dslreports logo

story category
Judge Keeps Apple's Samsung Award At $1 Billion
Denies Both Companies Request for New Trials
by Karl Bode 06:21PM Wednesday Jan 30 2013
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose has denied Apple's request for three times the $1 billion awarded last August. Koh's ruling this week largely left that settlement intact, denying both companies' requests for new trials. In rejecting Apple's request for a new trial and extended damages, Koh ruled that Samsung's infringement of Apple products was not "willful," though the company did violate Apple's intellectual property. "Given that Apple has not clearly shown how it has in fact been undercompensated for the losses it has suffered due to Samsung’s dilution of its trade dress, this Court, in its discretion, does not find a damages enhancement to be appropriate," Judge Koh wrote.

66 comments .. click to read

Recommended comments

Valencia, CA
·Time Warner Cable

2 recommendations

reply to Happydude32

Re: Android is very similar to iOS.

said by Happydude32:

Which platform had key functionalities like voice to text, copy/paste and MMS first?

Symbian? Windows Mobile?

When I think of what made iPhone revolutionary, the "key feature" was a truly usable mobile browser with intuitive pinch-zoom gestures that updated fluidly, and that it was a touch-screen device that didn't require a stylus. Compared to everything I used before it, it was also tremendously scratch resistant.

If you're looking at features like MMS, voice-to-text, and copy/paste, you're completely forgetting what made the iPhone so revolutionary. We had those things before iPhone or Android.

All this said, modern Android has surpassed iOS in plenty of ways, and that's a great thing.
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.

Go Colts
Fort Wayne, IN

2 recommendations

reply to IowaCowboy
said by IowaCowboy:

iPhone was on the market first and Android seems to be a duplicate of iOS.

What does first to the market have anything to do with this?

Android was released due to the fact AT&T had the iPhone by the calls.

Android, Inc. was bought by Google in 2005, 2 years prior to the iPhone reaching market. At that time, Android, Inc had been around already for 2 years. That puts both the iPhone and Android as originating around the same time and at least 4 years before either had anything to market.

People wanted iPhones but refused to do business with AT&T so Google and Verizon released the Droids,

Which is obviously untrue since the first Android phone was the HTC Dream aka Google G1 on T-Mobile, neither a "Droid" phone by Motorola nor on Verizon. The Motorola Cliq and MyTouch 3G were also available on T-Mobile at the same time or prior to the Droid launch, as well as the Samsung Moment and HTC Hero on Sprint. That pretty much shot down your idea that Android was developed to counter iPhones on Apple.

I had an Android device and it seemed very similar to iPhone. I went back to iPhone after a few months.

So what, every single smartphone must be a derivative of an iPhone? I guess that my HTC Wizard, which predated the iPhone by several years and had rounded corners, a large touch screen, icons, and could do things like play games, keep schedules, browse the internet, and make calls must infringe too.

It wasn't until relatively recently that Apple v. everyone not Apple got into pissing matches about design and utility patents. And there is definitely similarities between some iPhone models and Android models (not to mention non-Android phones). But just because they are similar doesn't mean they are derived from, or infringing of.

If you've operated both an Android and an iOS device, they seem very similar to look and feel in terms of operation. In terms of IP litigation, Apple was first so they win.

Win what? An illogical argument with some facts that aren't true and others that don't really matter?