Japan Court Rules in Favor of Samsung in Apple Lawsuit

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]zulutech[/nom]They should really check wether the jurors use apple or samsung products first before picking them.[/citation]
Maybe they should also move the court case out of Apples home town as well 😛
 
[citation][nom]kcorp2003[/nom]yeah that all depends on the jury. I heard the US jurors were engineers and well educated people.[/citation]

Most of them were, but some admitted that they went through process too quickly
 
[citation][nom]kcorp2003[/nom]yeah that all depends on the jury. I heard the US jurors were engineers and well educated people.[/citation]

If by "educated people" you mean a CTO, who despite owning at least one patent, does not understand how the patent system actually works and 8 other people who couldn't figure it out at all then yes, they are educated people.

Jurors are expected to use their own life experiences to reach a verdict but they are not allowed to introduce their own evidences or act as their own expert witnesses. By having his so called "aha!" moment, the foreman attempted to educate the jury in a matter that would go beyond that of a layperson, this is not allowed and is grounds for a mistrial. To make matters worse, his so called "expertise" was actually a complete and total misapplication of the law and the jury used this as a basis to reach their verdict. Normally the mental processes of jurors cannot be called into question but the mere fact that they admittedly treated pure speculation as objective fact means that the entire verdict must be called into question.

I smell a mistrial or a very strong appeal.
 
As if droid users will throw up their hands and buy iPhones. Tiny screen, chained to iTunes, and ugly. Apple has come a long way since 1984. Someone should throw a hammer at them now.
 
[citation][nom]jdwii[/nom]Its hard to speak their language but i guess i can learn time to move![/citation]
Japan rocks 😉 You'd love it. Well, anyone that comes to this site would love Japan. lol (yes, I've been there and I wanna go back!)
 
Wait, Apple patented syncing which is essentially just automating what people tend to do and defaulting to copying everything that's new over to the other device which is basically what automatic back-up systems are supposed to do? So does that mean you can patent the idea that computers and robots will basically do everything for you? not patent how they actually do it but patent that they will do it and then that means nobody else can make anything automatic?
 
Really.. a lawsuit on how it connects to a computer.. hint hint, its called USB, the U stands for Universal, not Apple, and Palm (now HP) was syncing "contacts, calendars, and media" long before Apple was.
 
[citation][nom]Pinhedd[/nom]If by "educated people" you mean a CTO, who despite owning at least one patent, does not understand how the patent system actually works and 8 other people who couldn't figure it out at all then yes, they are educated people.Jurors are expected to use their own life experiences to reach a verdict but they are not allowed to introduce their own evidences or act as their own expert witnesses. By having his so called "aha!" moment, the foreman attempted to educate the jury in a matter that would go beyond that of a layperson, this is not allowed and is grounds for a mistrial. To make matters worse, his so called "expertise" was actually a complete and total misapplication of the law and the jury used this as a basis to reach their verdict. Normally the mental processes of jurors cannot be called into question but the mere fact that they admittedly treated pure speculation as objective fact means that the entire verdict must be called into question.I smell a mistrial or a very strong appeal.[/citation]
This has been my thought process as well. Ever since I heard the interviews where the other jurors said the one elec engineer who had a few patents was 'instrumental in guiding them'. I imagine any of those fancy schmancy lawyers samsung's got loved that info.
 
Apple won the battle in the US? Come on. They were awarded a small win in a local court were all the jurors directly or indirectly depends on Apple. They fact that they were award only $1B when they asked for $10B could also be seen a giant defeat when the reality is that Apple will not see such a lop-sided group of jurors when it's appealed.
 
[citation][nom]mcd023[/nom]Japan rocks You'd love it. Well, anyone that comes to this site would love Japan. lol (yes, I've been there and I wanna go back!)[/citation]
...and the women are fine too. I'm just say'n.
 
This is great. I mean honestly this whole thing is ridiculous, its like somebody who invented door handles trying to file a lawsuit against automakers for putting them on there cars.

Apple is trying to sue Samsung for using things that have been established as industry standards.As much as I hate to admit it Apple has helped put these standards in place, but in reality they shouldn't be suing over it, they should just feel proud that they've had an impact.
 
Shall we keep count?

Samsung vs. Apple 3 : 1

Apple got the USA
Samsung got Korea, Japan and the UK.

Cell Phone Market sizes

USA 255Mil.

Korea 44
Japan 107
UK 72

Score by Cell Phone Market size therefore
223:255 (give or take a few for a balanced result)

Let's wait how China and Europe decide... that's where the real Numbers are.
China 550 Mil
Europe 480 Mil.


4 down, 180 more to go 🙂
 
I have an LG cell phone that's older than any icrap device from Apple and it has some features close to an iphone like bounce back and the phone has round corners.

Apple claims to be the first to use round corners and bounce back, but LG did it a few years before them.
Is it because it's a regular cell phone and not a smartphone?
 
[citation][nom]nieur[/nom]I salute you Tamotsu Shoji hope this helps Apple putting it's Patent Troll at hold[/citation]

How to Apple patent trolling? Clueless iHaters are clueless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom