a****a
发帖数: 5763 | 1 So far, the jury has found largely favor of Apple in the Apple vs. Samsung
trial after three days of deliberations.
On the first claim, regarding the '381 "bounce back" patent, the jury finds
Samsung guilty on all counts. Samsung infringed on Apple's patent on a wide
variety of products.
On Apple's "pinch and zoom" '915 patent, the jury found that Samsung
infringed on all but three products.
For the "double-tap to zoom" '163 patent, the jury found that Samsung
infringed on a wide number of products, but not all.
The jury found that Samsung took actions that it knew or should have known
were infringing across the '381, '915, and '163 patents on most, though not
on all, counts.
For the '677 patent, covering Apple's trade dress registration of the look
of the front of the iPhone, the jury found that Samsung did infringe on most
devices, but again, not all.
For the D'087 patent, covering Apple's trade dress registration of the look
of the back of the iPhone, the jury found that Samsung did infringe on some
devices, but not all.
For the '305 patent, covering the trade dress registration of the iPhone's
home screen, the jury found that Samsung infringed across most devices.
For the D'889 patent, covering the trade dress registration of the iPad's
appearance, the jury found that Samsung's tablets do not infringe -- one of
the first victories for Samsung.
On the question of whether Samsung Korea knew or should have known it was
inducing US subsidiaries to infringe on the D'677, D'087, D'305 and/or D'889
patents, the jury found in favor of Apple across a wide number of phones
and patents, though not on the '889 patent regarding the iPad. These two
questions are significant for Apple to receive damages.
On the question of whether Samsung's infringement was willful, the jury
again found for Apple on a number of patents and devices.
Finally, the jury ruled that all of Apple's patents are valid.
Regarding trade dress, Apple has proven that its unregistered iPhone 3G
trade dress was protectable, and the jury found that a number of Samsung
phone models violated Apple's trade dress, thought not all of them.
Overall, the jury is finding for Apple on most counts.
Regarding damages, the jury finds that Apple should be awarded $1,051,855,
000 in damages for willfully violating Apple's patents and trade dress.
Next up are Samsung's claims against Apple.
The jury has found for Apple regarding its alleged infringement of Samsung's
utility patents on every claim, however Apple did not prove they were
invalid. The jury did not award Samsung any damages.
NewImage
Previously: According to CNET, the jury has reached a verdict in the Apple
vs. Samsung trial after three days of deliberations. The three-week trial
has resulted in interesting testimony and evidence from both sides,
including looks at early iPhone and iPad prototypes, Apple and Samsung
mobile device sales numbers in the U.S., and an internal Samsung memo that
examined what the company needed to change in its Galaxy line of smartphones
to compete with the iPhone.
The 9-person jury was asked to fill out a 20-page jury form with more than
700 questions across 33 groups. They were required to come to a unanimous
decision on each question and court-watchers didn't expect a verdict until
at least next week. The decision will be announced later this afternoon.
MacRumors will update this page as more information is released. | d**r
发帖数: 899 | 2 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
finds
wide
【在 a****a 的大作中提到】
: So far, the jury has found largely favor of Apple in the Apple vs. Samsung
: trial after three days of deliberations.
: On the first claim, regarding the '381 "bounce back" patent, the jury finds
: Samsung guilty on all counts. Samsung infringed on Apple's patent on a wide
: variety of products.
: On Apple's "pinch and zoom" '915 patent, the jury found that Samsung
: infringed on all but three products.
: For the "double-tap to zoom" '163 patent, the jury found that Samsung
: infringed on a wide number of products, but not all.
: The jury found that Samsung took actions that it knew or should have known
| w********2
发帖数: 16371 | 3 你小时候会么？
先到
【在 d**r 的大作中提到】
: 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
: 像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
: 达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
:
: finds
: wide
| g*****x
发帖数: 3283 | 4
先到
没错啊，大家都知道哥伦布发现了美洲。不然你说第一个在美洲生活的土著是谁？
【在 d**r 的大作中提到】
: 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
: 像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
: 达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
:
: finds
: wide
| f****l
发帖数: 5514 | 5 这样的话用起来顺手，符合人类直觉的好设计都不能申请专利了
先到
【在 d**r 的大作中提到】
: 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
: 像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
: 达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
:
: finds
: wide
| o*****n
发帖数: 2098 | 6 你女儿的例子只是说你女儿通过尝试学会了这个功能，而不能说你女儿发明了这个功能
。如果Google设定三个手指pinch是zoom，相信你女儿也能学会，但这些都和专利没啥
关系。
先到
【在 d**r 的大作中提到】
: 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
: 像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
: 达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
:
: finds
: wide
| j**u
发帖数: 6059 | 7 welcome to the real world
先到
【在 d**r 的大作中提到】
: 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
: 像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
: 达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
:
: finds
: wide
| d**r
发帖数: 899 | 8 这个“发明”太过于自然而然因此其本身没啥创新的成分——但凡使用触摸屏来设计产
品必然就会想到。允许这样的专利相当于允许首先到达新大陆的人向后来者收取费用，
哪怕这个后来者是到新大陆上做开创性的工作的。
这样的制度鼓励你去发现新大陆，但不鼓励你开发已经发现的大陆。考虑到实际上不可
能有那么多新大陆可以被发现，在更多时候实际上这是打击竞争，阻碍创新的。
【在 o*****n 的大作中提到】
: 你女儿的例子只是说你女儿通过尝试学会了这个功能，而不能说你女儿发明了这个功能
: 。如果Google设定三个手指pinch是zoom，相信你女儿也能学会，但这些都和专利没啥
: 关系。
:
: 先到
| l**t
发帖数: 6971 | 9
先到
你搞反了吧？这只能说明这个专利很牛X啊。
【在 d**r 的大作中提到】
: 我两岁半的女儿用智能手机看了几次照片就无师自通地知道怎样pinch and zoom。所以
: 像"pinch and zoom", "double-tap and zoom", 这样的专利实在很无耻，类似于首先到
: 达某个新大陆的人插根旗撒泡尿就宣布自己拥有这块大陆一样。
:
: finds
: wide
|
|
