User Tag List

  1. Akshay Masand's Avatar

    Judge Lucy Koh recently handed down a ruling denying Samsung’s motion to retry a high-profile patent case between the two tech giants based on changes to the scope of Apple’s so-called “rubber-banding” scrolling patent. The patent, which covers the rebounding effect seen when a user scrolls to an end of a list of an Apple device, was a key piece of Apple’s 2012 victory in the company’s big lawsuit. The United States Patent and Trademark Office tentatively rejected all claims in the patent in April of this year but were confirmed by the government agency in June.

    In Judge Koh’s ruling, she confirmed that a limited retrial to adjust the amount of damages awarded to Apple will proceed. Judge Koh has already cut the award, which was originally set by the jury at more than $1 billion, by more than 40%. Still, the whole move is another victory for Apple in the company’s ongoing patent battle with Samsung.

    Source: FOSS Patents

    Twitter: @AkshayMasand
    2013-08-23 07:18 PM
  2. jOnGarrett's Avatar
    cosmetic patent = billion dollar judgement. essential patent gets a presidential pardon.
    2013-08-23 08:22 PM
  3. Scotty Manley Silberhorn's Avatar
    cosmetic patent = billion dollar judgement. essential patent gets a presidential pardon.
    american company > foreign company
    2013-08-23 09:25 PM
  4. tridley68's Avatar
    american company > foreign company
    Thank you Judge
    2013-08-23 10:29 PM
  5. kosher1's Avatar
    Enough with the fighting. Both you make your billions. Shut up. And stop being firkin greedy bastards!!!
    2013-08-24 12:31 AM
  6. politicalslug's Avatar
    Essential patents guarantee license holders will make substantial profits over a long period of time. That's why they pledge their patents as such under FRAND terms. It's good to do so. Samsung's made a bundle off those patents, they just took it took far and abused them with Apple, hence the presidential veto. Non-essential patents always have work-arounds, so if patent holders don't feel like licensing those patents (which Apple did not) then alternatives can be created. After all, there was a point in time when we could scroll to the bottom of a list without a rubber and effect. Clearly there's a workaround, but Samsung chose to try their luck and copy the feature verbatim then contest the patent. They knew the risk, accepted it, and lost. Now they have to pay the piper.
    They can have my jailbreak when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    2013-08-24 01:20 AM
  7. holyshnikes's Avatar
    It's a silly thing, but the rubber banding is definitly an apple trademark. I remeber seeing it for the first time and thinking how cool it was. I also remember playing with an android phone a year or so later and remembering how cluncky and glitchy it was compared to the iPhone. It was only when they beefed up the processor and added the rubber banding like effect that they started selling more. So, it's definitly hurt apple.
    2013-08-24 01:45 AM
  8. Jahooba's Avatar
    The rubber-banding patent was a really good one. I thought it was a silly thing to patent at first, but then I read about the design theory behind it. Basically Apple did a bunch of studies on UI design, and one of the things they noticed was that users would get to the bottom of the page and when the page stopped scrolling it would cause confusion - users thought the phone was freezing, as if it had become unresponsive.

    It's a simple thing, but genius. Apple shouldn't have lost its patent. There were probably some biased Android users at the patent office.
    2013-08-24 03:25 AM