Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Fuzzy Mammal
Aug 15, 2001

Lipstick Apathy
when even florian mueller thinks your lawsuit strategy sucks, your strategy sucks. should have spent those tens of millions on lobbying congress instead of lovely lawyers lol

:owned:

quote:

Apple's second California case against Samsung-- filed in 2012, about 10 months after the first Apple v. Samsung complaint--has turned out to be a non-starter. As I predicted in early January based on the official recording of the appellate hearing, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has thrown out the 2014 district court ruling in Apple's favor (which was already a major disappointment for Apple, as Apple got only about 5% of the roughly $2.5 billion it originally wanted).

The Federal Circuit opinion is available here (PDF).

Here's my takeaway:

It's a humiliation for Apple. I'm not happy to say so because I actually think very highly of Apple's in-house and outside counsel. But the outcome (which this decision is, though I guess Apple will petition for a rehearing) couldn't have been worse. Apple has lost its offensive case 100%, but Samsung's symbolic win (over one of two counterclaims) has been upheld.

As a result, Apple will have to pay Samsung a few million dollars in damages and actually a lot more in litigation costs. The Federal Circuit opinion says "costs to Samsung." That could be tens of millions of dollars in the end, depending on whether Apple will suffer the fate of other litigants who have brought claims without merit. Some of the cost reimbursement will then be passed on to Google, which paid for parts of Samsung's defense.

By now, 18 judges in four countries (adding the three members of the Federal Circuit panel to the 15 European judges who ruled on a patent from the same family before) have held that Apple's slide-to-unlock mechanism, however good the idea was from a usability point of view, simply isn't a patentable invention. The only judge among the 19 who ruled on this patent who thought iw as valid: Judge Lucy Koh.

Judge Koh can only hope that Republicans (who may be inclined to oppose her nomination, by a lame-duck failed president, in any event) won't take a close look at her track record in the highest-profile litigation she presided over. That track record is not very good. I don't mean to suggest that the Federal Circuit is always right, and in the injunction context the Federal Circuit presented kind of a moving target, but the fact that she, unlike all of her 18 colleagues who looked at slide-to-unlock, deemed it a valid patent is nothing for her to be proud of. (Of course, the Ninth Circuit doesn't hear patent cases.)

I also believe she handled the situation concerning the '647 patent the very wrong way. After the Federal Circuit affirmed (right before the 2014 trial) Judge Posner's claim construction, it was crystal clear to me that Apple no longer had a case over that patent. I made it very clear at the time. I never understood why Judge Koh didn't throw out that patent, period.

I've said this many times and I'll repeat it here: Apple should finally put an end to this Samsung litigation. The entire "thermonuclear war" on Android was a bad idea. Yes, there was a time when I thought Apple (and others) could win this. At some point, however, I drew the necessary conclusions from what happened (and, even more so, what didn't happen). That "earned" me some conspiracy theories on discussion boards even though I honestly didn't believe in Apple's second California case at the time of the 2014 trial.

cremnob get in here and defend this poo poo

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Satellit3
Oct 21, 2008

You Am I
May 20, 2001

Me @ your poasting

who?

GameCube
Nov 21, 2006

first post in The Yospos Apple Lawsuit Megathread. see y'all on page 69

pram
Jun 10, 2001

As a Millennial I posted:

first post in The Yospos Apple Lawsuit Megathread. see y'all on page 69

where the discussion will have inexplicably turned to the finer details of led lightbulbs, with shagger providing a contrarian opinion about the superiority of incandescent bulbs

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
CFL or sick my dick four ways from friday

Smythe
Oct 12, 2003
Did anyone mention Pittsburgh?

angry_keebler
Jul 16, 2006

In His presence the mountains quake and the hills melt away; the earth trembles and its people are destroyed. Who can stand before His fierce anger?
apple → crapple

samsung → samsdung

Asymmetric POSTer
Aug 17, 2005

Smythe posted:

Did anyone mention Pittsburgh?

pittsburgh is larger than this thread

Sham bam bamina!
Nov 6, 2012

ƨtupid cat
Shittsburgh.

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy

angry_keebler posted:

apple → crapple

samsung → samsdung

youve outdone yourself

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Fuzzy Mammal
Aug 15, 2001

Lipstick Apathy
pity bump

  • Locked thread