Apple and Samsung have been fighting it out in the courts for months — the fight started in the US, when Apple claimed Samsung "slavishly" copied the iPhone, but since then it's spread out around the world, with both sides jockeying for position. Considering the stakes involved, this wrangling is bound to go on for some time — we'll keep track of all the latest right here.
Nov 10, 2012
The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ordered Apple to pay the legal fees of competitor Samsung on an 'indemnity basis' after the company published a "false and misleading" notice in the wake of a patent lawsuit over the iPad. The judgement, intended to humiliate Apple, will require the company to pay a majority of the expenses associated with Samsung's legal defense, with any disputes over the exact amount likely to be resolved in the latter firm's favor.Read Article >
Apple was ordered to publish the notice on the front page of its UK website after losing an appeal in October. But while the Cupertino-based company complied, it also added a number of statements which, according to the court, were "calculated to produce huge confusion" — among them, a reference to the separate US verdict that awarded Apple more than one billion dollars in damages. Under pressure from the court, Apple has posted a second statement on its website drawing attention to the previous inaccuracies:
Nov 6, 2012
Apple's already expanded the number of devices it's accusing of intellectual property infringement in the company's second case against Samsung, but it's trying to add Android 4.1 Jelly Bean as well. Bloomberg reports that the argument was made before US Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal today, during a hearing at which Samsung was also scheduled to explain why it should be allowed to include the iPhone 5 in its own countersuit against Cupertino.Read Article >
The concept was first brought up in an Apple court filing back on October 5th, where the company's legal team wrote that it wanted to "explicitly include within its contentions the Jelly Bean operating system that has been incrementally released for the Samsung Galaxy Nexus from July 2012 through September 2012." The Galaxy Nexus has been a focus in this particular case since February, when Apple first targeted the device for infringing upon several of its software patents. The Galaxy Nexus, of course, runs stock Android — so any potential software infringement would be due to Android itself (the Galaxy Nexus was one of the first devices to be updated to Android 4.1 Jelly Bean earlier this year).
Nov 2, 2012
Apple has posted its Samsung Galaxy Tab design acknowledgement in several UK newspapers today following the scolding that it received from the courts over the "incorrect" online statement. Unlike the declaration first served up on Apple’s website, the new notice takes a very dry approach to explaining how Samsung's tablets didn't infringe the design of the iPad while also pointing readers to copies of the courts' judgments.Read Article >
The Verge has confirmed that a copy of the advertisement has appeared on page four of The Daily Mail, with The Next Web spotting the same notice in The Guardian. Apple was asked to run the statement in additional publications, including The Financial Times, in a font no smaller than Arial 14 and before page six. The company was also ordered to post a revised acknowledgement on the front page of Apple.com within 48 hours after yesterday’s ruling, but there’s no sign of it so far.
Nov 1, 2012
During the Apple vs. Samsung trial, Samsung was able to question high-level Apple personnel like Phil Schiller and Scott Forstall (then still the head of the iOS team). As part of the post-trial action, US magistrate judge Paul S. Grewal has ordered that Samsung will get another crack at Schiller for three hours of deposition questioning.Read Article >
The questioning is in connection with Apple's pursuit of a ban on some of the products that the jury found infringed Apple's intellectual property. At issue are comments made by Schiller in a court document declaring his support for the injunction. According to Samsung, some of the statements made were "new or in conflict with his testimony at trial," and the company felt Apple shouldn't be able to introduce them into the mix. If they were allowed, however, Samsung's legal team should at the very least get the opportunity to question Schiller themselves on the topics — hence the new deposition.
Nov 1, 2012
A UK court has reprimanded Apple for adding "incorrect" details to its online statement that Samsung did not copy the iPad tablet. After losing an appeal over the Samsung Galaxy Tab, the company was required to post a notice on its site acknowledging the decision, but it added details from other cases (including a German suit and the massive US trial) in which Apple had fared better, ending with an assertion that "while the UK court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad."Read Article >
According to Bloomberg, the court found that some of these details were inaccurate, and The Guardian reports that judges censured Apple for adding information that made the statement less clear. "I’m at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this," said Judge Robin Jacob. "That is a plain breach of the order." Now, Apple has 24 hours to post a corrected statement, though it originally requested 14 days — something one judge reportedly said he "can't believe... This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?"
Oct 26, 2012
Apple and Samsung took their intellectual property spat all the way to the Court of Appeal in the UK, where recently it was affirmed that the latter company's range of Galaxy tablets did not infringe on the former's design rights with respect to the iPad. As part of the original High Court ruling, Apple was required to post an acknowledgement to its website, in a font no smaller than Arial 11, stating that Samsung's hardware does not in fact copy Apple's tablet design. The Court of Appeal softened that requirement a little, stating that just a link to the acknowledgement on Apple's homepage would be sufficient, which the American company has now dutifully produced on its UK landing page.Read Article >
The more amusing aspect of the ruling should come when the minimum font size gets cranked up to Arial 14 as Apple is forced to also get the same notice printed in a number of big UK publications, including the Financial Times and The Guardian. This is all in an effort to reverse the damaging (for Samsung) impression created by the original injunction that Apple obtained against its Korean competitor. Still, Apple's made sure to include a couple of paragraphs' worth of quotes from the UK judiciary that highlight the strengths of its design, while also pointing out its victories in Germany and, most famously, in the United States, closing off with the following statement:
Oct 18, 2012
Apple has lost its appeal in the UK regarding the High Court of Justice’s ruling that Samsung’s tablets did not infringe the iPad. The Cupertino-based smartphone maker has now been ordered by Judge Kitchin to run a public
apologynotice stating that Samsung did not infringe its design. In an amusing twist, Reuters reports that the font size for the acknowledgement must be "no smaller than Ari[a]l 14."Read Article >
Judge Colin Birss noted in July that Samsung’s tablets "were not as cool," saying that the designs didn’t have "the same understated and extreme simplicity." The judge in the case also ruled that Apple would have to run advertisements on its website and in UK newspapers declaring that Samsung did not copy its designs. That motion was stayed, however, following today’s appeal.
Oct 2, 2012
In a court filing this evening, Samsung has asked Judge Paul Grewal to allow it to include the iPhone 5 in the company's latest countersuit against Apple. While the companies recently wrapped up a jury trial — in which Apple emerged victorious, to the tune of $1.049 billion — this move is part of a different round of legal wrangling. In this second case, Apple is accusing more than 20 Samsung devices, including the Galaxy S III and the Galaxy Nexus, of infringing a wholly different set of patents. Samsung, as before, is alleging infringement as well, having targeted the iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch product lines in its initial counterclaims.Read Article >
In the filing, Samsung says it is accusing the iPhone 5 of infringing the same patents as the other devices: a mix of 3G standards-essential patents and specific feature patents. Given that this second case is still in its early stages, there's no reason to believe Samsung won't be allowed to include the iPhone 5 in its claims, but the device won't officially be added until the parties have a hearing with Judge Grewal, currently scheduled for November 6th.
Sep 18, 2012
Not content to challenge Apple’s trade dress claims in court, Samsung has taken to its Samsung Tomorrow blog to try and correct the "misunderstandings" surrounding the designs of its products. At the top of the blog post, the team lays out how they’ll "reveal the truth from an objective point of view" as part of an ongoing series "until the day all misunderstandings have been cleared up."Read Article >
The South Korean company references the iPhone 3GS and Galaxy S, displaying patent D593,087 that Apple holds over the iPhone design, submitted in July 2007 and granted in May 2009. Samsung boldly lays out "the truth," saying that it was the first to design a handset, the F700, with rounded corners, a glass surface, and black background. The design patent was submitted in December 2006, with the phone showcased at 3GSM World Congress in February 2007 and released to the public in November 2007.
Sep 1, 2012
Well, that didn't take long. A week after its $1.049 billion victory against Samsung, Apple has accused four more products of infringement in its other case against the electronics giant. It's the same lawsuit that targeted the Galaxy Nexus — for which Apple received a temporary injunction before the ban was lifted while Samsung appealed the decision.Read Article >
According to an amended complaint filed today, Apple is naming "at least 21 new smartphones, media players, and tablets that Samsung has released beginning in August 2011 and continuing through August 2012." (The full list, which actually consists of 22 devices, is reproduced below). Some of the devices named were also part of the just-concluded trial, but are being named here because Apple is citing a different set of utility patents — eight of them in total.
Aug 31, 2012
When the Apple v. Samsung jury handed in its $1.049 bilion verdict last week, the man that delivered the form itself was jury foreman Velvin Hogan. We recently spoke with the 67-year-old engineer, who described his time participating in the trial as a personal high point â while also cautioning that those who were unhappy with the US patent system should look to public debate to change the situation, not a jury.Read Article >
"Except for my family, it was the high spot of my career," Hogan said about the trial. "You might even say my life." A holder of a patent on video compression himself, he said he recognized that the case represented a "landmark decision," and that he was pleased he'd been selected "because I wanted to be satisfied from my own perspective that this trial was fair, and protected copyrights and intellectual property rights, no matter who they belonged to."
Aug 31, 2012
Samsung may have lost its war with Apple in California, but it's winning small battles elsewhere. Following the company's recent victory in its home nation of South Korea, a Tokyo court has ruled in its favor in Japan. The Nikkei reports that Apple's case dealt with a patent covering the syncing of media files between devices, and eight Galaxy products sold by NTT Docomo and KDDI were alleged to have infringed.Read Article >
Apple was seeking ¥100 million (about $1.275 million) in damages and an injunction against sales, but the judge ultimately found in Samsung's favor after the company argued it was using different technology. It's a minor step in the two companies' global dispute, but it underlines the fact that neither side is likely to lay down for a long time.
Aug 29, 2012
Mere hours after the jury returned its $1.049 billion verdict in the Apple v. Samsung case, Judge Lucy Koh informed both parties that a hearing would be held in September to discuss any new injunctions Apple would be seeking againt Samsung's products. A change in Koh's strategy has shifted the playing field, however — and both sides now aren't scheduled to discuss any new injunctions until December 6th.Read Article >
In an order filed this afternoon, Koh lays out the new post-trial schedule, writing that after considering the breadth of Apple's recent injunction request, and "the additional post-trial motions that the parties have already filed and will file," it makes sense to put the injunction discussion and the post-trial judgement requests on the same schedule. As such, both sides will be filing paperwork with the court between now and November, but a hearing won't happen until December 6th. That would be the soonest Apple could be granted any new injunctions against Samsung's phones and tablets. Koh also enacted strict page limits for both parties in the order, continuing her hardline push for Apple and Samsung to be as efficient as possible.
With the trial stage just completed last Friday, Apple wasted no time filing a notice with the court identifying which Samsung products it will now seek to have banned in the US. Despite having received a finding of infringement from the jury on most of the 28 products in play in the case, it looks like Apple is only going after an injunction on eight of them — all smartphones. That's not terribly surprising given the fact that many of the products in the case are no longer available in the US. The eight Samsung devices are:Read Article >
Apple's filing specifically associates the devices with the patents each was found to infringe according to the jury. You can see from the chart below that, save the Galaxy Prevail, each of the identified devices was found to infringe on Apple's design-related intellectual property (design patents and trade dress). The Galaxy S2 Skyrocket, Galaxy S2 Epic 4G and the Galaxy S Showcase are the only ones listed that escaped infringement of Apple's more technical utility patents. With infringement already established, and assuming Judge Koh doesn't disrupt the jury verdict, Apple must convince the court that it will be irreparably harmed if these handsets are not banned in the country. It's easier to make this argument after a positive jury verdict, but an injunction is by no means a foregone conclusion. However, Apple did apparently appreciate the benefits of picking its battles here, rather than just going after each and every product found to infringe. It's easier for Apple to establish irreparable harm when the focus of the injunction is on products it may actually compete against in the market.
There's no doubt Apple walked out of the San Jose courtroom Friday afternoon the undisputed winner according to the jury in the Apple v. Samsung case, but there are still many details to work out as the trial process wraps up. We're not even close to appeals yet, although those will absolutely come later. There's still a lot to do in Judge Koh's courtroom over the next few weeks.Read Article >
Today will mark the beginning of a new chapter in the case: a brutal stretch of legal briefings and in-court debates, where both Samsung and Apple will break down and scrutinize a large number of those 700 individual questions tackled by the jury. And we know how much these attorneys like to file papers with the court — there were around 2000 formal objections filed just for the trial stage of the case. Obviously, Samsung will have far more to complain about, but you can rest assured that Apple will lodge several challenges of its own.
Aug 27, 2012
In the wake of Friday's $1.049 billion jury verdict, Apple and Samsung quickly released statements to the press — but one company that remained conspicuously silent was Google. The company has now provided us with a response to the decision, stating that "The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims."Read Article >
Google stops well short of adopting Samsung's own strident language, however. In fact, it appears to keep the matter at arm's length, saying that the claims involved "don't relate to the core Android operating system" — though to be fair, the company does specify that all mobile industry players "are building upon ideas that have been around for decades."
Aug 25, 2012
After two and a half days of deliberations, the Apple vs. Samsung jury returned a decisive verdict in Apple's favor today — holding that Samsung owes Apple $1.049 billion for copying Apple's intellectual property. Specifically, the jury found that all three of Apple's software patents on the iOS user interface were valid and infringed by a long list of Samsung devices, that Apple design patents were valid and infringed by several Samsung phones, and that Apple's trade dress on the iPhone and iPhone 3G were diluted by several Samsung phones as well.Read Article >
On the other hand, Samsung lost every part of its case against Apple — the jury ruled that none of the Apple devices in the case infringe Samsung's patents, including patents that are part of the 3G networking standard. The only major decisions that went to Samsung were related to the iPad — the jury didn't think Samsung's tablets copied the iPad's design.
Aug 24, 2012
After a surprisingly short time in deliberations, the jury in the Apple v. Samsung case reached a verdict today. The nine jurors decided unanimously that Samsung had infringed on Apple's intellectual property, and while Cupertino won't be getting the more than $2.5 billion it asked for, it will be getting at least $1,049,343,540.Read Article >
The jury didn't think much of Samsung allegations of infringement, either. They didn't feel that Apple had committed a single count of infringement — at least not anything that Samsung had demonstrated — against either Samsung's standards-essential or utility patents. As such, the company will be receiving nothing for its troubles.
Aug 24, 2012
After we published our huge breakdown of the insane Apple vs. Samsung jury form yesterday, I got a lot of requests from readers to do a poll on which company would win the case. That was actually our first idea — but with over 700 interdependent questions on the jury form, it's almost impossible to code up a workable poll using off-the-shelf tools, and most people probably wouldn't fill out the whole thing any way.Read Article >
But to give you just a small taste of what the jury in this historic case is going through, we thought we'd present just one question — something emblematic of the entire case that pulls in all the major facts, evidence, and themes. Turns out it's pretty easy to figure that one out: it's whether or not Samsung's Galaxy S diluted Apple's iPhone trade dress.
Aug 23, 2012
By Nilay Patel, Matt Macari, and Bryan BishopRead Article >
After weeks of trial and impassioned closing arguments from both sides, the historic Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit is now in the hands of the jury. The seven-man, two-woman panel began deliberating yesterday at 9AM, and they'll carry on today and every day until they reach their decisions. It will be a monumental task.
Aug 22, 2012
After weeks of witnesses, prototypes, and one last failed settlement talk, it came down to this: Apple and Samsung's closing arguments in what is very likely the tech trial of the century. The day saw both sides landing heavy blows before sending the case off to the jury — where anything can happen.Read Article >
There was an undeniable buzz in the courtroom to start the day, with media and members of the public lining up as early as 6:15AM — even though the day's proceedings didn't start until almost three hours later. When Judge Lucy Koh finally brought the jurors into the courtroom, it was for a purely procedural event: the reading of the jury instructions (all 109 pages of them). Over the course of several hours Koh worked through the instructions, largely sapping the energy from the room before breaking for an early lunch. The court reconvened afterwards — and that's when the real fun began.
Aug 21, 2012
We'd heard rumors that the CEOs of Apple and Samsung were getting together today for one last court-mandated meeting, but their discussion proved unfruitful. Samsung attorney Kevin Johnson just told Judge Lucy Koh that "The CEOs did speak... There was no resolution." The meeting was a last-ditch attempt to bring the legal battle between the two companies to a conclusion before closing arguments start tomorrow.Read Article >
Johnson's announcement marked the end of a long day of legal wrangling, with both sides jockeying for changes both to the instructions that will be read to the jury, as well as the verdict form the jurors will be tasked with filling out. The verdict form proved of particular concern today. Both sides went over a preliminary version of the 22-page document, which consists of pages of questions and charts upon which the jurors will indicate which devices infringed which patents and claims — if any.
A parade of familiar faces made their way through the courtroom today as Apple and Samsung finished up their rebuttal cases, with the last few hours consisting of expert upon expert saying the other was wrong. Apple, however, may have struck gold in taking out some of Samsung's strongest arguments against tap-to-zoom and bounce-back patents.Read Article >
The day started off with a light touch, spirits no doubt buoyed by the knowledge that this would be the last day of testimony. Judge Lucy Koh made a passing joke about yesterday's "crack" comment; Apple attorney William Lee stepped forward in response. He'd received an email from his 86-year-old mother last night, he said, asking what crack was and wanting to make sure he wasn't into anything bad.
- Read Article >
It's been a sprint this afternoon as both sides worked against a ticking clock, but Samsung has now rest its rebuttal case, less than an hour after Apple did the same. It's the end of testimony in the high-stakes trial, but it's going to be a few days before we have even the hope of any answers. Both parties will be discussing jury instructions with Judge Lucy Koh on Monday, and closing arguments are scheduled for Tuesday. Koh hopes that the jury will begin deliberations on Wednesday, and we'll continue to be there every step of the way.
- Read Article >
With 16 minutes left on the clock, Apple has rest its case in the Apple v. Samsung trial. The company's legal team finished up its primary offensive case earlier this week, and spent the majority of today questioning witnesses for its rebuttal case. Samsung has 37 minutes left for its rebuttal this afternoon. We'll have more for you shortly.