After Judge Lucy Koh decided to invalidate $450.5 million of the original damages owed to Apple in its trial against Samsung, most of the press believed this meant Apple wasn’t going to get anywhere near the original $1.05 billion owed to it by Samsung. Turns out everyone was probably wrong.
Even though Judge Koh ordered a new trial to determine the proper damages to award Apple for 14 of the 28 infringing Samsung devices, Apple could actually get more than the original $1.05 billion figure.
Under no circumstance does Apple want to part with its company secrets. Even when it’s been ordered to do so by a U.S. Judge.
Apple must show in detail how it’s complying with a court order to turn over evidence related to its privacy lawsuit, because U.S. Judge Grewal says he can no longer rely on what Apple tells him in the case.
Remember that one time that a U.K. judge told Apple that they have to publish a public apology to Samsung on their homepage? It was a really weird punishment that made a lot of us scratch our heads, but Apple handled it pretty well.
Well it turns out that that same U.K. judge who was pro-Samsung now has a really good reason for wanting Samsung to win against Apple – he just got a new job with Samsung!
Apple and Samsung have been exchanging blows with each other in the Australian courtroom for the past two years. Neither side has emerged as a clear favorite to win, but the case is already breaking records.
Because of the enormity of the case, Australia’s Federal Court has appointed two judges to hear the case together. It’s the first time Australia’s Federal Court has ever needed to have two judges hear a case together.
When Samsung lost this summer’s $1.05 billion trial against Apple, we knew Samsung would try any means within their power to get the ruling overturned. And who can blame them for wanting to keep a billion dollars in their bank account?
Since the verdict was read, Samsung has learned that the jury foreman, Velvin Hogan, withheld key facts, like how he was sued by Seagate Technology and went bankrupt because of it. Seagate is partly owned by Samsung, so it could have been that Hogan had an axe to grind against them. Samsung thinks Apple knew all about Hogan, so Apple had to disclose everything they know about Hogan and when they knew it.
Following the supply problems Apple has faced with the iPhone 5, the Cupertino company is reportedly woking to ensure that it is better prepared for the iPhone 5S by trialling production way ahead of the handset’s public release. According to one Chinese newspaper, it will begin production of up to 100,000 iPhone 5S units this December.
Apple’s legal battles have been quietly continuing in the U.S. even after their landmark $1 Billion win over Samsung a few months ago. Apple is currently trying to fight patent claims lobbied against it by Motorola Mobility which is now owned by Google.
With five days to go before their contract trial starts in Wisconsin, Apple formally declared to the court that it will be willing to pay a licensing fee to Motorola Mobility as long as the license is $1 or less per iPhone sold.
Apple may have been awarded $1Billion in damages by the jury in their case against Samsung last month, but it will be awhile until Apple can start counting that cash. In fact, Apple might not even get the full $1Billion they were rewarded if Judge Koh changes the ruling.
Bruce Willis loves battles, and fights, and blowing crap up while trying to escape from bad guys. Bruce Willis ain’t afraid of no one, even Apple. And so when Bruce Willis heard that he can’t leave his massive iTunes music library to someone in his will, he decided he wants to fight Apple, in the courtroom.
It’s a battle royal on our shiny new CultCast! Don’t miss our Apple Vs. Samsung trial breakdown, where Cult of Mac reporter Jose Fermoso tells us what it was like to be in the tension-filled courtroom, what the verdict means for consumers, and where Apple and Samsung go from here.
Then, a topic you suggested, dear CultCast listeners! We talk AppleCare, Apple’s extended warranty program, and tell you when it makes sense, when it doesn’t, and which gadgets you should always keep covered.
U.S. Federal Judge Lucy Koh has moved the hearing for Apple’s request for an injunction against Samsung phones to December, possibly diluting the economic effect of last week’s patent trial verdict.
It isn’t too difficult to understand why the jury involved in the Apple versus Samsung case made the verdict it did last Friday, awarding Apple a landslide victory and more than $1 billion in damages. But what isn’t clear is how the jury came to its decision. Thanks to Jury Foreman Vel Hogan, we now have a fascinating insight into what it was like to be part of that panel.
In his first TV appearance since the billion dollar patent trial came to an end, Hogan reveals how he made up his own mind, how the jury decided on the damages Samsung must pay Apple, whether feelings and emotions influenced the jury’s decision, and more.
Apple’s victory in its patent trial against Samsung is already a few hours old but the shock of the damage tally is still hard to shake off. The final figure of $1,049,393,540.00 is a staggering rebuke of Samsung’s design and manufacturing process and may force the company toward more original ideas.
The completed jury verdict form, released late Friday night and attached below, reveals the Korean company maybe never really had a chance to win the case.
Apple has won a massive damages sum of nearly $1.05 billion in the patent trial against Samsung and the reaction from the technology community has been vast and swift.
In an email immediately following the verdict, Forrester Research Principal Analyst Charles Golvin told us the main takeaway from the verdict is the focus on innovation. Companies will now be forced to create legitimately different products, or at least engineer some without extravagantly similar features:
The jury particularly vindicates Apple’s software patents and their decision has implications not just for Samsung, but also for Google, other Android device makers like LG, HTC, and Motorola, but also potentially for Microsoft who employs features such as pinch to zoom, bounce on scroll, etc. These competitors are now forced to go back to the drawing board and come up with substantively different designs — or seek settlement terms with Apple. Since many of these controls are now built into the expectations of customers in how they work their phones, those are substantive challenges.
Gartner analyst and VP of Mobile Research Van Baker agrees the redesign of products in the long term is an issue but that it won’t affect any products anytime soon.
This is a clear win for Apple but it will have little impact on the market in the near term as it is highly likely that there will be an appeal so we will have to repeat the process. If sustained it has the potential to force Samsung to redesign a number of products and it will apply significant pressure on all smartphone and tablet makers to avoid trying to emulate the Apple designs as they bring new products to market.
Earlier, the two principals in the case immediately followed the shocking judgement with their own statements.
The lengthy Apple vs. Samsung trial is now reaching a close, and this week the jury will make a verdict on who’s guilty of what. But before that happens, Apple CEO Tim Cook is set to make a last-ditch attempt to reach an agreement with Samsung CEO Kwon Oh Hyun over the telephone.
Apple and Samsung have now made their closing arguments against each other in the ongoing patent trial that is now entering week three, but they’re no closer towards seeing eye to eye. Both companies are now pushing for their own version of the jury’s verdict worksheet, which will be used to determine the outcome of the trial.
We’ve always been curious about just how Samsung managed to sell 2million Galaxy Tabs. I mean, do you actually know anyone that bought one? Have you seen one in the wild? Because we haven’t. Yet in 2010 Samsung reported that they had shipped over 2 million units.
Turns out that there’s a huge discrepancy over the way Samsung reports “units shipped” and the amount of units that were actually sold. In some new court documents for the Apple vs Samsung trial, both companies had to reveal their sales figures for each device in the case. Turns out that Samsung really only sold 262,000 Galaxy Tabs in 2010, and their other sales figures were hugely disappointing as well compared to the iPad.
For those of us watching the trial of Apple vs Samsung this week, the fact that Judge Lucy Koh made the companies reveal confidential sales data is something of a no-brainer. The jury will need to look at the sales of the various devices from the two mobile technology giants to decide at some point what the damages should be, if any.
Keeping up with all the latest Apple vs Samsung happenings can be tough, and confusing. The trials is underway in San Jose California. Some days are filled with interesting witnesses taking the stand, while others are packed with lawyers hammering boring witnesses with silly questions.
To help you keep up on the Apple vs Samsung trial we’re compiling each day’s events into one short news story that consists of the best tweets from the reporters there on the scene. Here’s everything you need to about what happened in the Apple vs Samsung Trial on day five, August 7th.
To defend their allegations that Samsung has been shamelessly copying their products, Apple has had to bring in a few outside experts to testify in the Apple vs Samsung trial. So far the expert witnesses have included people in the fields of product design, graphic design, and marketing.
So how much have they made total? About $205,000 between the three of them to endure the pains of lawyers asking them the like a billion questions. Here’s how much each expert has been paid so far –
Keeping up with all the latest Apple vs Samsung happenings can be tough, and confusing. The trials is underway in San Jose California. Some days are filled with interesting witnesses taking the stand, while others are packed with lawyers hammering boring witnesses with silly questions.
To help you keep up on the Apple vs Samsung trial we’ve compiled the entire day’s events into one short news story that consists of the best tweets from the reporters there on the scene. Here’s everything you need to about what happened in the Apple vs Samsung Trial on day four, August 6th.
Are Apple products truly superior to the competition? Or are they just marketed a lot better? Either way, there’s no denying that Apple can build hype around a product like no other tech company on the planet, but all that superb marketing ain’t cheap.
Testifying during the Apple vs Samsung trial today, Phil Schiller revealed that Apple has spent over $1 billion marketing the iPad and iPhone since their respective launches.
Samsung has been trying to accuse Apple of ripping off Sony’s design as the inspiration for the iPhone as a way to justify Samsung’s own smartphone copying tactics. Their argument is based on a prototype iPhone mockup by Shin Nishibori created in 2006 that was supposed to look like an iPhone that Sony would make.
Shin’s mockup was requested after an Apple designer read a profile on Sony’s top designer in Businessweek. Thing is, the article wasn’t about Sony’s smartphones at all, it was about their newest Walkman – the NW-A1200 (pictured above).
An interesting jury has been selected today in the high-profile patent case between Apple and Samsung. Of course, any details about said jury would be interesting simply due to their inclusion in such a pivotal legal case, but the list does sound like somewhat of a lead in to a stand-up comedy routine. An insurance agent, an unemployed video game enthusiast, and a project manager for AT&T are three of the ten jurors selected today to decide the issues behind the patent case between the two electronics superstar companies.
Last week we found out that back in 2006 Apple Industrial Designer, Shin Nishibori, was asked to create mockups of what an iPhone-like device would look like if created by Sony. Nishibori’s prototype mockups have become a hot item of debate in the Apple vs Samsung trial as Samsung was hoping to use them as evidence that Apple copied Sony.
The court recently dismissed the images, but Samsung wanted to get their creator on the stand. Even though Shin Nishibori no longer works for Apple and now lives in Hawaii, Samsung was hoping to subpoena him to the court and have him testify against Apple. How were they going to get him there? A $60 check.