[BREAKING] Apple V. Samsung Jury reaches verdict.


Recommended Posts

Indeed. I edited my post (while you were likely typing this one) to state the Samsung HAS brought up the prior art argument using multiple examples, and were denied.

I really think they should have done that before this case though. They had ample opportunity to contest that patent and so has every other company on the face of the earth. But they waited until now while infringing on it, they have no one to blame but themselves in my opinion.

or at least licensed under FRAND terms.

I'm looking silly. Ooohkay. :rolleyes:

Apple offered to license all their patents that were being infringed to Samsung. Samsung refused. I'm sure you're aware of this but you'll probably counter by saying the deal wasn't fair enough to meet FRAND stipulations. Something I disagree with before you ask me for evidence on why I believe their offer was fair it's just my opinion.

The tilt in the George Foreman is a unique feature their competitors don't have. Apples rounded corners were a unique feature their competitors didn't have. I really don't see a difference here. If Samsung believed Apples patent with regards to the rounded corners were invalid they should have contested that in a separate court case way before Apple brought a suit against them. They could have used prior art to invalidate that patent, they didn't do that.

Take it up with Samsung buddy.

Cell phones have had rectangular shapes with rounded corners long before Apple came on the scene. It should not be a patentable idea. Every single cellphone I have ever owned was rectangular with rounded corners. ****, even the Original Motorola Dynatac fits this description.

How could a South Korean company win a court case against an American Company in America with an American Jury on the plaintiff's back step, The conclusion was foregone before the case even started.

The result was not unexpected, but its still wrong.

Cell phones have had rectangular shapes with rounded corners long before Apple came on the scene. It should not be a patentable idea. Every single cellphone I have ever owned was rectangular with rounded corners. ****, even the Original Motorola Dynatac fits this description.

How could a South Korean company win a court case against an American Company in America with an American Jury on the plaintiff's back step, The conclusion was foregone before the case even started.

The result was not unexpected, but its still wrong.

Based on what you just said it sounds like you're saying Samsung was always going to lose regardless because the Jury just wanted the American company to win? - That is a pretty outlandish accusation. But I agree with you that Apple shouldn't have been awarded that patent as there have been many many products with rounded corners long before Apple as a company even existed there has been consumer products with rounded corners. But again, no one contested it, why did they let Apple keep this patent and why did they willfully infringe on it?

In my life I have to abide by laws, I can't just cross the street without using a proper cross walk or I'd be breaking the law. If I don't agree with that law I don't just willfully ignore it and do whatever I want because I know I could get penalized for doing so. The proper way to go about protesting a bad law is by using the court system to change the law, Samsung didn't do that and so I have little sympathy for them. And yes this is an analogy I'm not saying a patent is a law or anything like that.

Please give us just one example where say pinch-to-zoom was implemented before the iPhone came along?

Like it or not, Apple have brought significant innovation to this space in both interaction and industrial design.

If you take a totally unbiased view of this you would know that this is fact! You don't have to like Apple to admit it.

Apple didn't invent pinch-to-zoom or other multi-touch gestures. They either licensed it or bought someone who did it. There is not one inventor of multi-touch gestures and that's the reason Microsoft had it in Surface which was announced after iPhone but shipped before it (IIRC). This is the reason Android didn't have multi-touch in early days (I think 2.1?) because Google knew patents would be a problem.

Cell phones have had rectangular shapes with rounded corners long before Apple came on the scene. It should not be a patentable idea. Every single cellphone I have ever owned was rectangular with rounded corners. ****, even the Original Motorola Dynatac fits this description.

How could a South Korean company win a court case against an American Company in America with an American Jury on the plaintiff's back step, The conclusion was foregone before the case even started.

The result was not unexpected, but its still wrong.

I think rectangle with rounded corner is over-simplification. Apple accused Samsung of trade dress violation again IIRC and can be wrong on this. It was sum of all things Samsung copied not just one or the other.

My hands feel better when holding my sharp-edged Lumia and Xperia phone than they do when holding my iPhone. The former two phones' sharp edges don't poke me at all. Does this count as evidence invalidating the poking claim? If not, then you might begin to understand why the evidence in favor doesn't count as evidence either.

apologies if I got this wrong, but aren't the sides of the Lumia 800/900 rounded? and the Lumia 710 has rounded corners too :)

And while it's not very pronounced, the Xperia S does have rounded corners:

Sony_Xperia_S_on_hand.jpg

My point was in respect to having absolutely pointy corners and sides - the way I read it, you were saying that having a phone with pointed edges somehow feels the same, or better, than a phone with rounded corners/sides. If you were just trying to say that a phone with such pronounced rounded corners as the iPhone doesn't necessarily feel better in the hand than something with less-rounded corners, then I apologize for reading your comment wrong.

Because it doesn't naturally follow that a phone with rounded corners is easier to hold. That's why you need evidence.

I'm certainly not against evidence (and I'll admit I definitely haven't seen a study saying that people prefer rounded corners over pointy ones), but just building off of past experiences I'm trying to make a point that is reasonably correct for the majority of people.

I can also say that phones with rounded corners are more difficult to hold and declare it as unassailable fact without evidence, too, but I'm not going to because such a line of argument is nonsensical.

and I could say that people prefer to eat chocolate cake over broccoli. It's definitely not true for everyone - I'm sure there are many people in the world who would prefer broccoli - but it's a well-accepted fact that a majority of people prefer the taste of chocolate over the taste of broccoli.

If I stick you with the pointy end of a knife you'd feel worse than if I threw a ball at you. People simply prefer smooth surfaces over pointy ones because over our evolution we've somehow figured out that pointy objects + skin (more often than not) = pain.

IMO, you don't understand how logic works.

Live long and prosper, my friend :laugh:

This is a sad day for tech

It will be interesting to see what happens going forward, especially considering google provided some of the patents to assist Samsung in refuting Apples argument. I dont see google allowing it to die away and leave Samsung on its own.

The fight cannot be over

I think the appeal will be more interesting and hopefully Samsung will get better legal representation and they will prevail.

Apple is nothing more than an anti-competitive patent bully with tenuous at best ability to assert its so called patents

Seriously the jury should hang its head in shame on this one, an absolute travesty

Just reinforced my stance on never buying Apple anything, i dont want those ******** getting a cent from me.

Personally ill be happy when Apple and all its sheep customers are banished form this earth.

To be honest I think the outcome of this might actually be productive. Samsung is a great company and I own many of their products, but their phones were clearly trying to emulate the iPhone. MS managed to do something different (not my cup of tea but it looks nothing like the iPhone which is good), Samsung has some great people working for them and I know they can do better.

Maybe they'll turn things around completely and to be honest if they come out with something completely innovative, I would consider buying a phone from them.

Countersuing a patent troll and forcing them to settle under reasonable terms - as opposed to $30-40 per device - has proven to be a very good way of protecting consumer choice and innovation. I don't see any hypocrisy here, sorry.

Yeah, that'll solve everything... :rolleyes:

<pic>

Hadn't seen that one. Pretty sexy if I do say so myself. :o

Great take.. was anyone surprised that California jury would rule anything against Apple?

The jury's quick decision ? just two days of deliberations in an immensely complex case, with more than 100 pages of instructions from the judge ? surely means the panel members had made up their minds in the courtroom and spent most of their time in the jury room filling out a 20-page form of checkboxes and granular detail. And on almost every point that mattered, they gave Apple what it wanted. The jury tossed out virtually all of Samsung's counter-claims against Apple for infringement on its own patents, and awarded no damages to Samsung.

Crucially, the jury found none of Apple's patents invalid, despite substantial evidence that others anticipated many of the innovations that Apple put together when it released its first iPhone. This is a shame, because Apple's abuse of our out-of-control patent system has given Apple its chief ammunition in its global campaign to destroy Google's Android operating system, which Samsung (and many others) adopted for its smart phones.

The California jury's decision came a day after three Korean judges handed down a mixed decision in a similar case, saying both companies had violated some patents and ordering several products ? mostly older ones that barely figure in today's market ? off store shelves.

Now, I'm not a fan of Samsung. Like so many others in the technology world, it has has behaved in ethically questionable ways. And it quite plainly did mimic much of the functionality of the iPhone ? though it was Apple's longtime CEO, Steve Jobs, who famously quoted Picasso's adage that good artists copy and great artists steal.

But in recent years, I have become even less a fan of Apple. It is now the uber-bully of the technology industry, and is using its surging authority ? and vast amounts of cash ? in ways that are designed to lock down our future computing and communications in the newest frontier of smart phones and tablets.

In the end, Apple will settle for nothing less than outright capitulation by Samsung ? and, by extension, other Android device makers ? in what Jobs called a "thermonuclear war", which he planned, before his death, to wage on Android. If Apple is successful, either all Android manufacturers will pay Apple a license fee, or Apple will simply make it too expensive, via lawsuits, for other phone makers to compete. And if that happens, Apple's financial dominance in smart phones (Android leads in overall numbers of units sold) and overwhelming dominance in the tablet market could be insurmountable. Users of technology should worry about that scenario, for many reasons.

http://www.guardian....tech-domination

According to you I need evidence that things without rounded corners can stick you. I think you need to do some homework on that one yourself as you looked pretty silly saying that.

Really doesnt pay to argue with that guy. According to him, I am not allow to voice my opinion about anything.

Still think the jury decision was a quick one considering the trial lasted for a few weeks. Not the only one who thinks so but hey, I am sure Samsung will appeal and they will straighten things out.

Kinda bored of Samsung to be honest. Waiting for Google to announce and confirm the next Nexus line of phones.

In the end, Apple will settle for nothing less than outright capitulation by Samsung ? and, by extension, other Android device makers ? in what Jobs called a "thermonuclear war", which he planned, before his death, to wage on Android. If Apple is successful, either all Android manufacturers will pay Apple a license fee, or Apple will simply make it too expensive, via lawsuits, for other phone makers to compete. And if that happens, Apple's financial dominance in smart phones (Android leads in overall numbers of units sold) and overwhelming dominance in the tablet market could be insurmountable. Users of technology should worry about that scenario, for many reasons.

Going to get worse before it gets better. If Apple starts to aggressively go after other companies, just proves, IMO, they are out to sue the competition rather than compete. There is an Acer phone that looks similar as well as another company (cannot remember the name). So we shall see what happens with them.

Yes, it was obvious what Samsung did but they also had a good case. I find it "odd" that Apple wins most of its arguments while Samsung didnt win one thing. But oh well, life goes on and Apple cannot stop Android...maybe slow it a little but it isnt going anywhere

Wow what a shocker..and these guys are deciding the future of technology/smartphone/tablet industry? Holy smokes.

How qualified is the Apple-Samsung jury? We found out

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57499944-37/how-qualified-is-the-apple-samsung-jury-we-found-out/

It's kinda funny, while Apple have been busy trying to destroy Android they are completely forgetting Microsoft. When Apple make it too expensive to make Android phones, who do you think they'll [OEMs] jump ship too (or in the case of the OEMs already supporting multiple OSs, shift their focus too)? Windows Phone! Microsoft will rise as a serious force to be reckoned with. Not to mention Apple will have no chance of suing MS off the market and will be forced to compete with WP directly. Good luck Apple, enjoy your little victory. You might of won the battle but the war isn't over yet ;)

When Apple make it too expensive to make Android phones, who do you think they'll [OEMs] jump ship too (or in the case of the OEMs already supporting multiple OSs, shift their focus too)?

To expensive to make an android phone? Not going to happen. There are other companies other than Samsung that make android devices. Apple is not going to stop Android.

To expensive to make an android phone? Not going to happen. There are other companies other than Samsung that make android devices. Apple is not going to stop Android.

This ruling doesn't just affect Samsung though, it's a precedent that if successful will allow Apple to go forward and start suing other Android OEMs. Don't think for a minute Apple is going to stop at Samsung, this is just the opening battle of a much larger war...

This ruling doesn't just affect Samsung though, it's a precedent that if successful will allow Apple to go forward and start suing other Android OEMs. Don't think for a minute Apple is going to stop at Samsung, this is just the opening battle of a much larger war...

Which I have said a few times myself in this thread. Apple will go after other Manufactures and will just prove they are out to sue than compete. They only went after Samsung because they are the number one Android maker. The ONLY reason Apple won this case is because they patent EVERYTHING. We are going to see much more patent trolling from Apple and others now because Apple winning the case, shows others that patent trolling works and you can profit from it. I agree some things need to be protected, but some of the things that were sued over were silly and never should of happened.

Glad this kind of BS doesnt happen with other products. I am sure it happens on some level, but not to the extent of Apple/Samsung.

Which I have said a few times myself in this thread. Apple will go after other Manufactures and will just prove they are out to sue than compete. They only went after Samsung because they are the number one Android maker.

I agree with you. Apple can't handle competition.

Apple hired the guy who invented the Palm webos notification system.

And? The Palm notification system is different that the one Google implemented and then later Apple copied. Shouldnt say copied because according to Apple, they dont steal/copy...they innovate.

Companies take ideas from others, Samsung went to the extreme. But thats what all companies do...anyone is a fool to think otherwise.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. They are seeking a better life too. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!