Samsung takes Apple patent battle to US Supreme Court

[AresKrieger]

 

Samsung's taking its suit against Apple all the way to the Supreme Court -- if the justices will consider the case, that is.

The South Korean electronics giant on Monday filed a request with the highest court in the US, asking it to re-examine the decisions made in the patent infringement lawsuits between Samsung against Apple. The trial, which ended in 2012, cast a bright light on the designs behind some of the most popular smartphones, and it resulted in Samsung ultimately having topay Apple $548 million.

 

Well I'm not that surprised it came to this

 

 

It's unclear whether the Supreme Court will consider the case. It hasn't looked at a suit involving design patents since the 1800s. Those cases involved a spoon handle, a carpet, a saddle and a rug. Since that time, a lot has changed, including the introduction of electronic devices like the ones Apple and Samsung make. Samsung wants the Supreme Court to give guidance on what's covered by design patents and what damages can be collected.

 

Asking the Supreme Court to hear a case "is always an uphill battle," said Mark Lemley, an intellectual property law professor at Stanford Law School. "But this is a very high-profile case."

 

Really the only question is whether the supreme court actually decides to take the case, given how big of a deal this has been over the years I could see them accepting it, if they do this case could have major ramifications on patent law in the US.

 

http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-takes-apple-patent-battle-to-us-supreme-court/

[Mr.Meerkat]

...Can we all stop fighting with all of these lawsuits and keep it as competition only as these are all piety and are really un-needed as it's just wasting courts time. Competition is  good as it allows things to evolve to something better as everyone always wants the advance devices and it also allows companies to price their products more appropriately (For example, when the r9 290x launched, Nvidia lowered the price of the 780 to match the price of the 290x).

[patrickjp93]

...Can we all stop fighting with all of these lawsuits and keep it as competition only as these are all piety and are really un-needed as it's just wasting courts time. Competition is good as it allows things to evolve to something better as everyone always wants the advance devices and it also allows companies to price their products more appropriately (For example, when the r9 290x launched, Nvidia lowered the price of the 780 to match the price of the 290x).

Try telling that to the Asetek drool monkeys on this website.

[Bensemus]

Try telling that to the Asetek drool monkeys on this website.

lol. You never did reply to me when I pointed out that Asetek only went after Swiftech's H220 with its pump & block combo and not the H220x with everything on the rad, the one that doesn't infringe on their patent.

On point. Why invest in making something new when you can rip off someone else's design and undercut their prices due to no money spent on R&D. We need patents. We just seem to have a terrible system which reviews and grants them. Samsung and Apple are just doing what they can with the current system.

[Agent181]

Try telling that to the Asetek drool monkeys on this website.

am i the only one that thinks that the entire US patent system is broken? 

[Sauron]

I still call bs on "your phone can't look somewhat like ours despite being completely different on the inside". There are only so many ways to arrange 2 buttons and a screen.

[patrickjp93]

lol. You never did reply to me when I pointed out that Asetek only went after Swiftech's H220 with its pump & block combo and not the H220x with everything on the rad, the one that doesn't infringe on their patent.

On point. Why invest in making something new when you can rip off someone else's design and undercut their prices due to no money spent on R&D. We need patents. We just seem to have a terrible system which reviews and grants them. Samsung and Apple are just doing what they can with the current system.

Yes, we need patents, but not lasting both the life of the applicant and then an additional 70 years. 30 years is more than enough for everything but drugs which, due to the regulatory bodies which monitor them, take about that long to reach market.

[Sakkura]

Yes, we need patents, but not lasting both the life of the applicant and then an additional 70 years. 30 years is more than enough for everything but drugs which, due to the regulatory bodies which monitor them, take about that long to reach market.

 

That's copyright. Don't be a drool-monkey.

 

The regular patent term is 20 years in the US, significantly less than the 30 years you propose.

[Misanthrope]

Something tells me they're just suing their way out of paying the settlement, sadly this is likely the end of the road but they thought "What the hell, push it back 1 or 2 more quarters"

[patrickjp93]

That's copyright. Don't be a drool-monkey.

The regular patent term is 20 years in the US, significantly less than the 30 years you propose.

Depends on the industry. Further, sorry, should have been 20. Finger slip.

[Bensemus]

That's copyright. Don't be a drool-monkey.

 

The regular patent term is 20 years in the US, significantly less than the 30 years you propose.

EDIT ops wrong person