Quantcast

Half of $1B Apple awarded from Samsung invalidated



Samsung Electronics’ Galaxy S III, right, and Apple’s iPhone 4S are displayed at a mobile phone shop in Seoul, South Korea, Friday, Aug. 24, 2012. South Korea’s Samsung won a home court ruling in its global smartphone battle against Apple on Friday when Seoul judges said the company didn’t copy the look and feel of the U.S. company’s iPhone, and that Apple infringed on Samsung’s wireless technology. However, in a split decision on patents, the panel also said Samsung violated Apple technology behind the bounce-back feature when scrolling on touch screens, and ordered both sides to pay limited damages. AP/Ahn Young-joon

SAN JOSE, California— A U.S. judge is erasing nearly half of the $1 billion in damages that a jury decided Samsung Electronics should pay Apple in a high-profile trial over the smartphone and tablet computer patents.

In an order issued Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh lowered the damages awarded to Apple Inc. by $450.5 million. The ruling reduces Samsung Electronics’ bill to just under $599 million.

Koh also ordered a new trial on Apple’s allegations that Samsung stole its ideas for more than a dozen different smartphones and tablet computers.

The judge says the jury had made several mistakes in its deliberations.








Recent Stories:

It’s both head and heart for Christina Perri 10 mins elapsed Estrada: Past ‘inefficient governance made Manila the gates of hell’ 17 mins elapsed Giselle Toengi is new host, producer of Los Angeles TV talk show 39 mins elapsed Aquino defends DAP, assails judiciary’s cross-border transfers 40 mins elapsed UN chief believes Gaza fighting will end soon 41 mins elapsed Bb Pilipinas USA ’14 more eventful than expected 48 mins elapsed Arroyo’s PCSO plunder case hearing canceled 58 mins elapsed Banig’s comeback heats up iconic Grammy Museum 1 hour elapsed
Complete stories on our Digital Edition newsstand for tablets, netbooks and mobile phones; 14-issue free trial. About to step out? Get breaking alerts on your mobile.phone. Text ON INQ BREAKING to 4467, for Globe, Smart and Sun subscribers in the Philippines.

  • glances2

    It seems only in the phone sector that copyright suits are thriving. I have yet to read Toyota and Mitsubishi suing Hyundai, Kia, or Daewoo for copying certain features of their cars, which they do unabashingly . . .

  • Iggy Ramirez

    It’s clear that Samsung copied everything what Apple had. Only a stupid person would not see it.

    Apple spent a fortune on research. Samsung doesn’t have to do that. All they need to do is copy and just pay the corresponding penalty. It’s much cheaper that way. Sometimes, if luck (read: buy judges) goes their way, they can even get away with it.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TSX56EQOQIJQWG42MHQLSZOPXI Flugie

      Just curious. Do you have factual proof – beyond reasonable doubt – that all Samsung does is copy, does not spend a fortune on research and all Apple does is innovate?

      I’m a long time Apple user (started programming using the Apple II, use Apple products) but if there is a number one copy cat in the IT industry, it’s Apple. It has been “copying” ideas for decades. They didn’t come up with the very 1st GUI interface in the 80s  – they copied the idea from Xerox at Palo Alto. Same with the mouse. Apple doesn’t even own the rights to the name iPhone in some countries
      even yet they try to bully companies to drop rights to the iPhone name.  Apple does have brilliant engineers but most of what they do is copy what is out there and improve it, which is good (making improvements). This has long been proven and people who have been in the IT industry as long as I am know that this is a “fact” but Apple gets away with it in the US. Now that one company (Samsung) has the money to match Apple cent per cent and is trying to beat Apple at it’s own game, they (Apple) cry wolf. Fair play. Apple does it so why can’t Samsung?

      Apple’s approach to patenting (shapes and colors) is also questionable.

      But I get your passion for Apple. Either you are an Apple employee or a die-hard fanboi (no disrespect intended). I love Apple products. They are elegant and simple to use. Lasts long too but I am with Samsung on this battle.

      • rouelcalzita

        For your information Xerox received royalties on his patent.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TSX56EQOQIJQWG42MHQLSZOPXI Flugie

        Of course they did but after they complained. You are preaching to the choir here. =)

      • Iggy Ramirez

        I don’t even own one of these brands because they don’t really serve my needs. If I need to call or text, I use the trusty old phone. If I want to surf the net, I use the trusty old pc. If I wanna play game, I use PS3 or the PC.

        But not using something does not necessarily make you ignorant about what’s happening around you. The same is true for the converse. Owning something does not necessarily make you aware of everything about what you own.

        I know that Apple is not a constant innovator. Much of what you’ve said is true. But the look and feel of their phone have been honed all through the years of improvement. Then here comes Samsung out of the blue, with lots of money to boast at that, selling cheaper phones with the “look and feel” of the iphone.

        It’s obvious that you like Samsung so much (what’s not to like? They give you a phone that looks and feels like an iphone, only that it’s affordable)

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TSX56EQOQIJQWG42MHQLSZOPXI Flugie

        “It’s obvious that you like Samsung so much (what’s not to like? They
        give you a phone that looks and feels like an iphone, only that it’s
        affordable)’

        I just said that I am an Apple user but I do have an office-issued Samsung phone  =)

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/TV-Shows-Online/433998430000984 Angel Divera

    Apple the patent troll of the world. Little they know because of this SamSung gained fame and their market share on phones are increasing.

  • gilbs72

    I’d commend Samsung if only for bringing to light the stupidity of patent laws… patenting shapes IS stupid and laws should be changed. It benefits no one, and only limits tech companies’ desire to innovate – for fear that they’d be stepping on everyone else’s patents. Imagine a world where almost all functions, shapes and colors are patented by someone?!! Progress will stop. Efforts and resources move away from innovation and into litigation. We’ll see judge and jury waste their time (and our taxes) examining cellphone icons and deciding if they were copies!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/FWD5IDZT7SXOEHKLE3O7CGFOAE Bright

      a world without patents is a world of fakes.. innovation is good.. you get paid for innovation.. 

    • rouelcalzita

      If you had copied something patented, you have to give royalties to holder of a patent.



Copyright © 2014, .
To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.
Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:
c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement
Marketplace