The battle of the tech giants has once again come to an end after samgung was asked to pay $119.6 million more to Apple over patent infringements, according to court documents filed by the U.S. District Court of Northern District of California, San Jose division.
According to Cnn's website the ruling is the latest development in the long-running legal battle between the two tech giants.While certainly not
insignificant, Friday's decision was by no means a total victory for
Apple: The Cupertino, California-based company had actually sought a
much higher sum from Samsung, and the jury only sided with it on two of
the four patent infringements that it claimed. And according to the
court documents, Apple must pay Samsung more than $158,000 for patent
infringement accusations filed by the Korean smartphone maker.
In a statement, Apple
said the latest ruling "reinforces what courts around the world have
already found: that Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our
products."
"We are fighting to
defend the hard work that goes into beloved products like the iPhone,
which our employees devote their lives to designing and delivering for
our customers," the company said.
This decision marks another -- and almost definitely not the final -- chapter in the years-long fight between Apple and Samsung.
The two companies are
embroiled in dozens of patent disputes in courts around the world. Apple
has typically been the aggressor in alleging Samsung of "slavishly"
copying aspects of its iPhone and iPad technology, though Samsung has
levied a few patent infringement accusations of its own.
In August 2012, Samsung
was found to have violated several of Apple's patents, and a jury ruled
that Samsung owed Apple more than $1 billion in damages. U.S. District
Court Judge Lucy Koh later said that the jury miscalculated the award,
and about $450 million worth of those damages were reconsidered in a new
trial.
Then, last November, a
federal jury ordered Samsung to pay $290 million in damages on top of
the $640 million in damages that Judge Koh upheld.
But it's not likely that decision is final, as both companies have appealed the original August 2012 ruling.
An appeal of Friday's ruling, too, is still possible -- from either party.
0 comments:
Post a Comment