Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Patents The Courts Apple

Jury Finds Apple and Samsung Infringed Each Other's Patents 49

Posted by timothy
from the shouldn't-it-come-out-in-the-wash? dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A U.S. jury concluded Friday that Samsung had infringed on two of Apple's patents and that Apple had infringed on one of Samsung's patents. Prior to the trial, the judge had ruled that Samsung had infringed on one other Apple patent. Samsung will receive $158,400 in damages, although they had requested just over $6 million. Apple will receive $119.6 million in damages, although they had requested just over $2 billion and a ban on certain Samsung phones. Some say that a sales ban is unlikely to be approved by the judge. The jury is scheduled to return on Monday to resolve what appears to be a technical mistake in their verdict on one of the patents, and Apple may gain a few hundred thousand dollars in their damages award as a result."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jury Finds Apple and Samsung Infringed Each Other's Patents

Comments Filter:
  • who wins? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 03, 2014 @06:10AM (#46906915)

    Totally worth it. (For the lawyers making baaaaaaaaank)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 03, 2014 @06:12AM (#46906927)

    Samsung will receive $158,400 in damages, although they had requested just over $6 million. Apple will receive $119.6 million in damages, although they had requested just over $2 billion [...]

    Samsung demand a reasonable about and is granted peanuts. Apple make obscene demand and is granted smaller, but still obscene, amount. THE SYSTEM WORK!

  • A method for. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by serviscope_minor (664417) on Saturday May 03, 2014 @07:03AM (#46907071) Journal

    1. A method for doing stuff on a thing. Actually it's a modern patent, so the mere idea of using a thing to do stuff without bothering to elucidate the useful information which is how.

    2. The claim of (1) but like on a computer.

    3. The claim of (2) but like totally using the internet.

    4. The claim of (3) but like on a device but with a means of communication.

    5. The claim of (4) where the device is also portable.

    6. yeah and battery powered too.

    7. and uses like a radio.

    8. like 7 but may or may not do voice communication.

    9. like any of the above with with a touch screen.

    10. The claim of (9) whereby the touch screen represents physical elements

    11. And the claim of 11 where it doesn't,

    12. ooh and maybe rounded corners too.

    13. The claim of (1) but this one is so obtusely worded that if you manage to read it correctly (and we're pretty sure neither the judge, patent examininers or jury will) we atually managed to patent the idea of using buttons on a portable device so lolz to you.

    Sure I'm cynical, but whenever I see a patent in my area of speciality it's either the vague idea of doing something that people have been trying to do unsucessfully for ages, a totally obvious aggregation of two things that really is obvious to anyone in the field who happens to have that problem and of course, completely not novel in any way at all and has simply been done before in its entirety.

    Not to say all patents are bad, but it's the woeful 99.9% giving the remaining .1% a bad name.

  • by bazmail (764941) on Saturday May 03, 2014 @07:28AM (#46907165)
    Its us the consumer who ends up picking up the tab for the legal bills, and in the end we just find out what we all knew already, they all steal each others ideas. Thanks Apple.
  • Re:Which patents? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jcr (53032) <jcr.mac@com> on Saturday May 03, 2014 @07:39AM (#46907199) Journal

    I would have thought the "Look and Feel" --type patent suits were dead and buried after Microsoft won vs. Apple back in the Win3.1 days.

    Nope. Microsoft skated on that because of a poorly-worded license contract that was intended to permit them to use Apple's UI ideas in their Mac products.

    -jcr

  • by Pascoea (968200) on Saturday May 03, 2014 @08:45AM (#46907505)
    In a round-about way, yes, I believe he is saying that Samsung ripped off Apple. But in the same breath implied that Apple is stealing Samsung's shit. Which, as he said, everybody already knew that. So, in the end, they trade a shit ton of money, neither of them change what they are doing, and the price you and I pay for a smartphone goes up by 10c to subsidize the lawyers. Great system we have going.

EARTH smog | bricks AIR -- mud -- FIRE soda water | tequila WATER

Working...