Even though Samsung already agreed to pay Apple $548 million in damages for patent infringement, the Korean-based tech giant is understandably hoping to get the Supreme Court to overturn the original ruling.
While perhaps a long shot, Samsung's efforts to secure Supreme Court attention represents the company's last-ditch effort to secure an unlikely victory from the jaws of defeat. As Samsung tells it, its 2012 trial with Apple was tainted because jurors in the case weren't given sufficient information to help them truly grasp the nature and implications of the patents at issue.
Not only that, Samsung contends that the manner in which existing patent laws were interpreted in its litigation with Apple doesn't bode well for the patent system at large.
A Samsung statement on the matter reads:
Samsung is escalating this case because it believes that the way the laws were interpreted is not in line with modern times. If the current legal precedent stands, it could diminish innovation, stifle competition, pave the way for design patent troll litigation and negatively impact the economy and consumers.
Apple of course isn't buying it, and just recently filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asking them to reject Samsung's appeal request. Apple specifically points out that the case poses no pressing or exceptional legal questions and, in short, is hardly worth the Court's time or attention.
Apple's brief, in part, notes that its patent litigation with Samsung, while high-profile, is "legally unexceptional."
Having looked at Apple's brief in full, Florian Mueller writes:
The hurdle for Apple to discourage the Supreme Court from taking the case is (although cert petitions are normally long shots) reasonably high here not only because of all the amici who support Samsung but also because the Supreme Court hasn't heard a design patent case in about 122 years. It's so obvious that a lot of things have changed during that period, and the role design patents play in connection with complex technology products really needs to be adjudicated again.
All in all, I would really be surprised if Samsung's petition didn't at least result in a CVSG (call for views of the Solicitor General so the U.S. government will talk to industry and find out how much of a concern there is). Apple's opposition brief has just added to my belief that at least the damages part of Samsung's petition is really very strong.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the months ahead. I personally can't see the Supreme Court taking on this case, but stranger things have happened.
via Foss Patents