apple vs samsung
Latest
Best Buy to provide Samsung mini-stores as Apple competition heats up
The battles between Apple and Samsung have been heating up for a while, and there is a new battleground for the two foes -- the aisles of Best Buy stores. Geek.com reported this morning that some high-traffic Best Buy stores have been given orders to remove two aisles next to the mobile section of their stores to make room for a Samsung "store within a store." At this time, Best Buy stores include an Apple mini-store where customers can browse and buy their favorite Apple products and accessories. The first wave of the Samsung mini-stores will be done in time for the release of the Galaxy S4 next month, but it's expected that the content and ubiquity of the stores will later in the year. By then, other Samsung phones and tablets will be added to the mix of products, and the mini-stores should be in every Best Buy. Like the Apple mini-stores, the Samsung stores will be manned by Best Buy employees specially trained to answer questions about the company's products and to assist customers in making purchasing decisions. Samsung has been opening its own "Samsung Experience Stores" in major cities around the globe to market its tablet, smartphone, PC and HDTV products, but the stores haven't achieved the success of Apple's retail outlets. While the Samsung mini-stores are sure to give their Apple counterparts a lot of competition, the move will definitely benefit Best Buy by furthering its reputation as the place to go for mobile technology.
Apple points out possible $85M court error in Samsung case
Legal maneuverings continue in the landmark court case between Apple and Samsung in the Northern District of California. In the latest development reported by FOSS Patents, Apple is questioning Judge Lucy Koh's decision to vacate $450 million of the original $1.05 billion award. Apple claims an error by Judge Koh would increase the number of devices included in the damage determination from 14 to 16. This would add an additional $85 million onto the judgement, bringing it up from the $600 million awarded by Koh to a new $685 million figure requested by Apple. You can read more about the legal strategy behind Apple's objection in the article on FOSS Patents. [Via Apple Insider]
Daily Update for March 7, 2013
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Apple grabs another win against Samsung in London court
Watching the patent lawsuits between Apple and Samsung is like watching a tennis match -- first the ball is on Apple's side and they lob it over the net right past Samsung, then Samsung sneaks a shot past Apple and they win a game. The latest news, this time out of a court in London, is that Apple has won a case over the use of Standard Essential Patents in its products. Samsung had asserted that Apple products infringed on a Standard Essential Patent held by the South Korean manufacturer. The Wednesday ruling means that Samsung, which was hoping for 2.4 percent royalties on sales of any of Apple's 3G-capable devices, won't get a thing. Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents told ZDNet that "On a worldwide basis Apple has now fended off 24 assertions of Standard-Essential Patents by Samsung. Samsung prevailed only on three such patents, two of them in Korea. With every win Apple scores, Samsung's demand for a 2.4 percent royalty on Apple's sales of 3G-capable products looks more ridiculous."
Apple wins one against Samsung in Japanese court
The lastest round of fighting between Apple and Samsung goes to the Cupertino Kid. A Japanese court ruled favorably for Apple in a suit filed by Samsung alleging that Apple had misused 3G wireless patents in several versions of the iPhone. As noted by Apple Insider, Samsung's lawsuit in this case goes back to April of 2011, when the Korean electronics giant sought an injunction against the iPhone for unauthorized use of specific data transmission patents. A ruling today found that Samsung doesn't have the right to assert those 3G patents in court. Samsung had also recently made a request to a California federal court seeking documents from the Apple v. Samsung patent trial, hoping to use those documents in discovery for a similar case in Japan. The move was seen by Apple as an attempt by Samsung to sneak around the usual Japanese court procedures, and the US court agreed with the company.
Apple, Samsung case in Australia warrants two-judge system
Samsung and Apple have been battling in the Australian court system for almost two years. According to a report in Financial Review, the infringement claims have gotten so complicated that the court system has taken a radical move to simplify the hearings. For the first time in Federal Court history, two judges will be present in court to hear each side's arguments. The idea was introduced by Justice Annabelle Bennett, who has been involved in the court cases since the beginning. Joining her in court will be Justice David Yates. The pair will have to examine 19 patent infringement claims by Apple and several from Samsung. [Via AppleInsider]
ITC to rule on Apple's Samsung complaint August 1
Administrative Law Judge Thomas B. Pender of the International Trade Commission (ITC) has scheduled a final ruling on one of Apple's lawsuits against Samsung for August 1, 2013. The ruling in question deals with a decision made by Pender in October of 2012 finding Samsung to be in violation of a design patent and three utility patents owned by Apple. Pender had recommended that the ITC force a ban on certain Samsung products that were infringing on Apple patents, but the ITC returned two of those patents -- dealing with providing translucent images on a display and headphone plug detection circuitry -- back to Pender for him to reconsider. Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents commented that even if Pender rules in Apple's favor, it's not certain whether or not that will result in a ban on infringing Galaxy products in the US. Samsung has designed workarounds to bypass several of the violations, although Pender will have the final word on whether or not those workarounds are sufficient to keep a ban at bay. [via AppleInsider]
Apple rejects Samsung request to see iOS 6 source code
In the never-ending global legal battle between Apple and Samsung, the Korean electronics firm has been rebuffed by Apple in an attempt to see the source code for iOS 6. According to The Korea Times, Samsung argues that unless they have access to the source code, they won't know if iOS 6 infringes on its technology patents. Apple's legal representatives apparently called the demand "insane," with a Seoul Central District Court representative recalling an Apple lawyer as saying, "It doesn't make any sense. Samsung is saying that we should give up protecting our most important data." What Samsung is most interested in looking at is whether Apple infringed on its patents when iOS acquired Notification Center. As iOS users are aware, Notification Center lets users check status of things like messages, schedules and weather information by swiping down from the top of a screen. Samsung says they originally patented that feature in November of 2006, and put the feature into Samsung Galaxy smartphones and tablets before Apple did. The court hasn't yet decided whether to accept Samsung's request to see the source code.
Attempts to ban Apple devices could see Samsung fined $15 billion
The European Commission has made it clear that it's none too happy with Samsung over the company's attempts to get Apple devices including the iPhone and iPad banned there. The Guardian reports that the commission is claiming Samsung tried to use so-called standard-essential patents to request the bans, a practice that could see the company fined up to 10 percent of its 2011 revenue, or about $15 billion. Standard-essential patents are ones that a company agrees to license to any competitor, and if the two companies can't come to an agreement on a fair and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing fee, one will be determined by a court. In this case, the patents cover 3G technology. Apple has attempted to license them but hasn't been able to agree on a price with Samsung. Perhaps in anticipation of the European Commission's move, Samsung withdrew its request to have the iPhone and iPad banned in Europe earlier this month. In a statement, it cited a willingness to "protect consumer choice" and "compete fairly in the marketplace, rather than in court" as its motivation. The company is still seeking similar bans in other countries including the US, however. It must now respond to the commission, which will then decide if a fine will be levied. [Via BGR]
Daily Update for December 28, 2012
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Judge throws out Samsung's juror misconduct argument
In the seemingly never-ending battle between Apple and Samsung, Apple just won another round. As you'll remember, Samsung had alleged that juror misconduct was behind Apple's decisive victory against the Korean manufacturer earlier in 2012. Yesterday, Judge Lucy Koh denied Samsung's request for an evidentiary hearing -- to determine if jury foreman Velvin Hogan was biased against Samsung and influenced the outcome of the trial -- and a whole new trial. In what was considered a longshot for Samsung, the company had accused Hogan of deliberately hiding information about a lawsuit he was involved in. That lawsuit was against Seagate, the drive manufacturer in which Samsung recently became a major shareholder. Samsung alleged that Hogan was biased against Samsung as a result, and worked to sway the rest of the jury members against the company. In her filing yesterday, Koh pointed out that Hogan had admitted that he worked for Seagate during jury selection. That gave Samsung's legal team the opportunity to discover Hogan's lawsuit had the team "acted with reasonable diligence." It wasn't all roses for Apple yesterday, though -- Koh threw out Apple's request for a permanent sales ban on the Samsung products that had infringed on Apple's patents. The judge still has to make a ruling on Apple's request for additional damages and Samsung's request to reduce the damages already awarded to Apple.
Court adds iPhone 5, Galaxy Note 10.1 and Galaxy S III to patent lawsuit
Both Samsung and Apple may expand their patent infringement claims to include recently released devices, says a report in Computerworld. A California judge handed down an order that let Apple add the Jelly Bean OS and new Samsung products like the Note 10.1 and the Galaxy S III to an ongoing patent lawsuit between the two companies. The same order also lets Samsung amend its infringement device list to include the iPhone 5 and possibly both the iPad mini and the iPad fourth generation. The order was handed down by Paul S. Grewal, Magistrate Judge of US District Court for the Northern District of California. Apple filed this lawsuit in February 2012 and is one of two cases that are making their way through the California court system. In the other case, a jury ruled in favor of Apple and awarded Apple a $1.05 billion judgment.
Daily Update for November 1, 2012
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Patent office invalidates Apple's "rubber-banding" patent in Samsung trial
According to FOSS Patents, the United States Patent and Trademark Office has invalidated all 20 claims of Apple's rubber-banding patent (U.S. Patent No, 7,469,381). This is a non-final decision that could be overturned by Apple if it convinces the USPTO that the claims are new and innovative enough to warrant a patent. Samsung didn't waste any time and already pointed out this rejection in a late-night request that was filed in the US District Court in North California.
USPTO has 'tentatively' invalidated Apple's key rubber-banding patent
The US Patent and Trademark Office may have just thrown a wrench into Apple's recent courtroom triumph over Samsung by invalidating one of the patents at the heart of the victory: rubber-banding. We noted at the time that Apple hit a "home run" with that particular IP, as jurors declared that all 21 disputed Samsung devices infringed it, no doubt resulting in a large part of the $1 billion (and counting) owed by the Korean maker. "Claim 19" of patent 7469381, which covers that feature, was invalidated by the USPTO on two counts, both of which were cases of prior art that allegedly existed before Cupertino claimed them. Either one could be enough reason to throw out that part of the patent, according to FOSS Patents, provided that the USPTO's ruling stands up. Either way, Samsung has already brought the new information to Judge Koh's attention -- which might bring about some new action very soon.
Samsung may be getting out of display supplier deal with Apple next year
A report in the Korea Times suggests Samsung will sever its contract with Apple and will no longer supply LCD panels to the Cupertino company, starting in 2013. An unnamed senior industry source told the newspaper that the company is not making enough money off the panels that it is selling to Apple. We are unable to supply our flat-screens to Apple with huge price discounts. Samsung has already cut our portion of shipments to Apple and next year we will stop shipping displays. Samsung is reportedly shipping fewer and fewer panels to Apple each quarter, with the Korean company expected to supply Apple with only 4.5 million LCD panels in the second half of the year. This is down from the 15 million panels that Samsung sent to Apple in the first six months of 2012. Samsung will reportedly turn to Amazon and its own handset division to make up for the loss of orders from Apple. Apple sources components from many companies, including displays from LG and Sharp as well as Samsung.
Apple's supply relationship with Samsung reportedly strained
The Korea Times is reporting that Apple's relationship with Samsung's supply arm is strained. According to the infamous "industry sources," (not to be confused with "people familiar with the matter"), Samsung did not participate in the development of Apple's A6 chip, which powers the iPhone 5. Instead, the company is assembling parts only. It's believed that Samsung took part in the development of Apple's A5. Just last week, we learned that Apple added Samsung's Jim Mergard to its talented staff. Last August, Bloomberg reported that Apple and Qualcomm tried to purchase exclusive access to TSMC chip production. Considering the contentious legal relationship between the consumer products divisions of Apple and Samsung, it'll be interesting to see where their manufacturing relationship goes.
Appeals court reverses ban on Samsung Galaxy Nexus
A U.S. Court of Appeals says that a lower California court "abused its discretion" by ordering a sales ban of the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and kicked the case back to the lower court, Reuters reports. The injunction, ordered by Judge Lucy Koh, came about in the days before Samsung and Apple went to trial in California. Samsung filed an appeal two days after the injunction was ordered. The appeals court took the chance to give its two cents regarding the entire mess. "Sales lost to an infringing product cannot irreparably harm a patentee if consumers buy that product for reasons other than the patented feature," the court said in its opinion. "If the patented feature does not drive the demand for the product, sales would be lost even if the offending feature were absent from the accused product." It also said there was not sufficient evidence to show that Apple would suffer irreparable harm if sales of the Galaxy Nexus were to continue, and the district court abused its discretion by having irreparable harm be a factor in determining the injunction to begin with. Judge Koh lifted the injunction on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 on October 3. Since the injunction was filed, a California jury found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's patents and awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages. [via Engadget]
iPad, iPhone sales ban delayed in South Korea
Someone at Samsung must be getting very frustrated right now. Apple was facing a ban on sales of the iPhone and iPad in South Korea after a court found that those devices infringed on patents owned by Samsung. Now a Seoul court has ruled that Apple can keep the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad and iPad 2 on store shelves at least until the appeals process has been completed. On the other hand, Samsung's Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy S and Galaxy S II -- all of which are also covered by the August 24 ruling -- are still on the ban list. A Samsung spokesperson told Bloomberg that the company had "no comment" about whether it would file its own request to delay the South Korean sales ban.
Samsung goes after credibility of jury foreman
If you thought that the end of the Apple vs. Samsung patent infringement case was really the end, you're sadly mistaken. Yesterday saw Samsung filing a lawsuit against Apple for alleged patent infringement in the new iPhone 5, and today the Korean electronics giant is attacking the foreman of the jury, saying that he lied about his past history to get onto the jury. Foreman Velvin Hogan has provided multiple interviews since the end of the trial, and Samsung has picked apart those statements saying that his "incorrect and extraneous legal standards had no place in the jury room." In addition, Hogan didn't tell lawyers in pre-trial hearings about the time he was sued by former employer Seagate Technology -- owned partially by Samsung -- and had to file for bankruptcy. Samsung lawyers believe that he deliberately lied during jury selection, and that the only solution would be to hold a new trial. Hogan told a Bloomberg reporter that he was only required to disclose litigation he was involved with during the past 10 years, and the Seagate litigation took place in 1993. Hogan said that "I answered every question the judge asked me... [Samsung] had every opportunity to question me." Samsung has a number of other tricks up its sleeve to try to either get the judge to throw out the US$1.05 billion verdict or at least reduce it, and we're sure to see many of them arise during the next few months.
