The jury sitting on the Apple and Samsung trial in California has largely found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple’s intellectual property. The nine jurors unanimously came to agreement, largely finding in Apple’s favour and thus awarding Apple $1.049 billion in damages.

Apple was succesful on a number of claims it put to the jury, but not necessarily against all the phones and tablets that Apple claimed to infringe. One such claim that Apple was particularly succesful in claiming ingringement was the notorious ‘bounce-back’ patent in which the jury found every one of the accused devices infringed on – similarly with Apple’s scrolling and two finger gestures, the jury agreed that nearly all the devices did infringe the patent.

But Apple certainly wasn’t succesful on every front, and one notable area in which the jury did not agree with Apple was in regards to the claim that Samsung’s patents were invalid. In fact the jury didn’t find a single patent, on either side, was invalid.

When the verdict was read, there was minor mistake in the damages calculation that lead the jury to go back and reconsider the decision. It had arisen when Samsung pointed out that the jury had awarded damages for some devices that the jury had said didn’t infringe.

[via AllThingsD, The Verge]

Next: Injunction Hearings

Now that the jury’s verdict has been handed down, the next step will be a preliminary hearing on injunctions. Apple will have to file its requests by August 27th (this coming Monday), at which point Samsung will have two weeks to respond. The actual hearing will be held on September 20th.

[via The Verge]

Samsung Responds To Verdict

Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.

[via The Verge]

Apple Responds To Verdict

We are grateful to the jury for their service and for investing the time to listen to our story and we were thrilled to be able to finally tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.

[via AllThingsD]

Tim Cook Emails Apple Employees

Today was an important day for Apple and for innovators everywhere.
Many of you have been closely following the trial against Samsung in San Jose for the past few weeks. We chose legal action very reluctantly and only after repeatedly asking Samsung to stop copying our work. For us this lawsuit has always been about something much more important than patents or money. It’s about values. We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. And we do this to delight our customers, not for competitors to flagrantly copy.
We owe a debt of gratitude to the jury who invested their time in listening to our story. We were thrilled to finally have the opportunity to tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than we knew.
The jury has now spoken. We applaud them for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.
I am very proud of the work that each of you do.
Today, values have won and I hope the whole world listens.
Tim

[via 9to5 Mac]

Microsoft Responds To Verdict?

Windows Phone is looking gooooood right now.

— Bill Cox (@billcox) August 24, 2012

Using Bing Local Scout on my Windows Phone to look for a place to drink a pint. Love that UI. Fresh. Unique. Different. That is all.

— Frank X. Shaw (@fxshaw) August 24, 2012

[via The Verge]

Apple has today won a preliminary injunction against Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US, just a day before Google’s I/O conference begins. Issued by US Disctrict Judge Lucy Koh, it means that Samsung can no longer sell their tablet in the United States.

Although Samsung has a right to compete, it does not have a right to compete unfairly, by flooding the market with infringing products. While Samsung will certainly suffer lost sales from the issuance of an injunction, the hardship to Apple of having to directly compete with Samsung’s infringing products outweighs Samsung’s harm in light of the previous findings by the Court.

The judgment from Judge Koh also came before Friday’s hearing that was meant to cover the preliminary injunction. She said in her order that the strength of Apple’s case left her no choice but to grant the injunction, deciding she didn’t need to hear further arguments on the issue in Friday’s hearing. As noted by AllThingsD, she had previously denied a preliminary injunction request against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 by Apple back in December.

Once Apple fronts up with a $2.6 million bond (for Samsung if it is later ruled the injunction should not have been granted), the order will become effective. Speaking to an Apple representative, AllThingsD got a familiar statement on the matter:

“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging

[via AllThingsD]

The last 24 hours has seen a number of developments regarding various legal issues that involve Apple. It’s not the most riveting news, so rather than writing them up as separate posts, we’ve decided to combine them into one, easily digestible post.

Apple Responds to DOJ Allegations

Late yesterday, somewhat belatedly, Apple issued AllThingsD with a statement responding to the DOJ’s allegations of collusion with the big book publishers. It was a similar statement that the other publishers made earlier and conveyed the idea that Apple’s entrance into the e-book market disrupted Amazon’s prior monopoly in the market.

The DOJ’s accusation of collusion against Apple is simply not true. The launch of the iBookstore in 2010 fostered innovation and competition, breaking Amazon’s monopolistic grip on the publishing industry. Since then customers have benefited from eBooks that are more interactive and engaging. Just as we’ve allowed developers to set prices on the App Store, publishers set prices on the iBookstore.

Apple Permitted To Intervene in Lodsys Case

You may recall that Lodsys filed lawsuits against a number of iOS developers last year for allegedly violating their patents. Apple filed a motion to intervene in the case last year, claiming that the licensing it has attained from Lodsys itself also protects third party developers on the App Store. The court yesterday agreed with Apple and has granted permission to Apple’s motion to intervene. Unfortunately, for many developers this is too little too late, with many settling with Lodsys early on to avoid costly legal fees.

Apple Loses Attempt To Restore Push Email to German iCloud Users

Apple had been forced to suspend email push services for German iCloud users earlier in February this year after Motorola succeeded in bringing an injunction against Apple. Today the Mannheim regional court upheld that decision and Apple will be required to pay damages to Motorola Mobility.

Apple Required to Compensate Tokyo Couple For iPod Nano that Burst Into Flames

In July 2010, a first generation iPod nano spontaneously burst into flames and caused burns to the owner’s hand that took more than a month to heal. Apple was required to pay the owner approximately US$7,400 for medical fees and compensation for the pain and suffering. Apple began a worldwide replacement program of the device last November.

[via, AllThingsD, TUAW, TNW, Cult of Mac]

There have been a lot of twists and turns in the Apple and Samsung legal battle and the latest milestone saw a US judge deny Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction to stop sales of some Galaxy devices in the US. What this means is that Samsung can continue to sell all their Galaxy devices in the US for the time being. Interestingly, Judge Lucy Koh noted that Apple will likely succeed in proving that Samsung’s Galaxy products infringe Apple’s patents, but she didn’t grant the injunction because it wasn’t demonstrated that it would cause irreparable harm to Apple if the Galaxy products stayed on sale.

The Verge got a statement from Samsung on the ruling:

Samsung welcomes today’s ruling denying Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction. This ruling confirms our long-held view that Apple’s arguments lack merit. In particular, the court has recognized that Samsung has raised substantial questions about the validity of certain Apple design patents. We are confident that we can demonstrate the distinctiveness of Samsung’s mobile devices when the case goes to trial next year. We will continue to assert our intellectual property rights and defend against Apple’s claims to ensure our continued ability to provide innovative mobile products to consumers.

It was also revealed yesterday that Apple had given some work-around options to Samsung for how they could side-step their iPhone and iPad design patents. Matt Macari from The Verge has an excellent article that covers the issue in great depth and clarity. In short, Apple had to make a list of alternative design choices to make the argument that Samsung did have other choices when designing their smartphones and tablets and they chose to emulate Apple instead. Some of the alternatives Apple made include:

• Front surface that isn’t black
• Display screens that aren’t centred on the front face and have substantial lateral borders.
• No front bezel
• Front surface that isn’t entirely flat
• Cluttered appearance

[The Verge (1) (2)]

Samsung today filed for a preliminary injunction against the iPhone 4S in Australia and Japan. This is the latest development in the complex legal battle between Apple and Samsung which has spread across the world since Apple originally revealed it was suing Samsung over the “look and feel” of it’s Galaxy devices.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Japan filing (which is also attempting to halt sales of the iPhone 4 and iPad 2) cites infringements in technology and user interface patents, whilst in Australia Samsung is claiming that Apple has infringed on patents related to wireless telecommunication standards. The move comes after Samsung was dealt a blow in Australia last week, with the preliminary injunction against its Galaxy Tab 10.1 was upheld. A Samsung spokesperson said that this latest legal action is them “now counterattacking Apple again”.

Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents believes that the attack on the iPhone 4S in Australia  is “doomed to fail” because the patents Samsung is using in the filing are related to 3 patents declared as essential to the 3G telecommunications network. As he explains, it would be unlikely that an Australian judge would take a significantly different approach as occurred last week in the Netherlands:

…a Dutch judge already made it clear that Samsung can’t seek an injunction based on such patents, and I’d be extremely surprised if an Australian judge took a different perspective on FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing commitments… The odds are very long against Samsung overcoming all of Apple’s defenses.

Speaking on the situation in Japan, FOSS Patents says it is less clear what will happen as Samsung’s filing there also relates to user interface patents that “are presumably not subject to FRAND licensed commitments”. This means Samsung could seek injunctions on them and it would be up to Apple to contest their validity. The patents apparently relate to “the display of a flight mode icon, the utilization of homescreen space, and an app store menu structure”.

[Via The Wall Street Journal, FOSS Patents]

Update 2: The Sydney Morning Herald has managed to get more details on this legal dispute between Apple and Samsung in Australia. Apple claims that Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 is misleading customers by making representations that the Tab is the iPad/is a version of the iPad 2/has the same performance of the iPad/is manufactured or supplied by Apple/is associated with Apple/is the same quality of the iPad 2. They are demanding that Samsung destroy all stock of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 or hand over stock to Apple. Furthermore the SMH also has details of the patents Apple is citing:

Standard Patents
- 2008201540: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display
- 2005246219: Multipoint touchscreen
- 2007283771: Portable electronic device for photo management
- 2009200366: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display
- 2007286532: Touch screen device, method and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics

Innovation Patents
- 2008100283: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display
- 2008100372: Electronic device for photo management
- 2009100820: Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image
- 2008100419: Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image
- 2008101171: Portable electronic device for imaged-based browsing of contacts

Clarification 1: This agreement Samsung has made with Apple is related to not selling the US model of the Galaxy Tab in Australia. As detailed below, Samsung has also agreed to share 3 samples of the Australian version to Apple (which it will do at least 7 days prior to launching the product – which was expected for August 11). FOSS Patents speculates that sharing these models will allow ”Apple to seek a preliminary injunction against” the Australian model before it goes on sale as well.

In the latest development of the patent dispute between Samsung and Apple, the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 has now been delayed from going on sale in Australia whilst a Federal Court case is resolved. The Galaxy Tab 10.1 had been expected to launch just next week on August 11 down under, but after Apple pushed for an injunction on the device in Australia it seems that Samsung agreed to postpone the launch of the device.

Samsung’s lawyer noted in their court documentation that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 has some differences in Australia and have agreed to provide Apple three samples of the Australian version. As a result of this agreement between Apple, Samsung and the courts, not only will Samsung postpone the release of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia but they will cease all forms of advertising for the product.

A hearing is currently scheduled for August 29 to review the status of the case and, if necessary, set a trial date. If Apple loses the case, they would be required to pay Samsung damages as a result of the release postponement.

[Via The Next Web]

A report from Reuters is claiming that Apple has begun trialling production of an A6 processor with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) ahead of an expected 2012 launch. If true it would be a movement away from Samsung, which for the A4 and A5 processor, has been Apple’s sole manufacturing partner.

Such a move would presumably be in part be due to the current legal battle between Apple and Samsung that began earlier this year. As for what the A6 brings, analysts are expecting the processor could be a quad-core chip, a jump from the current dual-core A5 chip and single-core A4 chip.

A final decision has not yet been made on whether TSMC would produce the commercial, high-volume quantities, but TSMC is well prepared for that – they are the largest contract chip manufacturer in the world. CNet notes that analyst Gus Richard told them this month that Intel could be an option as they have been aggressively seeking more business with Apple

[Via CNet]

There’s been some news on the Apple vs. Samsung patent battle today with some recent Apple filings coming to light where Apple alleges that Samsung is “attempt[ing] to harass” them and that Samsung’s demands are not made in good faith – even going so far as to label Samsung as “the copyist” in the documents. It comes after Samsung requested Apple to hand over the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 (or the most recent prototype) to Samsung’s lawyers, which itself was a response to Apple’s request for several Samsung products that hadn’t yet been released (although they were announced).

Samsung’s Motion to Compel is an improper attempt to harass Apple by demanding production of extremely sensitive trade secrets that have no relevance to Apple’s likelihood of success on its infringement claims or to a preliminary injunction motion.

This Friday (1:30 PM Pacific Time) Apple and Samsung will meet with their judge for the purpose of discussing Samsung’s request for expedited delivery (Samsung gaining access to the next generation iPhone and iPad). Apple’s recent filings are in preparation for this court session. FOSS Patents has given the filings a good look over and found some highlights.

As many had expected, Apple’s lawyers make the note that Samsung is asking for much more than what Apple asked given that the Samsung products, although unreleased, had been fully revealed and were available for pre-order. By contrast the next generation iPhone and iPad do not officially exist – in fact it notes in its filings that “Apple is widely recognised as one of the most secretive companies in the world”.

It also tackles the idea that whilst Samsung’s law firm may not leak the details of the iPhone 5 and iPad 3, it could use their knowledge of them to form future patent infringement theories for other companies it represents – which includes other major Android device makers including Samsung, Motorola and HTC.

It also puts the argument that since no future iPhone or iPad products are included in Apple’s complaint of Samsung products, there isn’t reason to show them. It also dismisses Samsung’s suggestion that future design changes “could indicate that Apple is not as consistent as it claims, and consequently Apple’s related rights could be weaker”. Be sure to head over to FOSS Patents if you want a more thorough review of the recent filing and if you want to remind yourself of what the lawsuit is about, be sure to head over to read This Is My Next’s excellent analysis.

[Via FOSS Patents]

With a series of blog posts published earlier today, Lodsys has confirmed [via MacRumors] that they’ve started filing lawsuits against app developers allegedly infringing patents related to in-app purchases and upgrade links in their mobile applications. Lodsys initially said that they would give developers 21 days to license the patents before filing any lawsuits, but the firm decided to change its schedule in order to defend against Apple’s legal response, which showed support for iOS developers and claimed third-party “app makers” were not infringing any patent as Apple is already licensing patents from Lodsys.

Why did Lodsys sue some App Developers on May 31, 2011

Lodsys chose to move its litigation timing to an earlier date than originally planned, in response to Apple’s threat, in order to preserve its legal options.

As for why they have decided to target small, indie developers who don’t have the resources to legally defend themselves, Lodsys writes:

Why are you targeting Apple developers or Android developers? Why are you picking on small developers who cannot defend themselves?

This story is about accountability for actions. If you are a Developer, it’s about knowledge about the scope and risks of your own business.

Lodsys has only one motivation: we want to get paid for our rights.

Lodsys also posted a response to Apple’s claims that third-party developers using Apple’s SDK and agreeing to the company’s terms are not infringing patents from Lodsys. They company also says they’ve sent a letter to Apple’s legal team, which Apple can publish in its entirety if they want to.

The letter was very surprising as Apple and Lodsys were in confidential discussions and there was clearly disagreement on the interpretation of the license terms of Apple’s agreement.  Before, during and after these interactions, Lodsys has carefully considered this issue and consulted several legal experts to consider Apple’s claims.  We stand firm and restate our previous position that it is the 3rd party Developers that are responsible for the infringement of Lodsys’ patents and they are responsible for securing the rights for their applications.  Developers relying on Apple’s letter do so to their own detriment and are strongly urged to review Apple’s own developer agreements to determine the true extent of Apple’s responsibilities to them.

Lodsys previously explained that usage of in-app purchases would cost developers 0.575% of their US revenue over the period the technology was implemented — for example, an app that generates $1 million in revenue  in one year would pay $5,750 to Lodsys. Finally, Lodsys says they’ll send $1,000 as reimburse to developers hit by the lawsuit if the whole story turns out to be wrong:

While it is true that Apple and Lodsys have an obvious dispute about the scope of Apple’s license to the Lodsys Patents, we are willing to put our money where our mouth is and pay you something if we are wrong.  Therefore, Lodsys offers to pay $1,000 to each entity to whom we have sent an infringement notice for infringement on the iOS platform, or that we send a notice to in the future, if it turns out that the scope of Apple’s existing license rights apply to fully license you with respect to our claim relating to your App on Apple iOS.

As many previously suggested after Apple’s response, the story is far from over and Lodsys appears to be pursuing its agenda by suing developers that don’t agree to pay licensing fees. Several bloggers broke down Lodsys’ patent claims in the past weeks, and the EFF even came out and said Apple should stand up for its developers.

Update: Florian Mueller of FOSSpatents tweets the names of the companies and developers sued by Lodsys today.