![]() The designers and educators said the iPhone's distinctive look drove people to buy it, so a similar-looking Samsung phone could hurt Apple's sales. More than 100 design industry professionals, including well-known fashion names like Calvin Klein and Alexander Wang, signed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Apple. ![]() Other groups supporting Samsung included 50 professors of intellectual-property law, from places like Stanford and Georgetown universities, and digital-rights nonprofits like Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Tech companies that support Samsung include Dell, eBay, Facebook, Google and HP. Who sides with Samsung?ĭozens of legal experts, nonprofit organizations and technology companies filed amicus, or friend of the court, briefs in support of Samsung in January when it was trying to get the Supreme Court to hear its case. The companies also were battling in overseas courts but agreed in August 2014 to settle all litigation outside the US. But Koh put the trial on hold until the Supreme Court reviews the case. In that case, a jury told Samsung to pay Apple $119.6 million for infringing some of its patents, while Apple owed Samsung $158,400 for infringing one of the Korean company's patents.Īnother damages retrial - which would have been the fourth showdown between the companies - was slated to start in late March in San Jose, California. The two companies also battled in April 2014 over newer devices, specifically the Galaxy S3 and iPhone 4S. The 2012 case wasn't the only time Apple accused Samsung of patent infringement. Weren't there some other cases between Apple and Samsung? But it said Samsung didn't provide enough evidence of that during this case. It did admit, in recent court filings, that sometimes a patent holder shouldn't collect profits on an entire product, but instead only on an infringing portion. The company contends that Apple should get profits only from the parts of a smartphone that infringe Apple's patents - the front face and a grid of icons on a user interface - not the profits from the entire phone.Īpple, meanwhile, quotes Congress in saying that "it is the design that sells the article" and, because profits attributable to design are often "not apportionable," it wants the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court ruling. Samsung believes design patents are given too much value when it comes to legal damages. But the Supreme Court is looking only at the second issue: "Where a patented design is applied only to a component of a product, should an award of infringer's profits be limited to profits attributable to that component?" Samsung wanted the court to give guidance on what's covered by design patents (which protect the way an item looks) and also on what damages can be collected. This is what the entire Supreme Court case is about. ![]() The additional $149 million in damages Samsung paid Apple is not at stake. 289) - is being examined in the Supreme Court case. Only $399 million of the $548 million paid to Apple - considered the "additional remedy" amount under Section 289 of the Patent Act of 1952 (35 U.S.C. ![]() Watch this: Jury awards Apple far less than it wanted in Apple v. ![]() In this case, Samsung sold 10.7 million infringing devices, generating $3.5 billion in revenue. That's what Samsung - and other tech companies like Dell and Facebook - want the Supreme Court to change. The amount was based on the total profits Samsung made from its infringing devices. South Korea-based Samsung ultimately paid Apple $548 million in damages in December 2015. How much did Samsung end up paying Apple?ĭistrict Court Judge Lucy Koh, in striking $450.5 million off the original judgment against Samsung, ordered a new trial to begin in November 2013 to recalculate some of the damages in the case. Samsung, which asked for $421 million in its countersuit, didn't get anything. At that time, the jury awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages, much less than the $2.75 billion sought by the Cupertino, California, electronics giant. In August of 2012, a nine-person jury sided with Apple on a majority of its patent infringement claims against Samsung. What was the decision in the original case? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |