them and they let the iPad copying case go on as an insurance if Samsung wanted to appeal...
I absolutely don't understand how someone can buy those fucking things from Samsung for that senseless money, and even more I don't understand that someone has the audacity to recommend it to others. My grandmother was probably in the sun for a long time and she didn't think of anything better than not to consult and bought a Samsung from Vodafone! ……..great, the whole family uses iPhones and so I screwed it up myself, she needed to set everything up, so I got closer to Samsung…. I didn't hold a bigger piece of shit in my hand, and in connection with the moron (Android shop) now google plus completely idiotic controls, colorful like a circus and absolutely confusing and user-unfriendly !!!!
Pay god for an Iphone 4S. Therefore, I completely understand that Apple requests the withdrawal of most of Samsung's products from the market, that will return them to where they belong. If someone thinks that they copy what they can and add colorful animations, that's fine. Koreans are the same as Chinese, I'm surprised they haven't been selling Iphone 7 for a long time.
Daddy!! xD fuck it, I don't need dicks like you here. Each phone has advantages and disadvantages. If you think my SE Xperia Arc is worse at something, or my dad's SGS3 than yours, talk me into buying it ;)