[jogiba]

Apple Inc. scored a sweeping legal victory over Samsung on Friday as a U.S. jury found the Korean company had copied critical features of the hugely popular iPhone and iPad and awarded the U.S. company $1.051 billion in damages.

The verdict -- which came much sooner than expected -- could lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products and will likely solidify Apple's dominance of the exploding mobile computing market.

A number of companies that sell smartphones based on Google's Android operating system may now face further legal challenges from Apple, a company that is already among the largest and most profitable in business history.

Shares in Apple, which just this week became the biggest company by market value in history, climbed almost 2 percent to a record high of $675 in after-hours trade.

Brian Love, a Santa Clara law school professor, described it as a crushing victory for Apple: "This is the best-case scenario Apple could have hoped for."

Apple triumphs over Samsung, awarded over $1 billion damages | Reuters

[Rondec]

It is interesting. A lot of the case depended, not on the technology, but on the appearance of the devices. Looks like a lot of phone companies will either need to license features from Apple or change up their phone's appearance/ways of navigating the web, etc. Not necessarily a bad thing, but too bad really, as a standard interface is nice for when you pick up a new device.

[kenafein]

The bad guys win again. Hopefully Samsung will be able to appeal.

[Blue]

The bad guys win again. Hopefully Samsung will be able to appeal.

They are appealing it. This reminds me of the Honeywell law suite that rocked Minolta back in the 80s early 90s. Honeywell had patented nonworking concepts but won the case. That is probably what weakened Minolta's camera division to the point of merging with Konica. $1B would have to stagger a company even like Samsung.

[RobA_Oz]

Samsung was blatant in their appropriation of Apple's design elements. Their mistake was to not emulate the Japanese, from whom they've learned other things successfully, and to overtake your opposition by working with them, until you're ready to do your own design, using your own ideas.

They may appeal, but from what I can see, their defense of this suit was so weak that their chances of having it overturned are probably small. All they can hope for, in that case, is a reduction in the penalty.

Google should be worried by this, because their interface looks remarkably similar to Apple's iOS. Still, Microsoft got away with a similar trick, although that was quite a while ago, and they're not Korean.

Let's not reduce this to a tribal OS war.

[boriscleto]

Google should be worried by this, because their interface looks remarkably similar to Apple's iOS. Still, Microsoft got away with a similar trick, although that was quite a while ago, and they're not Korean.

Let's not reduce this to a tribal OS war.

Microsoft got away with it because John Sculley was an idiot. He gave a perpetual license for the Mac gui to Microsoft for a renewal of the license Applesoft Basic. He killed MacBasic in the same deal, then Microsoft never released Basic for the Mac.

Folklore.org: Macintosh Stories: MacBasic

Unfortunately, there was another problem on the horizon. Apple's original deal with Microsoft for licensing Applesoft Basic had a term of eight years, and it was due to expire in September 1985. Apple still depended on the Apple II for the lion's share of its revenues, and it would be difficult to replace Microsoft Basic without fragmenting the software base. Bill Gates had Apple in a tight squeeze, and, in an early display of his ruthless business acumen, he exploited it to the hilt. He knew that Donn's Basic was way ahead of Microsoft's, so, as a condition for agreeing to renew Applesoft, he demanded that Apple abandon MacBasic, buying it from Apple for the price of $1, and then burying it. He also used the renewal of Applesoft, which would be obsolete in just a year or two as the Mac displaced the Apple II, to get a perpetual license to the Macintosh user interface, in what probably was the single worst deal in Apple's history, executed by John Sculley in November 1985.

[RobA_Oz]

Microsoft got away with it because John Sculley was an idiot. He gave a perpetual license for the Mac gui to Microsoft for a renewal of the license Applesoft Basic. He killed MacBasic in the same deal, then Microsoft never released Basic for the Mac.

Folklore.org: Macintosh Stories: MacBasic

That part of the story was possibly a god-send, in that Apple users didn't have to suffer from the endless parade of tinkerers who thought that MS-Basic was the be-all-and-end-all of programming. It was probably the worst form of BASIC in history, and it still persists, tucked away in some applications.

Sculley was also possibly the simultaneous greatest mistake and blessing in Jobs' career, but he almost succeeded in killing Apple, although that would at least have spared us the puerile pro and anti jibes that persist in some quarters. We'd possibly mostly still be using the sort of clunky phones that cheap CFOs continue to foist on lower echelons of employees, instead of the types of phones that were the subject of the court case in this thread.

[jogiba]

Manuel Ilagan, one of the nine jurors who ruled in favor of Apple, tells CNET he thought Samsung's internal e-mails about incorporating some of Apple's technology into its devices, and the evasive way Samsung executives answered questions, was damning.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/exclusive-apple-samsung-juror-speaks-out/

[RobA_Oz]

A postscript to this, from Jean-Louis Gassée on Monday Note, 26 August 2012:

Following last week’s verdict against Samsung, the kommentariat have raised the specter of an egregious new Apple Tax, one that Apple will levy on other smartphone makers who will have no choice but to pass the burden on to you. The idea is this: Samsung’s loss means it will now have to compete against Apple with its dominant hand — a lower price tag — tied behind its back. This will allow Apple to exact higher prices for its iPhones (and iPads) and thus inflict even more pain and suffering on consumers.
There seems to be a moral aspect, here, as if Apple should be held to a higher standard. Last year, Apple and Nokia settled an IP “misunderstanding” that also resulted in a “Tax”…but it was Nokia that played the T-Man role: Apple paid Nokia more than $600M plus an estimated $11.50 per iPhone sold. Where were the handwringers who now accuse Apple of abusing the patent system when the Nokia settlement took place? Where was the outrage against the “evil”, if hapless, Finnish company? (Amusingly, observers speculate that Nokia has made more money from these IP arrangements than from selling its own Lumia smartphones.)

[jogiba]

With all of the legal entanglements facing Android, Microsoft's Windows Phone operating system is looking pretty attractive right now.

Samsung and Android's loss could be Microsoft's gain | Mobile - CNET News

Samsung leaks Windows Phone 8 devices in Apple court documents

Samsung leaks Windows Phone 8 devices in Apple court documents | Microsoft - CNET News

[RoxnDox]

F-ing greedy B@stards and *&^*&^%*&^%$(&*&(*&^%^%&*$*&^% lawyers...

[vonBaloney]

So now Apple owns the rectangle? God help us...

[kenafein]

So now Apple owns the rectangle? God help us...

I should also send them a check for every time I've pinched my fingers to indicate the relative size of something.

[jpzk]

My Samsung Galaxy S II LTE HD is 2 months "old" ... better send it back to the Network Provider where I got it from: Rogers.

I could always ask for an exchange for an Apple iPhone 4, 5, ... 6 ? I wonder what they would do?

Too bad.

JP

[boriscleto]

iPhone 5 will be released in less than a month. And nobody is going to have their phones taken away because of this ruling, Apple is asking for an injunction on new sales.

There are also rumors that Apple will be selling an unsubsidized iPhone (3GS or 4?) for $200.