The Apple v. Samsung jury on Friday meted out $119.6 million in damages to Apple after ruling Samsung infringed on two Apple patents. Considered a win, the award is still a ways off from the $2.2 billion Apple was seeking in its suit.
Samsung has begun hyping a health-related event to be held in San Francisco on May 28 — five days before Apple's own Worldwide Developers Conference is slated to begin in the same city.
The jurors deciding the outcome of the second Apple vs Samsung trial haven't yet returned a verdict, but their options are limited to a few possible outcomes, ranging from a fiery thermonuclear blast to a wintery new Dark Ages.
Apple started 2014 with a diverse lineup of iPods and iPads in multiple sizes, but the company still only makes one form factor of iPhone. Here's how the company's iPhone 5c experiment has helped it to develop the operational sophistication needed to produce multiple sizes of iPhone.
Though its total shipments fell year over year last quarter, Apple and its iPad still accounts for about a third of all tablets pushed to market last quarter, though research firm IDC has predicted overall tablet growth will be slow throughout 2014.
In its first full day of deliberations, the jury deciding Apple and Samsung's patent trial in California sent five notes to Judge Lucy Koh asking for further clarification on key case points including Steve Jobs' thinking behind the suit.
In their second major California court case, Apple and Samsung on Tuesday presented closing arguments before a jury of eight will decide how much of the companies' respective $2.2 billion and $6.2 million damages claims will be meted out, if at all.
While Samsung itself does not report unit shipments, estimates from a closely positioned marketing company indicate that it shipped 89 million phones in the March quarter, nearly 20 million more than the year ago quarter, despite earning less money this year, and half as much as Apple.
On the last day of testimony in the Apple v. Samsung patent trial, Samsung counsel and its final expert witness were berated by presiding Judge Lucy Koh over possible coaching on what to say regarding claim construction of a contentious Apple patent.
Samsung Electronics reported quarterly operating profits of 8.5 trillion South Korean won ($8.2 billion), a -3.3 percent change from the year ago quarter and its second quarterly drop in a row; the company blamed slowing high-end smartphone and flat screen sales.
Jurors in the second Apple v. Samsung patent trial in California, who were scheduled to begin deliberations early next week, will now hear an additional two hours of testimony clarifying a key phrase used in one of Apple's patents-in-suit.
Last fall, Google's Motorola group unveiled its Moto X and Apple released its middle-tier iPhone 5c. Across the board, pundits and reporters portrayed the 5c as a grave mistake that got everything wrong while lavishing Google's Moto X with praise. Why were they so incredibly wrong?
A U.S. appeals court ruled that Apple and Google's Motorola can sue each other over smartphone patents, overturning Judge Richard Posner's opinion from the summer of 2012. The court also sided with a claim construction that does not favor Apple, and may impact its case with Samsung.
Apple and Samsung continue to be at loggerheads over seemingly every action in their second California patent trial, the latest issue being a tentative juror verdict form issued by presiding Judge Lucy Koh on Wednesday.
Even more startling than the news from today's trial that Google offered to indemnify Samsung for Android's infringement of Apple's iPhones patents is the fact that Samsung falsely stated in court filings that that it had not been "seeking indemnification from any third party."
An agreement between Google and Samsung, revealed on Tuesday in the second California Apple v. Samsung patent trial, has the Internet search giant on the hook for legal fees and liability related to up to four Apple patents.
In the ongoing Apple v. Samsung patent trial in California on Monday, a Samsung damages expert said Apple should be granted $38.4 million for all five alleged-infringed patents, far from the $2.19 billion Apple is seeking.
In an industry captivated by cheap commodity components, Apple's ability to command healthy profit margins for "magical," premium priced products designed to delight users—rather than just solve basic problems in a cost effective way—has confounded analysts and pundits for the better part of 40 years. It appears Apple will continue to introduce upscale new products in 2014, rather than following the industry into a race to the bottom in pricing.
During the Apple v. Samsung trial on Friday, Samsung continued its defense by calling on a number of expert witnesses who asserted Apple has grossly exaggerated the value assigned to each of its patents-in-suit.
Samsung recently inked a deal with Swiss Federal Railways, the same organization that accused Apple of copying one of its iconic clock designs, leading some to speculate that Samsung may have sought the contract solely to make a dig at Apple.
{{ summary }}
Mikey Campbell
Neil Hughes
Daniel Eran Dilger
Sam Oliver
