Samsung wins bid to sell Nexus in court(finance.yahoo.com)
finance.yahoo.com
Samsung wins bid to sell Nexus in court
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/samsung-loses-bid-stay-u-201220889.html
5 comments
That is a very confusing article. I can't tell whether they are saying it is a good thing or not. When they say "on Friday" in the first paragraph, do they mean today or last week? Towards the end of the article, it says that sales were banned earlier this week.
They mean today.
There is an upcoming trial in the lower court. The judge who will preside over that trial issued an injunction earlier this week preventing the Nexus from being sold until the trial can resolve these patent issues.
Samsung appealed to the higher court, who agreed to stay (temporarily remove) the injunction - so that the Nexus can continue to be sold - at least until Apple files its response to Samsung's request and the court has considered the papers.
There is an upcoming trial in the lower court. The judge who will preside over that trial issued an injunction earlier this week preventing the Nexus from being sold until the trial can resolve these patent issues.
Samsung appealed to the higher court, who agreed to stay (temporarily remove) the injunction - so that the Nexus can continue to be sold - at least until Apple files its response to Samsung's request and the court has considered the papers.
"I can't tell whether they are saying it is a good thing or not."
The whole point of the media is not to take sides. Generally it's not really a great result for either side -- Apple had the tablet injunction upheld and Samsung got a reprieve on the Galaxy Nexus injunction.
The whole point of the media is not to take sides. Generally it's not really a great result for either side -- Apple had the tablet injunction upheld and Samsung got a reprieve on the Galaxy Nexus injunction.
I think from the perspective of a patent hater like myself it's a good thing (edit to be clear: a good thing on balance). The tablet injunction was based on a very narrow criteria in a design patent (basically that the Galaxy Tab looked just like an iPad). The "search from multiple sources" patent was absolute nonsense, and hugely dangerous to a functioning market.
I think you've simultaneously missed and proved my point. You don't care for the tablet injunction so upholding the tablet can't have been the good thing you claim. It's a mixed result.
Neither here nor there... I have more sympathy for software patent defendants then design. If Samsung wants to gamble with their billion dollar product lines to see how close to Apple's shit the courts will allow them to get that's their prerogative. They knew exactly what they were doing just as Motorola and others knew exactly what they were doing by differentiating their products more clearly - protecting themselves from costly lawsuits for one.
Neither here nor there... I have more sympathy for software patent defendants then design. If Samsung wants to gamble with their billion dollar product lines to see how close to Apple's shit the courts will allow them to get that's their prerogative. They knew exactly what they were doing just as Motorola and others knew exactly what they were doing by differentiating their products more clearly - protecting themselves from costly lawsuits for one.
It's a confusing article for you, I guess. An article written on a Friday referring to Friday is probably referring to the Friday on which the article was written. What is confusing about the phrase "earlier this week"?
That's not true. An article written on Friday referring to Friday probably means the previous Friday.
Wrong. There's a concept in journalism called newspaper dateweek. A story written on Friday can refer to the day on which it is written either as "today" or "Friday." LAST Friday would be the month & day, e.g. June 30.
You are confusing how things actually work with how you think they should work.
You are confusing how things actually work with how you think they should work.
It's confusing because it's a temporary stay of a temporary injunction, but other news reports suggest that Google will be selling again next week.
(See Update 3 below)
http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/3/3136336/galaxy-nexus-no-lon...
(See Update 3 below)
http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/3/3136336/galaxy-nexus-no-lon...
I suspect that they plan to remove the infringing features indefinitely, so they can sell while the appeal goes on no matter what the courts may decide. They can then re-add the features later, if the GNex is found to have not been infringing.
Well that headline is completely stupid.
So basically Samsung can sell Nexus for one more week. Big deal. Any longer will depend on if the Federal Court decides they can continue to sell during the appeal or not.
This article gives the impression that Samsung won the appeal.
So basically Samsung can sell Nexus for one more week. Big deal. Any longer will depend on if the Federal Court decides they can continue to sell during the appeal or not.
This article gives the impression that Samsung won the appeal.
They won the appeal in precisely the same way that they "lost" the case. It was a preliminary injunction, decided before trial. The federal circuit said no, that it wasn't an appropriate status quo and lifted it preliminarily until they can come up with a firmer decision.
The headline merely states that Samsung won the bid to sell Nexus phones inside the courtroom.
A pyrrhic victory. Not very many customers in there.
What makes you think that Apple will win the case next week? The patents they offered are ridiculous and could easily be laughed out of Court by a competent judge (probably not in this case) or invalidated by prior art. Also one more week buys Google time to roll out the firmware patch should the patents hold up.