3 replies to this topic

[+techbeck]

Quote

Tonight one of the big outstanding issues in the Apple vs. Samsung case came to a close when Judge Lucy Koh ruledthat Samsung's infringement of Apple patents was not in fact willful. At issue are the seven design and utility patents that the jury found Samsung had infringed in a $1.049 billion win for Apple last August. The jury had decided that Samsung's infringement in five of the instances had in fact been willful — a finding that could have led to a ballooning of the damages Samsung would be instructed to pay. As part of the post-verdict proceedings, Samsung's legal team asked Koh to consider whether this should be challenged. Judge Koh agreed.

As Koh writes in the ruling, for an ultimate finding of willfulness to hold, not only would the jury need to find that the infringement was willful, but Apple also needed to prove that there was an "objectively high likelihood that its [Samsung's] actions constituted infringement of a valid patent.”
Developing...

http://www.theverge....tents-willfully

Good, Apple already won big time being as they are, wanted more and more.

[redvamp128]

I am Not trying to start a "flame war" merely a general question. (since I have not really followed this much)

http://www.foxnews.c...atent-rejected/


http://www.newser.co...thrown-out.html

I thought after the Pinch To zoom Patent was thrown out - that this judge would have to lower the total damages since some of those rulings were based upon that infringement (not all of them but some).

And after looking at the prior art - it also appears as scrolling through a timeline or document is covered in it as well.\
As well as "end of scroll notification effect"

http://www.google.co...epage&q&f=false

Or will Samsung have to refile for that motion?

[(Spork)]

going to get a chair

[Growled]

Good for Samsung. They need to catch a break here.