Apple is seeking more than $2 billion in damages from Samsung in a second patent infringement suit that begins Monday in the US District Court of Northern California with Judge Lucy Koh presiding over the case (Via The Financial Times).
/article-new/2013/10/apple_samsung_logos.jpg?lossy)
This second lawsuit involves new patents and more recent devices than the previous case, which ended with an $890 million judgement in Apple's favor. This latest suit focuses on five utility patents involving software features such as auto-correct, slide-to-unlock and Siri's universal search. Apple lists Samsung's Galaxy S3 and Galaxy Nexus smartphones as infringing devices.
Google is expected to take a bigger role in the litigation with testimony from executives such as current vice-president of Android engineering Hiroshi Lockheimer and former Android Chief Andy Rubin. These executives will discuss how Android was developed outside the influence of Apple and iOS. Apple is expected to again call Phil Schiller to testify on the design, development, and marketing of iOS and associated hardware.
Before the trial even begins, Samsung already has been handed a minor setback as reported by Re/code. Judge Koh rejected a motion by Korean company that objected to an instructional video describing the patent process because it includes references to Apple products. Samsung argued the newer video, shown above, was "highly prejudicial to Samsung" and asked that the jurors be shown an older, more neutral version. Koh disagreed.
Top Rated Comments
(View all)Apple didn't steal anything from Xerox, which is why Xerox never sued.
Yes, Xerox sued Apple. Go read some history. You can start with this NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/15/business/company-news-xerox-sues-apple-computer-over-macintosh-copyright.html) from 1989:"Xerox's suit, which was filed in Federal District Court, charges Apple with copyright misrepresentation and seeks more than $150 million in royalties and damages.
"Xerox contends that the Lisa and Macintosh software stems from work originally done by Xerox scientists and that it was used by Apple without permission."
There's nobody at Xerox who think Apple did anything wrong,
There were plenty of people at Xerox who thought that.In fact, the person whom Jobs asked to give the demonstration, Adele Goldberg, famously warned Xerox that Apple was going to steal their work. Her boss, Robert Taylor, was out of town at the time, but later said he would've told Jobs to "get out".
if anyone is to "blame" for that whole thing it's Xerox's management itself for selling Apple their technology. The key part in the story here is that Apple paid Xerox.
Xerox did not sell anything to Apple. Nor did Apple pay Xerox anything.Xerox did license Smalltalk 80 to Apple, but that was TWO years AFTER Apple's famous visit... and that's ALL they said they licensed.
Why doesn't Samsung just come up with their own ideas instead of copying and pasting other's ideas.
Samsung has no own ideas like 3G and 5G technology? Apple is using 2 essential patents from Samsung for data transmissions and an American court will of course not rule in favour for a non-American company. Without Samsung's inventions, there would be no iPhone because it would not work.Inventions such as pinch to zoom are no "inventions" from Apple since other manufactures have "invented" it a long time before the iPhone. And Apple is build on stealing others work such as Xerox.
products in a "Pre-Trial" instructional video on Patent law !!
That should have never been allowed, no matter which opinion you have.
Where is the "Justice" or "fairness" in that ??
Judge Koh should be ashamed.
M.
meh, apple just release your larger screened iphone already (or is that copying?)
from what we've seen from android OEM's already this year - the door is wide open for you.
It's not copying when Apple do it. It's called innovating :)
----------
An American company goes to an American court to sue a non-American company. We all know how this court will rule. No bias here.
Yes only in America.There isn't much Samsung can do despite all the lawyers they have. It's an unfair fight.
I loved the British judge who put Apple in their place and told them to run adverts on their website saying that Samsung didn't copy them.
- No more money to lawyers
- Settled once and for all
- There will be one fanboy left.
(Actually, we hire a hit man for that last one...)