Apple v. Samsung Jury Decision.

[Sheep]

http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/

That didn't take long. I've got my bucket of buttery popcorn ready to go.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Re

 

[Kingbee13]

Its a bit surprising the jury was able to get through all of the points so quickly

 

[Phynaz]

Ouch...Samsung found guilty of infringement.

 

[Kingbee13]

And it looks like a route for Apple

 

[XJustMeX21]

Doesn't look good

 

[ImDonly1]

Some of the stuff doesn't make sense. I dno what the patent in question is about, but example for one of them the Captivate was found to not infringe on the patent, but the Mezmorize, Fascinate, etc were? They were all the same phone Galaxy S but for different carriers.

 

[zoiks]

Samsung is getting creamed.

 

[Kingbee13]

GG Samsung.

Some of the stuff doesn't make sense. I dno what the patent in question is about, but example for one of them the Captivate was found to not infringe on the patent, but the Mezmorize, Fascinate, etc were? They were all the same phone Galaxy S but for different carriers.

If they use the same code that will look great on appeal

honestly no way the jury went though each of these points in detail

 

[Lonyo]

Pretty terrible live reporting since it doesn't give any indication what the patents are.

Anyone know a list of the patents involved, with numbers?

 

[Dumac]

Pretty terrible live reporting since it doesn't give any indication what the patents are.

Anyone know a list of the patents involved, with numbers?

Huh? It says what the patents are.

 

[Kingbee13]

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_21356424/live-blog-verdict-apple-samsung-patent-trial

this isnt as detailed but it's in english

 

[abaez]

Pretty terrible live reporting since it doesn't give any indication what the patents are.

Anyone know a list of the patents involved, with numbers?

You can find them on page 8: http://groklaw.net/pdf3/ApplevSamsung-1.pdf

 

[Phynaz]

Apple just lost on one of the patents.

 

[Hmoobphajej]

Ohh dear god this is ridiculous... it's time to appeal to another court that isn't home plate for anybody now.

 

[Kingbee13]

Its funny that they found the Galaxy Tab design didnt infringe the ipad design but the phones did, sort of saw that being reversed due to prior art

 

[cheezy321]

I was waiting for someone to claim 'bias!' or 'corruption!' for these charges...looks like I didn't have to wait too long.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I think it's funny they kicked the i9000 and i9100 out of these rulings and Samsung is still getting creamed. Are you serious?

Edit: Wait I see them in the ruling. What the heck. Is this another case I'm thinking of?

 

[Phynaz]

Double ouch.... Infringement was willful.

Samsung infringed intentionally, and knew they were doing it.

That's the biggie, game over for Samsung.

 

[cheezy321]

Samsungs actions were deemed 'willful'. In other words they knew exactly what they were doing the entire time.

none of their patents were proven invalid by samsung either. Another big ouch.

 

[Phynaz]

Ohh dear god this is ridiculous... it's time to appeal to another court that isn't home plate for anybody now.

Yes because the entire court and jury was biased.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Yes because the entire court and jury was biased.

I think Samsung needs to hire the Dream Team in patent law here....

 

[abaez]

They are going question by question.. aren't their like 400 questions? This is going to take awhile.

 

[Sheep]

They are going question by question.. aren't their like 400 questions? This is going to take awhile.

I thought it was 600 or 700...

 

[Kingbee13]

I always felt apple would win, but I thought some of the prior art claims would stick