U.S. Supreme Court rules for Samsung in fight with Apple

NEW YORK - The Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with Samsung in its big-money smartphone patent fight with Apple, throwing out an appeals court ruling that said the South Korean company had to pay a $399 million penalty to its American rival for copying key iPhone designs.

The justices in their 8-0 ruling sent the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.

The decision gives Samsung another chance to try to get back a big chunk of the money it paid Apple in December following a 2012 jury verdict that it infringed Apple's iPhone patents and mimicked its distinctive appearance in making the Galaxy and other competing devices.

The court held that a patent violator does not always have to fork over its entire profits from the sales of products using stolen designs, if the designs covered only certain components and not the whole thing.

The ruling followed a ferocious legal battle between the world's top two smartphone manufacturers that began in 2011 when Apple sued Samsung, asserting that its rival stole its technology and the iPhone's trademarked appearance. It was one of the most closely watched patent cases to come before the top U.S. court in recent years.

Samsung had been seeking to pare back $399 million of $548 million it paid Apple in December following a 2012 jury verdict finding that it infringed Cupertino, California-based Apple's iPhone patents and copied its distinctive appearance.

After a trial in 2012, Apple was awarded nearly $930 million in damages. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington in May 2015 upheld the patent infringement verdict, but said the iPhone's appearance could not be protected through trademarks. That cut Samsung's damages back by $382 million.

The legal dispute centered on whether the term "article of manufacture" in U.S. patent law should be interpreted as a finished product in its entirety, or merely a component in a complex product.

In court papers, Samsung, Apple and the U.S. government all agreed that the term could mean a component.

But Apple urged the Supreme Court to affirm the appeals court's ruling because Samsung presented no evidence that the article of manufacture in this case was anything less than its entire smartphone as sold. Samsung, meanwhile, said that it did not have to present such evidence.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the unanimous court, said that the patent law is clear. The term "article of manufacture is broad enough to encompass both a product sold to a consumer as well as a component of that product," she wrote.

Samsung in December 2015 paid Apple $548 million. But it took the matter to the Supreme Court, saying it should not have had to make $399 million of that payout for copying the patented designs of the iPhone's rounded-corner front face, bezel and colorful grid of icons that represent programs and applications.

Apple said its iPhone's success was tied to innovative designs, which other manufacturers quickly adopted in their own products. Samsung, in particular, made a deliberate decision to copy the iPhone's look and many user interface features, Apple said.

Samsung argued that it should not have had to turn over all its profits on phones that infringed iPhone design patents, saying those elements contributed only marginally to a complex product with thousands of patented features.

With the products that used iPhone designs, Samsung went on to become the world's top smartphone maker.

The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on Oct. 11.

Design patent fights very rarely reach the Supreme Court. It had not heard such a case in more than 120 years

source: news.abs-cbn.com

Samsung asks appeals court to toss out $930M award to Apple

WASHINGTON - Samsung Electronics Co Ltd asked a U.S. appeals court on Thursday to toss out an order that it pay Apple Inc $930 million for infringing on iPhone patents to make its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets.

The hearing at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was the latest fight between the two smartphone makers, which have been litigating around the world for three years, each accusing the other of infringing patents in making smartphones and other mobile devices.

They have essentially fought to a draw in about a dozen countries, but in August announced that they had agreed to withdraw all patent lawsuits against each other except in the United States.

In this case, Samsung asked the court to throw out a decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California which had found that Samsung infringed Apple patents and ordered it to pay the iPhone and iPad maker $930 million, a reduction from an earlier award of $1 billion.

Kathleen Sullivan, a lawyer with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP who represents Samsung, argued that the lower court erred in deciding that the design and trade dress patents were infringed because the Samsung phones did not carry an Apple logo, did not have a "home" button like an iPhone and had speaker slots in different places than the Apple phones.

"Apple was awarded Samsung's total profits on those (Samsung) phones, which was absurd," she said, arguing that it was akin to awarding entire profits on a car because of an infringing cup holder.

Arguing for Apple, William Lee of the law firm Wilmer Hale disagreed. "This is not the cup holder," he said.

He argued that the $930 million verdict was the right decision.

"What Samsung is actually asking you to do ... is to substitute yourself for Judge Koh and the jury," he said.

The three judges on the panel did not indicate which side they supported, and did not indicate when they would rule.

Apple and companies that make phones using Google's Android software, such as Samsung's top-selling Galaxy, have filed dozens of infringement lawsuits against one another around the world to protect their technology. Apple and Google Inc's Motorola Mobility unit, which has since been purchased by Lenovo, agreed in May to settle all smartphone patent litigation between them.

source: www.abs-cbnnews.com

Apple, Google call truce in smartphone patent war

SAN FRANCISCO - Google and Apple, the two technology titans behind the world's top smartphone platforms, called a truce Friday in a long-running patent war.

"Apple and Google have agreed to dismiss all the current lawsuits that exist directly between the two companies," the companies said in a joint statement.

"Apple and Google have also agreed to work together in some areas of patent reform."

The companies made it clear that the detente does not include licensing their technology to each other.

Motorola filed a patent lawsuit against Apple in US federal court four years ago, prompting the iPhone maker to fire back with a patent suit of its own. Litigation spread to more than a dozen other courts.

"The parties have entered into a second-class settlement from a position of mutual weakness," wrote intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller at fosspatents.com.

"They had to recognize that under the procedural circumstances their patents were not strong enough to give either party decisive leverage over the other, at least not anytime soon," Mueller wrote.

- Widespread patent fight -

Google took on the legal wrangling when it bought Motorola Mobility in 2012 in what was seen at the time as a move to use its patents for defending Android operating software in the increasingly litigious smartphone and tablet markets.

Early this year, Google agreed to sell Motorola Mobility to China-based computer giant Lenovo. The sale has yet to be completed.

California-based Apple has been battling smartphone competitors in courts around the world, accusing rivals using Google's Android software of copying features from its popular mobile devices.

The legal truce between Apple and Google does not take the pressure off South Korea-based Samsung, which has been a prime legal target for the maker of iPhones and iPads.

Japan's Intellectual Property High Court has ruled that Samsung could claim 9.96 million yen ($98,000) from its US arch-rival for use of Samsung's data transmission technology, found to have been used in Apple's iPhone 4 and iPad 2.

And early this month in Silicon Valley, jurors at a different patent trial held the line on its $119.6 million damages award to Apple in a patent battle with Samsung.

While the amount of the award is huge, it is a fraction of the more than $2 billion Apple had sought at the outset of the trial against is South Korean competitor in the hot smartphone and tablet computer market.

Jurors agreed that Samsung violated three of five Apple patents at issue in the two-month trial.

Jurors also found that Apple violated a Samsung patent, and said Apple should pay its rival $158,400 in damages.

- Holy war -

Samsung lawyers maintained that the legal onslaught emerged from a "holy war" Apple declared on Google-made Android software used to power smartphones.

The argument evidently struck a chord with members of the panel, who remarked after the verdict that Apple and Google should deal with their mobile gadget patent issues face to face instead of in courts.

The truce did not touch on Apple patent lawsuits aimed at Google partners who make Android-powered smartphones or tablets.

The outcome in the recent Silicon Valley trial pitting Apple against Samsung was sharply different from a 2012 patent trial in the same court. Unlike the previous case in which Apple was a clear winner, this time Samsung prevailed in many areas.

In August 2012, a separate jury in the same court decided that Samsung should pay Apple $1.049 billion in damages for illegally copying iPhone and iPad features, in one of the biggest patent cases in decades.

The damage award was later trimmed to $929 million and is being appealed.

source: www.abs-cbnnews.com

US Judge blocks Apple in Google smartphone war

A U.S. judge on Friday ruled that Apple Inc cannot pursue an injunction against Google’s Motorola Mobility unit, effectively ending a key case for the iPhone maker in the smartphone patent wars.

The ruling came from Judge Richard Posner in Chicago federal court. He dismissed the litigation between Apple and Motorola Mobility with prejudice, meaning it can’t be refiled.

The ruling is a blow for Apple, which had hoped a decisive ruling against Motorola would help it gain an upper hand in the smartphone market against Android.

A representative for Apple declined to comment. Motorola did not immediately return requests for comment Friday evening.

Motorola sued Apple in October 2010, a move that was widely seen as a preemptive strike against an imminent Apple lawsuit. Apple filed its own claims against Motorola the same month.

Posner issued a series of pretrial rulings that eliminated nearly all of Motorola’s patent claims against Apple from the prospective trial, while maintaining more of Apple’s claims against Motorola. That meant Apple had more to gain in the trial, which had been set to start last week.

However, Posner canceled the trial earlier this month.

Apple had sought an injunction barring the sale of Motorola products. But in Friday’s ruling, Posner wrote that “neither party is entitled to an injunction.”

Both parties have the option to appeal Posner’s ruling.

source: interaksyon.com