Monday, 17 December, 2018

Apple and Samsung fight over what made the iPhone 'revolutionary'

Will Motorola bring a foldable smartphone to market Motorola logoMore
Theresa Hayes | 16 May, 2018, 23:45

However, Apple may still be able to convince the jury that the devices would not have been marketable without the infringing designs and therefore the phones as a whole should be considered the relevant article.

Retrial judge Lucy Koh, who additionally sat in the principal case, has said she means to apply a "Groundhog Day" run the show.

It must be noted that Jurors will have to stick to the previous judgment that Samsung copied three design patents concerning the look of the original iPhone, and two utility patents involving its pinch-to-zoom feature and bounce-back scrolling effect.

They may choose to settle on an alternate honor, in view of the reality the Supreme Court has given them more scope.

In 2011, Apple sued Samsung claiming the South Korean company's phones, including the Galaxy S2, copied the iPhone in both physical and software design.

The phone is described as having two cameras, one on the front left that works in phone mode and the other at the top right so when in tablet mode they can be used like a dual camera.

Had Apple not released the iPhone, it anxious that mobile carriers could easily make the iPod obsolete by adding music to their phones, which served as a "gigantic threat" to the company and its mainstay media player. Lee asked jurors to "step back in time" to 2006 and consider what cellphones looked like before the iPhone. "Samsung recognized they had a crisis of design and in 4 months- 4 months-came up with the infringing phones". Samsung disputed the amount and now the fight is over the amount that's due to the Cupertino company.

Apple and Samsung are headed back to court to continue their long-standing patent trial.

It contended that purchasers had not purchased the telephones for their feel alone, but rather likewise their usefulness.

The eight-year-old suit has reached the damages phase and representatives from the two tech giants have been in court this week making their case to jurors over the final value Samsung should pay.

Rather, the judges consistently chose that a honor could be constructed exclusively with respect to the estimation of the segments included.

However, the justices did not set out how this should be applied in practice. The case is Apple Inc v Samsung Electronics Co, 11-cv-01846, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).