Samsung VS Apple: Retrial request denied!

Here’s a story we haven’t covered for a while. We almost forgot it had even happened in the first place it’s been that long! But the Apple VS Samsung legal wrangling is once again in the news.

The latest development is that the judge presiding over the case, Lucy Koh, has denied Samsung’s request for a retrial, stating that:

A new trial would be contrary to the interests of justice.

So as far as the justice system is concerned, in Koh’s eyes at least, Apple and Samsung have done nothing wrong. Well, Samsung did. Koh mentioned the fine of $1 billion, saying that “the trial was fairly conducted, with uniform time limits and rules of evidence applied to both sides.” So it doesn’t look like Samsung are going to get the reduction they were hoping for (and wanted).

The one position for Samsung is that, contrary to what Apple accused them of doing, Koh agreed that Samsung didn’t wilfully infringe on Apple’s patents. While it’s good for Samsung to hear, it doesn’t soften the blow that the fine was fair in the eyes of justice.

It’s expected that both Apple and Samsung will both appeal different parts of the verdict, with both parties having appeals already in motion.

You can read a full copy of the verdict, if you have the stomach for all the legal jargon, here.

Source: AllthingsD | Image courtesy of Cult of Mac

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Ballmer calls Dropbox a "little startup"; won't comment on Office for iPad

Next Story

ZTE teases Firefox OS phone, reveals 5.7-inch Grand Memo phablet

36 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I'd like to see all the big players sign on to a 'standard essential patents' type agreement like Google was forced to do in their FTC case http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/12/ but that's probably not realistic. It's really just going to come down to duking it out in court unfortunately which will waste a lot of time and money in the process. I found some interesting info about Intellectual Property law on http://trademarkshop.ca for anyone that's interested.

So let me understand this, she says Samsung didn't willfully infringe Apple but because of how the trail proceeded that justifies the full 1 Bil judgement?!

Kalint said,
So let me understand this, she says Samsung didn't willfully infringe Apple but because of how the trail proceeded that justifies the full 1 Bil judgement?!

If you hit someone with your car you will pay damages even if you did not intend to harm that person; there are differences between criminals and civil courts.

Fritzly said,

If you hit someone with your car you will pay damages even if you did not intend to harm that person; there are differences between criminals and civil courts.

ah good point.

Who cares. Samsung, pay the fine as we know you can afford it and looks like with Apple stocks, Apple could use the extra cash. And Apple, stop bitching and wining and accept that you won and are getting paid. Time to move on for BOTH companies and give the public a break from reading some new fight going on between the two companies.

Torolol, they raised the price becuase they had to, you cant set an agreement for say a 5 to 10 year deal and lock yourself into a particular price becuase if your costs go up you need the price of the components to go up to otherwise your losing out. Apple crap is so over priced anyway they could of easily soaked it up but cus there so greedy and only think about profits they would of raised the prices of there stuff.

My mate had a galaxy s2 and hes gone for a lumia 800 same as mine (lucky git got the 7.8 update on it cus it ships with it, still waiting for my update though ). hes loving it so far

Bias in what direction? There's been accusations from both camps. I saw another commenter raising a good point there: If both sides think she's biased, she's doing a good job.

Apple fans think she's biased for not tripling the fine due to willful infringement.

Windows fans think she's biased for having Samsung pay for "rounded corners".

Samsung did retaliates by rising the price for parts they manufactures for Apple.
Some of those parts were exclusive, nobody else made'em.

As Apple rising the product price to compensate, Microsoft should've use that to introduce the surface with lower price to grab more market shares.

But no, some genius in M$ claim its better to roll the Surface at Premium Prices ....
Seriously M$ please stop copying Apple bussines model.

Samsung and Apple have contracts, trust me, no prices were just raised as a reaction to the trial.

Samsung makes more PROFIT from their sales to Apple, than the whole payout.. they aren't gonna start burning bridges..

wasn't some of the patents they where convicted of using ruled invalid recently? Shouldn't that be enough for a retrial?

If you can't prove the patent is invalid during trial, then it's not invalid. At least not till it is invalidated by someone else..

Samsung couldn't prove they weren't valid patents to the Jury, and no one has been able to invalidate them since, so they are SOL.

Ryoken said,
If you can't prove the patent is invalid during trial, then it's not invalid. At least not till it is invalidated by someone else..

Samsung couldn't prove they weren't valid patents to the Jury, and no one has been able to invalidate them since, so they are SOL.

but the USPTO did say some of Apples patents where invalid after this ruleing... some of the same ones Samsung was convicted on... I know the rubber banding patent was definatly declared invalid by the USPTO...

They can still take it to a higher court though? Somehow I don't see how a $1 billion fine is going to stick unless it goes through the Supreme Court.
If I understand how the $1 billion figure was derived, basically it is done on the whim of a Juror of what they think is fair (with no upper bounds)?

I think that the judge denied the retrial because she couldn't be bothered re-trialing it herself, and the judgement is still technically valid even if extraordinary.

It's a demented legal system founded upon American values of freedom, freedom to sue anyone for anything all the way to hell!