GodMark2
Master Poster
No, Samsumg won.
This trial result reinforces my firm commitment to never buy an Apple product.
Ever.
Though I doubt you were ever going to rush into an Apple Store regardless of the outcome here.
Real questions: Do you buy products that copy Apple's designs? Should there be any limit at all on the freedom to copy successful designs? And if not, would that serve to stifle innovation?
There's another Apple vs Samsung court decision from the last day or so. This one in South Korea. The ruling was that Apple and Samsung both infringed each other's patents on mobile devices. Apple had infringed two patents held by Samsung, and Samsung violated one of Apple's: the bounce-back function.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875
Correct, which is why I said "reinforces my firm commitment".
Answers:
I don't buy products that copy Apple designs in form: no iPad "look-alikes", etc.
...snip...
However, I do own two Android based devices....I don't know if they contain features or functions that would be considered in a case such as this to be copies or not.
Question:
What should be considered a design?
Was Steve Jobs prescient or what???
[qimg]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8428/7856416724_4b4a9771d9_z.jpg[/qimg]
His comment?
"And, boy, have we patented it!"
It really hard to argue that Samsung owes nothing to Apple's innovation - I guess the question is how much?
The "bounce back" was one of the elements at the start of thread that I thought was a valid complaint from Apple in regards to the allegations that Samsung was copying something unique to Apple. (Granted the "prior art" that came out in the trial changed my mind about that being a valid patent.)
The jury's decision cannot be questioned. As I understand it, only matters of law or matters of redress may be.
And I can't see any reason they should be questioned. Apple had valid patents, enforced them, and won.
UPDATE (7:04 PM): Here’s the thing, ladies and gentlemen of the Apple v. Samsung jury: It would take me more than three days to understand all the terms in the verdict! Much less come to a legally binding decision on all of these separate issues. Did you guys just flip a coin?
Apple said they owned patents, but we were debating about the prior art [about the same technology that Samsung said existed before the iPhone debuted]. [Velvin Hogan] was jury foreman. He had experience. He owned patents himself. In the beginning the debate was heated, but it was still civil. Hogan holds patents, so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier. After we debated that first patent -- what was prior art --because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art, that there wasn't something out there before Apple.
"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down." ...
"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."
The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer.
What a jury SAYS is never considered.
I'm sorry, but i don't get what you try to say here. If what a jury says is never considered, then why have a jury at all?
...snip...
Seriously, i can't see how that jury's ruling can hold up. This thing has "mistrial" written all over it.
Greetings,
Chris