Apple, Samsung patent judge: 'I feel like I'm in Groundhog Day here' Samsung tried its very hardest to argue for a retrial in a hearing with Apple yesterday, as the fruity firm pushed for additional damages on top of the $1bn it already won. The hearing was ostensibly to discuss permanent bans on sales of Samsung products that a jury decided infringed Apple patents, but the South Korean firm's …
Even just looking at the jury foreman produces enough material to get it dismissed without referring to the issue of his failing to declare a previous interest.
Just look at some of his press statements:
The highlight of my career
Prior art doesn't count as it doesn't run on the same hardware
I told them what to say as they didn't understand the issues
and so on, how Samsungs lawyers haven't managed to get it declared a mistrial yet I don't know.
Get the feeling the Judge is also part of the problem. Fair enough warn them that negotiating is better than going to trial, but as its painfully obvious the two sides will never agree, just get on with it. Boot her out, get another person in and get on with round 2.
I want my popcorn icon
I was thinking the same thing and also wondering if it would play out the same way if it were in the UK.
I can't help but feel that Judge Koh is a bit self serving, she seems to me to be complaining about what is in effect due process and having to do what she's employed to do.
The way that it's all played out in the courts and the media in the US makes the whole thing a bit of a freak show which is gathering attention seeking legal people, and probably turning people who may once have been not interested in attention around, once there's a little bit of hype people start to believe their own press and seem to crave more of the same and adjust their behaviour to accumulate attention.
Sure, she can seem to be complaining about due process, but she is urging Apple to settle with Samsung "saying it would be good for customers and the industry". Which it will be because they can both get back to innovating, something Apple actually seems to NOT to be doing, while it tries to keep Samsung from doing business. Samsung crows that they're all for that, so it seems to be Apple digging in their heels so that they can extract their "pound of flesh" to teach the world a lesson.
"Stealing is wronng," whined Tim Cook, who's company has since been found guilty of usurping IP of a Swiss photographer and the Swiss railways, as well as that of VirtnetX...
Surely a secret agreement behind closed doors between these two is the last thing the world wants or needs.
The issues are important and should be decided in law. Yes I know you are going to whine about money going to lawyers, but nevertheless there should be a clear and legal decision, not one based on not paying lawyers.
Does the judge have any power to tell the squabbling parties that the case is over and they should go forth and multiply? Apple vs Samsung is getting to be like a cross between the cases of Tweedledum and Tweedledee, and Jarndyce vs Jarndyce. It's something of an open secret that the main purpose of patent litigation like this is to slow the competition down with a protracted and very expensive process rather than the actual outcome.
Honestly the jury shouldn't have been in charge of how much should be awarded for damages. They should have decided which patents were infringed upon, and which phones infringed with the damages calculated afterwards based on those figures, a % of earnings per patent infringed with a maximum of 20% (or something) That way we'd know at least that the damages were fair.
At a guess it's for reasons such as:
As a phone company, I prefer Samsung as they ship Android as their OS which as an operator, I can then customise with all of my own junk, helping to lock customers into my network. Apple on the other hand supply a closed OS that is the same on every other network.
Although I do agree that there needs to be some kind of tech knowledge involved to avoid the whole jury listening to one man with motives. Perhaps a jury of retired tech's from small unknown companies who've probably gone belly up by now.
"She urged the companies again to settle, saying it would be good for customers and the industry if they did."
It would be good for customers and the industry to throw this out of court (as done in the UK and elsewhere).
If APPL can get a billion for double clicks and rounded rectangles, they're not going to accept a small amount as a settlement. And, never mind not being fair to Samsung, if they were to settle for a huge amount (or any non-trivial amount), this would neither be good for customers (higher prices, less choice) or the industry (they'd be going after everyone else, too).
Get the Apple and Samsung top brass together. Add their respective legal teams.
Put them all in a large sack.
Charge the public USA$5 to beat the sack with a stick until they are exhausted.
You'll always hit the guilty party, the obese USA-ians will get some much needed exercise and you'll raise some money to boot (donate that to charity).
> Only morons resort to physical violence. I always thought better of The Register's readership.
OK, then ...
- Put them all in a large sack.
- Build a robot with that is able to beat the sack with the stick.
- Give the robot a vaguely sexist acronym and allow it to beat the sack until it is exhausted.
Better?
> The problem with "do your own thing" is that Apple have patents on obvious stupid stuff and will still sue you.
This is exactly what the problem is here.
This court case is about two companies wanting the other to just disappear. No-one can win a dispute like that. It's no better than getting two bickering school kids to shake and "make up". It might make the teacher feel good, but at the end of the day the kids still hate each other and they'll take it outside the school yard later on.
There is nothing in it for either side to make up, particularly for Samsung because a settled court case will not actually solve anything for them. Apple will just go after them for something else ad infinitum.
The big issue is whether the design patents are valid or not, as the USPO seems to go by the theory of awarding any patent applied for then letting it be tested in the courts. The key word from your post is innovative, most of these design patents are obvious and have prior art and therefore shouldn't have been awarded in the first place. The problem in this particular court case was that the jury allowed themselves to be guided by a member of that jury who acted in a way that broke the rules and had a personal agenda.
I did start typing an analogy from a very different area (not cars for a change!) but decided it was a waste of time as you clearly haven't read all the comments on previous articles on this subject and just parrot "Apple have a patent" ignoring the validity or not of that patent.
* Note I am not a fan of either company. I own an iPOD, I have some other Samsung household devices, and I don't have a smartphone.
This post has been deleted by its author
Why is Samsung still pushing this 20 year old conflict with the foreman, if anything THEY were the ones who knew about it since it was Samsung who were directly involved in that deal. It makes it seem a lot like it was Samsung who kept that fact hidden as an option to declare a mistrial, the judge should pick up on that.
They should just settle like HTC did, they've even seen that settlement agreement in full now.. Guess the only catch is it doesn't let them copy Apple's designs.
<<They should just settle like HTC did, they've even seen that settlement agreement in full now.. Guess the only catch is it doesn't let them copy Apple's designs>>
Oh, and HTC androids look radically different to Apple and Samsung don't they? Don't they?!?
effin' rounded corners, better take a look at HTC Desire, and just about every other phone if you think that's valid, as well as the laptop I'm typing this on.
As for the foreman, if you went for a job interview and started raving about all this experience that was valuable, but had neglected to put it on your CV, would you expect the boss to be a bit curious as to your motives? He failed to tell the judge, but used it as leverage to the rest of the jury as a reason to follow his lead, which is a dubious strategy at best.
HTC phones do look different from Apple ones and you can tell them easily, I own an HTC HD2. The Samsung S2 wasa rip off of the iPhone4 and you have to be blind to not notice that.
Strangly enough the s3 Looks nothing like the iPhone5 nothing like a lwasuit , to make people actualy get off thier arses and design their own stuff for a change!
Like him acting as technical advisor to the rest of the jury, and his understanding of prior art being fundamentally flawed.
Surely this makes HIM (and him alone) judge, jury and executioner, and it was never a trial by jury, but a trial by a single juror, one that had previous grievance with Samsung, and didn't understand fundamental legal and technical terminology...
Sounds like she's trying to overcompensate for being of the same descent as Samsung. We understand,but Apple has used this to their advantage too long. And to the detriment of the industry. The behind the scenes shenanigans Apple pulls, makes those in the know, avoid Apple's products.
Apple should be known as the Teflon Company.
Christmas sales season.
And with the profits accumulated, they are making hay. And all the models complained of by Apple are in a past catalogue.
Could it be the Courts are getting tired of all these patent claims and will simply give them short shrift as some judges have done already?
Perhaps 'cool' evaluations, as awarded in the UK, will keep Apple happy?
Being a professional in the tech industry (and I am one as well) does not make you (or I) in any way more knowledgeable on the law than a judge sitting in a Californian court. And court cases are about the legality or otherwise of the behaviour of the parties involved in the litigation.
There is some possibility that some of the commentards actually know something about technology, but it is very difficult to spot in the barrage of puerile nonsense that is written here. It is also possible that some of them might know more about smartphones than the judge. But the problem with that is, that the commentards apparently think that their knowledge is somehow unique and relevant. It's not. IT generally is an astoundingly trivial and simple subject area populated by an astounding number of simple minded people capable of pushing a set of buttons in the correct sequence with egos far bigger than their intellect can support. This forum is full of them. You, Corinne, demonstrate here that you among that group.
@LPF - Exactly that...
@Corinne - hmmm yeah right, sure, some do, the majority seem to have an eq level of a 4 year old. Just start your sentence with Ap...and they flock to the thread with negative comments. But besides that, none of them on this these pages, myself included, have access to the real details in the case. Like yourself with the conclusion that the forman has influenced the others...Sorry but that is just a theory and I'd rather leave it to the courts to decide on the facts opposed to some people on here speculating and mistaking to take their own baseless opinions for facts.
Actually the foreman himself announced to the press the details of how he influenced the rest of the jury, he seemed quite proud of himself for managing that.
Regarding your comment "Just start your sentence with Ap...and they flock to the thread with negative comments", there's also people like you who flock to the thread with defensive comments whatever the evidence. I came into the subject neutral with NO axe to grind, I'm not an Apple "fan" nor an Android/Samsung fan, but not only the facts of the case as published internationally but also the attitude of some of the commentators has driven me to conclude that Apple is royally taking the piss with their design pATENTS.
And whipped my plonker out and aimed then listened to the splashing noise for guidance. There was the sound of tutting in the dark background and being disturbed I missed and hit the seat. They sniggered.
Picking up the toilet roll and using touchy feely gestures I noted the previous user had left the plies out of synch so, going for a clean tear, I unwound the first ply and used it to mop up and then proceeded to....
At this point the bathroom was flooded by arc-lamps and they screamed.
'We've got patents on that!!!!'
1. The chance of Apple getting an injunction is falling; the Judge made a point of noting that the iPhone 3 and 3GS are no longer on sale, so there's no need to "protect" them with an injunction.
2. The judge suggested she was inclined to invalidate one of the patents.
3. The judge made it clear she agreed that some of the jury's "calculations" for damages were totally bogus.
4. The judge knows damn well that no matter what, UNLESS they settle, then some or all of the issues will go to appeal, so why should she spend too much time on them?
Predictions:
a) no injunctions are needed.
b) a new trial for damages (only) is more likely than a full retrial.
c) Judge Koh may try to orchestrate a reduction in damages to something low enough that Samsung will pay up rather than fight an appeal.
d) Samsung may still fight the appeal because the patents in question are too vague/indefinite/broad/obvious.
Perhaps the US patent office should declare no future patents since EVERYTHING has been invented and patented already.
Stop all innovation and competition, it's wasting the courts time.
Stop any new companies coming into any market, they are harming established companies.
Stop anyone having a free thought since that thought probably belongs to a large tech company or a patent troll..... there we go, fixed it all up.... now stop thinking and go and buy an [ insert officially approved handset for your country ] you worthless consumer.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
