ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Apple v Samsung Verdict is in

<< < (9/24) > >>

xtabber:
From today's NY times:

Velvin Hogan, the foreman of the jury in the Apple-Samsung case, said in a phone interview on Saturday that the decision should send a “clear message” to the industry that companies that violate intellectual property will have to pay a penalty, like the one Samsung officials face. “They took the risk and it caught up with them,” said Mr. Hogan, 67, a retired electrical engineer who holds two issued patents himself and has a third pending.

I wouldn't venture a guess as to whether this verdict might be eventually overturned, but I'd say that Samsung's lawyers certainly have some pretty good grounds for their inevitable appeal.

Mark0:
Especially when, as also written in the Jury instructions, damages are not supposed to punish, but only to compensate for losses.

That strange thing is that all the discussions will end up arguing on this kind of details, only to go around the giant absurdity of the current american patent law.

wraith808:
^ Doesn't that also go towards conflict of interest?  Why wouldn't the Samsung lawyers try to get rid of such a juror?

40hz:
Especially when, as also written in the Jury instructions, damages are not supposed to punish, but only to compensate for losses.
-Mark0 (August 27, 2012, 11:36 AM)
--- End quote ---

Actually, US patent law does allow for the awarding of punitive damages when it can be shown the infringement was significant and "willful." But in practice, the courts don't usually award them since most companies (or at least companies big enough to be able to pay punitive damages) can demonstrate the absence of willfulness by obtaining and following competent independent legal advice on issues relating to the possibility of patent infringement. In short, if your attorneys felt a patent in question was either invalid or not applicable to what you're doing, you're mostly off the hook for willfulness. (But not necessarily infringement.)

It's a not hard and fast rule how a court determines the degree of willfulness involved. But even where a court does find willfulness, it seldom awards the legal maximum of treble damages.

wraith808:
Relevant:

The frenemy companies try to limit fallout.

And though I don't defend the case, nor the outcome, I will say that Samsung isn't the innocent here.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version