If you were following our meta-live coverage, you'll know that the outcome of Apple v. Samsung was basically really, really bad for Samsung. To the tune of slightly over a billion dollars. Yikes. Samsung did escape any successful allegations of infringement through its tablets, but on the smartphone front, they really did get destroyed.
Samsung was found to infringe on two major iPhone design patents on almost every device Apple accused, including the D'677 patent, which covers the front fascia of the iPhone, pictured below. They also successfully asserted that Samsung infringed the design and layout of the iPhone's homescreen, another design patent. Read More
If you're anything like us, you've been closely eyeing the Apple v. Samsung verdict as it was just read (a bit sooner than expected). While Apple won just under half its requested sum in damages, and swept up a handful of patent infringement victories, Samsung had some patent-related bones to pick with Cupertino.
In a broad motion, the jury found Apple not to be infringing on any of Samsung's purported patents, awarding Sammy a grand total of $0.00 in damages to be paid by Apple. Samsung's patent claims were primarily against the iPhone, iPhone 3G/s, and the iPod Touch, including the '711, '893, '406, and '516 patents. Read More
While the tech world waits with bated breath for the conclusion of Apple's United States case against the world's most prolific smartphone maker, another case is just wrapping up in Samsung's home country of South Korea. The Wall Street Journal reports that a Seoul court found both Apple and Samsung in violation of each other's patents, with the former violating two of Samsung's patents and the latter violating one of Apple's.
Samsung must pay 25 million won to Apple while they get 20 million won in return for each patent violation - in U.S. dollars, that's $22,000 and 2x$17,650, respectively. More interesting are the device bans put in place. Read More
Apple's trial against Samsung, which resumed today, has hit another milestone – Apple rested its case against Samsung today after a somewhat shocking testimony from a financial expert who indicated that the Cupertino manufacturer may have lost up to 2 Million device sales (including both iPhones and iPads) because of Samsung's alleged infringement. This testimony came after last week's revelation that Apple asked Samsung for up to $30 per smartphone and $40 per tablet device for patent licensing.
The report, figured by CPA Terry Musika, relied on three main number sets: how much revenue Samsung brought in with the accused products, royalty fees based on infringed patents, and any profits Apple may have lost to Samsung sales. Read More
As most of our readers are surely aware, the Apple vs Samsung case is still boiling, and over the course of nearly two weeks since the trial's beginning, document after document has revealed juicy details from both sides regarding previously unreleased designs, plans, and even sales figures. While so far we've avoided piecemeal coverage of the case's twists and turns, a new development (reported earlier this evening by The Verge) reveals something particularly interesting.
We've known for some time that Apple attempted to sell Samsung on patent licensing back in 2010, but according to a document released today (and the testimony of Apple Exec Boris Teksler), Apple had proposed specific dollar figures per license – up to $30 per Phone and $40 per tablet, to which (according to Apple's slide deck) "Samsung should respond favorably." According to the proposal, Samsung would be responsible for a base rate of $30 per touchscreen phone (including phones running Android, Windows, Symbian, and Bada) and $40 per tablet (which would decrease to just $30 over two years). Read More
With Samsung and Apple's California trial scheduled for Monday, more and more information is being unearthed about the parties' respective claims. Yesterday, though, AllThingsD parsed out a few pieces of evidence from an unedited version of Apple's filing (not publicly available) that look quite bad for Samsung. I'll just quote them as they appear, because they really don't need much context:
- In February 2010, Google told Samsung that Samsung’s “P1” and “P3” tablets (Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1) were “too similar” to the iPad and demanded “distinguishable design vis-à-vis the iPad for the P3.”
- In 2011, Samsung’s own Product Design Group noted that it is “regrettable” that the Galaxy S “looks similar” to older iPhone models.
Well, this is awkward. While it was recently reported that Samsung removed the universal search feature from its international Galaxy S III devices, it turns out Samsung didn't mean to. Oops. According to the Korean manufacturer, the company only intended to remove the feature from certain US variants of the handset. Samsung told TechRadar, a UK-based tech publication, that the feature would be returning to the UK variant of the Galaxy S III. It's unclear if this means that it will only be returning to the UK variant, or if Samsung is simply informing TechRadar and the BBC of the versions relevant to their readers. Read More
Update: It appears Samsung sent out the update removing universal search from international Galaxy S III's mistakenly. I'd say the point still stands for the United States, though.
On December 1, 2004, a patent was filed in the United States naming Apple as asignee (owner). Its title is "Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system." This patent, which you can find here, has become Apple's most effective weapon in its fight to see Android dubbed an iOS "ripoff" by courts and consumers.
And effective it has been - Samsung just removed the local search feature from the international version of the Galaxy S III, having already removed it from the US versions on AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon. Read More
Over at FOSSPatents, Florien Mueller has gotten his hands on a copy of a filing containing Apple's damages claim against Samsung in their much-publicized California lawsuit. The contents indicate that Apple is seeking $2 billion in unjust enrichment damages (the amount Samsung has wrongly profited infringing Apple's design patents), along with $500 million in lost profits. A smaller $25 million royalty for various technical patents like tap to zoom and overscroll bounce is included, but only in regard to a few products.
The design patents are the damages headliners because only design patents offer the option of seeking unjust enrichment as a remedy (there are various and good reasons for this). Read More
According to a header from a sealed document unearthed by FOSSPatents, Google has requested to intervene in an ITC patent lawsuit between HTC and Nokia as co-defendant to the Taiwanese smartphone-maker. This is the first time Google has ever filed as an intervening 3rd-party in a patent lawsuit between one of its hardware partners and a competitor, so it may be the sign of a shift in strategy for the company.
There's also the fact that Google has requested an antitrust investigation against Nokia in the EU, so maybe Google is just piling on the Finnish firm to makes its stance even more clear. Read More