The Apple drops for Samsung

Share

This position stems from a Supreme Court ruling in 2016 that was favorable to Samsung and is central to how damages are calculated in infringement cases involving design patents. The case was decided in Apple's favor in 2012 and it was awarded $1.05 billion in damages.

Apple and Samsung's 7-year showdown over patents the latter infringed on has begun its latest chapter with a retrial taking place in a California court house.

That's according to Apple's vice president of marketing, Greg Joswiak, who recently testified at the firm's ongoing patent trial with top rival Samsung.

The legal dispute between the two tech giants dates to 2011 when Apple sued Samsung.

Ebola vaccines to be shipped to Congo, WHO chief says
Punch reports that 4,000 doses of Ebola vaccine would be sent to DRC by World Health Organization in the nearest furture. Abdulrahman Dambazau (retd.), "to take necessary steps to check immigration".

Everton end ties with Allardyce
Former Liverpool midfielder David Thompson believes Sam Allardyce was a victim of Everton's bloated expectations and did a better job than he is being given credit for.

England announces 12-man squad for first test match against Pakistan
I'm fully aware he hasn't played a red-ball game since the back-end of last season and our eyes are wide open. James Vince has not been included in the 12-man squad following his disappointing Ashes series.

The three design patents in this case relate to the iPhone's distinctive design features - including the phone's black rectangular face, the stainless-steel rim that surrounds the face (called a bezel) and the graphical user interface that appears on the screen when the phone is turned on. "Apple's design patents do not cover the entire phone". Samsung, meantime, has requested the jury to restrict damages to $28 million. "This is the article of manufacture", Quinn said of the components. The justices ruled that in the case of a multi-component product like a smartphone, the infringing "article of manufacture" could be the entire phone-as Koh and the Federal Circuit had assumed-but it also might be just one or more of its components.The Supreme Court left it to the Federal Circuit to determine exactly what the infringing "article of manufacture" is on 18 models of Samsung smartphones. The glass is easily separated from the phone and doesn't cost much, Samsung has argued.

Those design elements were protected, prompting the jury to award Apple all the profits from sales of smartphones containing those features, Samsung lawyers said in their filing. Apple told jurors that Samsung should hand over all the profit it made on four devices that were heavily inspired by the iPhone.

Instead of releasing another flip phone or keyboard phone, Apple devised the iPhone, which revolutionized phone design and quickly took the market by storm. But she's blocked Apple's argument that the phones should be viewed from the perspective of a "designer of ordinary skill in the art", saying there's no basis for importing the "person of ordinary skill in the art" to the design context.

Share