• Login:

Welcome to the Acer Tablet forum.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: [Editorial] Now That Samsung Was Found Liable, What are the Potential Ramifications?

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    Member #
    137
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    85
    Liked
    7 times

    [Editorial] Now That Samsung Was Found Liable, What are the Potential Ramifications?


    Apple vs. Samsung in the U.S. Court System: It was one of the most titanic trials of the decade. A fight between two juggernauts of the mobile industry. Similar battles where being waged around the world, with various outcomes, some of which are still to be determined. In the end, (although the appeals process is just beginning), Samsung lost to Apple. The verdict was paradoxically both shocking and unsurprising. Most of us realized that there was some copying going on (by both sides), but few of us expected the defeat to be so utterly lopsided in Apple's favor. But, what does this defeat mean going forward, for the companies involved, the consumers, and the legal system in general? Here's a brief analysis below culled from multiple sources around the web. Before that here is a defiant statement issued by Samsung in response to the outcome:

    Samsung said in a statement, "[This was] a loss for the American consumer. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims."
    Regardless, now that Samsung has been defeated by Apple in a U.S. court, we have several things to consider throughout this trial. We will attempt to list just a few of the most important ones (please keep in mind, much of this is simply speculation):
    • There is now a long appeals process coming, and it is possible we could see some reversals.
    • During this trial, the publicity of the case actually helped Samsung in world-wide market acceptance and consumer knowledge.
    • Because of all of this publicity Samsung is now considered an equal to Apple; however, after the verdict, their reputation could go either way. It could bolster their position, or they could be perceived as a copycat.
    • Even if Samsung is hurt by this, it may not be much. They are still way ahead of Apple in the emerging markets of China, by a factor of over 2 to 1. Plus, this could rally Android fans even further.
    • Apple will likely now ask for a ban on several Samsung products.
    • Because the infringement was found to be "willful," Apple could seek Treble damages. That would turn the $1 Billion dollar verdict into $3 Billion. That's almost half the profit they made over the past year.
    • This could lead to some sort of cross-licensing agreement between Apple and Samsung, in which Samsung pays Apple to make Android phones. Apple could then go after other Android OEMs for the same thing. This would hurt Android in the long run.
    • Conversely, if Apple decides to pursue bans only, they can now use this case as precedent to go after other Android OEMs, which might hurt Android more (or could force change in the current U.S. Patent system).
    • If Apple does seek a cross-licensing agreement, it will likely cause the price of all mobile devices to go up, which only hurts the consumer and market competition.
    • Emboldened by their success, Apple could try to go after the Galaxy S III now.
    • In the long run, this could actually hurt Apple more than it helps them, because they have effectively forced their competitors to think even further out of the box to remain competitive. Because of this, their competition is likely to change the rules of the game by creating a more disruptive technology. There are signs that this has already happened. Apple is now likely to release an iPad Mini, and an iPhone with a larger display. Both of these are reactive moves designed to keep up with the changes in the market brought on by Android.

    As you can see, there are a ton of ways to look at this situation, and we have only covered just a few. There are obviously other factors to consider, and other perspectives on this complex issue. Share some of your ideas in the thread!
    Last edited by dgstorm; 08-25-2012 at 08:26 AM.

  2. #2
    Iconia Informant
    Member #
    791
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    47
    Liked
    1 times
    I for one would like to know the specific features that Apple claims as being copied by Samsung. I could not find those particulars anywhere. Thoughts?

  3. #3
    Iconia Lurker
    Member #
    7842
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    24
    Liked
    5 times
    If you happen to frequent the Google+ forum there is a #boycottapple thread in progress and gaining heavy support. Of course the Applefanboys are fighting back. But it is rather lopsided and a rather interesting side effect. The intelligent responses are mostly coming from the boycott apple (Android) crowd. The pictures showing the side by side comparisons are also coming out and it is clear that the jury in the case were completely not able to see the entire range of evidence. Especially the pieces in the media that Samsung was not allowed to present. This evidence likely will be presented in the appeals process and could be a deciding factor in the process.

    Add to this the Jury's Foreman was a Patent Holder and a strong designer NOT a public Peer Person. This is where I believe Samsung blew the jury process. That should have been the First removed from the Jury. This person held solid sway over other opinions as he was a subject matter expert on patents and claims in the jury.

    All this being said.

    1. Look for more and radically disruptive technology to come out of Samsung.
    2. Look for the agreement by Samsung to product Apple Screens to be totally scrapped and Apple to have to find a new source for their screens.
    3. Watch for BioTech to be part of the new Samsung Lines in a generation or two.

    Apple has shot itself in the foot.

    If iPhone 5 trips even slightly in the market and does not recover well, then you can watch for Samsung to take the mantle here and leave Apple in the dust of electronics past. The Koreans are ruthless. They will take Apple to task now and bury them.
    RobKort likes this.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Member #
    4654
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Adelaide South Australia
    Posts
    213
    Liked
    16 times
    Quote Originally Posted by doublesixes View Post
    I for one would like to know the specific features that Apple claims as being copied by Samsung. I could not find those particulars anywhere. Thoughts?
    Apple Gets Decisive Win in Patent Case v. Samsung - WSJ.com

  5. #5
    Banned
    Member #
    4654
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Adelaide South Australia
    Posts
    213
    Liked
    16 times
    [QUOTE=carydc;38154]

    Add to this the Jury's Foreman was a Patent Holder and a strong designer NOT a public Peer Person. This is where I believe Samsung blew the jury process. That should have been the First removed from the Jury. This person held solid sway over other opinions as he was a subject matter expert on patents and claims in the jury.
    http://api.ooyala.com/syndication/st...length=1007707


    Have to agree with you here carydc,looks like this jury foreman held a lot of sway over his fellow jurors.
    Last edited by gary; 09-01-2012 at 10:57 AM. Reason: wrong url

  6. #6
    Banned
    Member #
    4654
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Adelaide South Australia
    Posts
    213
    Liked
    16 times
    This whole case has intrigued me from the start, I just cannot believe the actual result! With decisions being handed down with a different outcome in most other countries I cannot see how this will hold up in a higher court. The notion of prior art just doesn't seem to be taken into account by the jurors in this case,it certainly will be by an appeal court

    Jeff Han's multitouch demo makes a courtroom appearance as Samsung argues patent validity | The Verge

  7. #7
    Iconia Lurker
    Member #
    13873
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6
    Liked
    0 times
    As a fellow who works in the Engineering development field and manages a development deparment, I'm really shocked by this courts finding. I expect the appeals process will reverse a good deal of the fidnings. This is based upon the jury's failure to evaluate the prior art. Fundamental for most of these patents si the fact that much prior art exists for the utility patents. In the case of the design patents, this jury went magically well beyond any reasonable interpretation of historical design patent law. I believe the basis of the rejection will be Judge Lucy Koh's failure to allow Samsung to present their full case showing their own developmental projects and those of others in the industry. There was a posting asking for information on the specific patens that were the subject of this case. I've included a few excerpts here to help with this understanding:

    All of Apple's patent claims against Samsung in one chart | Apple - CNET News

    Assessment of damages summary From Engadget:

    According to a unit cost breakdown by Foss Patents, Apple wants $2.02 for every previously sold Samsung product that uses "overscroll bounce," another $2.02 for those that allow "tap to zoom and navigate," $3.10 for those that involve a "scrolling API," plus a mega $24 for each and every device that breaks an Apple design patent or trade dress right. That means the bulk of Apple's claim -- as much as $2 billion -- is actually for aesthetic rather than technical infringements. Of course, these figures have no bearing on what the US court may eventually decide to award to either party, and neither do they factor in any strategic value of the blood from Samsung's nose, or the negative PR that can only grow amid such litigious behavior

    As to the root casue of this case, there are several:

    1.) The USPTO has become a mill, often examiners fail to understand the subject matter they are evaluating. Patents issue without much real prior art searching on the part of the USPTO. A trap however does exist here for Apple. The USPTO requires that patent applicants disclose any material prior art that they are aware of at the time of the filing. Failure to disclose prior art which they are aware of, if later discovered will lead to the invalidation of the patent. I suspect Apple will lose most of the appeal process over this detail which seems to have been lost on the SF jury.

    2.) Design Patents are notoriously weak, protecting a very specific design cosntruction only. Design patents protect ornamental construction. Apples basic desire to protect a rounded corner rectangular construction could be shot down with a basic argument that such a construction is in fact functional. The reason Apple used that construction is firstly functional, that is, it is a shape easily produced (molded) and adds to product durability. Indeed the engineering world has been using rounded crner rectangles for all manner of molded devices for more than 1000 years, so the concept is not protectable.

    Astrobuf

  8. #8
    Iconia Operative
    Member #
    2525
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    140
    Liked
    8 times
    Apple being the darling US technology company has won a court ruling in a US court.

    A bad ruling that was handed down to protect Apple from a competitor that offers much better technology at a much lower cost.

    The real winners are the lawyers that worked the case.

    The real losers are the US consumers, and free trade.

    Next we will ban all imported cars and rule they "slavishly" copied the model A Ford.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Member #
    4654
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Adelaide South Australia
    Posts
    213
    Liked
    16 times

  10. #10
    Iconia Operative
    Member #
    2525
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    140
    Liked
    8 times
    Sanity prevails, a higher court overturns the ruling of the local court. The wording was " the lower court grossly overstepped its rights banning the sale of the Samsung devices.

    Sorry Apple, get back in touch with your lawyers.


 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Remove Ads

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

apple verdict ramifications

Click on a term to search our site for related topics.