苹果胜三星：Android阵营军心大乱

苹果(Apple)在与三星(Samsung)的诉讼官司中大获全胜， Android 阵营应该都如坐针毡──现在，苹果手里握有大把证实有效的武器，可随时与Android阵营对手针对iPhone的工业设计以及iPhone 、 iPad的用户界面，在法庭内外拚个输赢。 拜三星、HTC、Motorola以及其它厂商的成功， Android手机市占率已经大幅超越 iPhone；有部分市场分析师认为，由三星与Amazon、Google等厂商所推出的Android平板设备，出货量终有一天也会超越 iPad 。然而，苹果对三星的诉讼结果，可能成为扭转市场平衡力道以及走向的新变量。 美国加州圣荷西法庭的陪审团决议，三星大多数的智能手机违反了三项iPhone的工业设计与应用程序画面设计专利(D 593,087、D 618, 677与D 604,305)，陪审团也指出，被告的三星智能手机以及其部分平板设备，违反了三项苹果iPhone与iPad软件界面外观(look-and- feel)上的功能专利(utility patents，包括US 7,469,381、US 7,864,163与US 7,844,915)。 此外，尽管三星利用世界级专家出示多重案例，辩称那些专利都是现有技术(prior art)，但陪审团则表示那些专利都是有效的；陪审团也支持苹果对三星手机违反其第一代iPhone与iPhone 3GS的已注册、未注册产品外观包装(trade dress)之主张。 在苹果的诉讼案中，圣荷西法庭陪审团只在一个显著的小地方示弱，即判定三星并没有违反苹果iPad设计专利(D 504,889)，并指该专利虽然有效，却相对较无说服力。陪审团还指出，苹果无法证明其未注册的iPad产品外观包装是受到保护的。 而 最终结果是，苹果现在有三个证实可用来攻击任一款Android智能手机或平板设备的用户界面专利，无论是上法庭诉讼或是私下和解，这三项强而有力的设计专利，能有效打击所有的“类iPhone”产品。 “这对苹果针对Android阵营的专利执法行动是一大胜利；”手机专利战专家Florian Mueller表示。 “Android 产业生态系的其它厂商，现在跟三星一样有充分理由担心这个问题；”Mueller表示：“诉讼案结果的立即性冲击仅限于三星承受，但苹果已经证明该公司不 只能在法庭上主张其设计专利，还有多点触控软件专利。该判决结果也让乔布斯(Steve Jobs)形容Android是“偷来的产品”说法，取得了正当性。” 判决结果可能也会让苹果CEO库克(Tim Cook)誓言继承乔布斯的遗志，集中火力针对Android阵营猛打专利战。“这对苹果来说是很大的胜利，但实际的问题在于这是否足够削弱正不断扩张市场版图的Android阵营势力。”史丹佛法学院(Stanford Law School)教授Mark A. Lemley评论指出。 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 本文下一页：别转台，这出戏还没演完！

相关阅读：
• 苹果战三星：鹬蚌相争，渔翁得利
• 苹果战三星：硅谷式爱国主义和创新精神
• 苹果三星对簿公堂内容揭秘：谁是抄袭者？uiVesmc

{pagination} 还有一些有待确认的事情，包括圣荷西法院的该案件主审法官Lucy H. Koh，是否会坚持需执行禁止三星违反专利手机与平板设备进口美国的命令；她的决定将会让陪审团的判决结果对手机市场版图产生影响，至少在美国市场。 Koh还得决定是否在陪审团决议三星需支付的10.5亿美元损害赔偿金之外，再对三星施以惩罚性的赔偿金要求；根据法律，法官得以根据陪审团对被告之“蓄意”的发现，将损害赔偿金提高三倍。 高达10亿美元──甚至30亿美元的赔款，在消费大众眼中所留下的印象，会超越苹果与三星将取得/支付的实际金钱数目。“10亿美元是笔让人震惊的大数目，也将吸引舆论与消费者的注意；”曾为RIM等智能手机供货商服务的智财权律师Casey Hill表示。 诉讼结果还将带来其它不为人知的冲击；“其中一个问题包括，三星要避开专利重新设计手机产品将会有多么困难，而判决结果是否会打乱支持Android平台的应用程序开发工作。”史丹佛法学院的Lemley继续指出：“第二个问题是，其它Android手机制造商是否也需要重新设计自家产品，以避免侵犯苹果专利？” 苹果获胜的武器包括两项工业设计专利──包括描述iPhone大尺寸显示器平坦、透明黑色接口设计的D’677，以及描述其圆角长方形外型与边框设计的D ‘087；另一个获胜的设计专利是描述在黑色背景上以格状排列之应用程序屏幕图标的D ‘305。 而苹果取得胜利的软件功能专利，还有描述当使用者来到例如联络人清单的最底端、会自动反弹(bounce-back)的‘381号专利，描述双点击缩放功能 的‘163号专利，以及描述单指滑动滚动条/双指缩放手势(single-finger scroll/two-finger zoom gestures)的‘915号专利。 这些专利可能会成为苹果最强大的武器，而且也可以合理化的假设，该公司可能有第二道专 利防线，准备开始在全球各地打专利战时使用。“苹果已经在美国针对Android设备供货商，主张数十个不同专利的所有权，而在国外，大多数的相关诉讼都还没判决。”专利战专家Mueller表示。 他补充指出：“苹果有权撤回在加州提出的任何一个专利诉讼，以缩小官司的规模；而且该公司与三星之间在加州法院辖区还有另一项未解决的诉讼，是在2月时提出，涉及8项专利。”──所以别转台，这出戏还没演完！ 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 编译：Judith Cheng 参考英文原文：After Apple win, Droids should feel afraid，by Rick Merritt

相关阅读：
• 苹果战三星：鹬蚌相争，渔翁得利
• 苹果战三星：硅谷式爱国主义和创新精神
• 苹果三星对簿公堂内容揭秘：谁是抄袭者？uiVesmc

{pagination} After Apple win, Droids should feel afraid Rick Merritt Apple is now armed with a handful of proven weapons it can wield against Android competitors in and out of court on the industrial design and user interface of the iPhone and iPad. SAN JOSE – The Android community should be very afraid in the wake of Apple’s clear win Friday in its case against Samsung in San Jose’s federal court. Apple is now armed with a handful of proven weapons it can wield against Android competitors in and out of court on the industrial design of its iPhone and the user interface of both the iPhone and iPad. Android handsets now significantly surpass the iPhone in market share, thanks to the success of HTC, Motorola, Samsung and others. Some market watchers believe Android tablets from Amazon, Google, Samsung and others also will surpass the iPad eventually. But the court decision suggests a new dynamic that could shift the balance of power and the market direction. The San Jose jury decided most of the Samsung smartphones in the case infringe three design patents on the iPhone’s industrial design and app screen (D 593,087; D 618, 677 and D 604,305). It also said most of the accused Samsung smartphones and some of its tablets infringe three Apple utility patents (US 7,469,381; US 7,864,163 and US 7,844,915) on the look-and-feel of the software on both the iPhone and iPad. In addition, the jury said those patents were valid despite Samsung’s attacks using world-class experts showing multiple examples of what it claimed were prior art. The jury also upheld Apple’s claims Samsung handsets violated its registered and unregistered trade dress on the original and 3GS iPhones. The San Jose jury weakened just one small but significant part of Apple’s case. It said Samsung did not infringe Apple’s design patent on the iPad (D 504,889), suggesting that patent was valid but relatively weak. It also said Apple did not prove its unregistered trade dress on the iPad was protectable. The net result is Apple now has three proven user interface patents that can attack any Android smartphone or tablet in court or in private negotiations and three strong design patents useful against any iPhone look alike. “This is a boost for Apple's patent enforcement efforts against Android worldwide,” said Florian Mueller, an expert following the mobile patent wars. “The rest of the Android ecosystem has just as much of a reason to be concerned about this as Samsung,” Mueller said. “The immediate impact will be limited to Samsung, but Apple has proven its ability to enforce not only its design patents but also its multi-touch software patents in federal court,” he said. “The verdict also lends credibility to Steve Jobs's characterization of Android as a ‘stolen product,’” he added. The San Jose decision also is likely to embolden Tim Cook to continue Jobs’ vow to “go thermonuclear” in a patent war against Android backers. Injunctions could "derail Android momentum" “This is a huge victory for Apple...[but] the real question is whether this is enough to derail the momentum the Android ecosystem has gained in the marketplace,” said Mark A. Lemley, a professor at the Stanford Law School. Factors still to be determined include whether Lucy H. Koh, the judge in the San Jose case, will uphold an injunction against importing the Samsung handsets and tablets found to be infringing. Such a decision quickly would translate the jury verdict into a market-share shift, at least in the U.S. Koh must also decide whether she will add punitive damages to the $1.05 billion in compensatory damages already awarded by the jury. Under the law, she could triple the damages award due to the jury’s finding of willfulness. A billion—or even three—is more significant in the eyes of the buying public than it is to the big bankrolls of Apple and Samsung. “A billion dollars is sensational and will certainly capture the attention of the media and the consumer,” said Casey Hill, an intellectual property lawyer who worked with smartphone makers such as Research in Motion. Other key factors are private. "One question is how hard it is for Samsung to redesign its phones to avoid the patents, and whether doing so messes up the apps written for the Android OS," said Lemley. "A second question is whether other Android phone makers feel the need to redesign to avoid these patents," he said. The winning Apple design patents include two on industrial design—the D ‘677 on the iPhone’s flat, black transparent face with large display and the D ‘087 on its rectangular shape with rounded corners and a bezel. The third winning design patent is D ‘305 on its app screen with colorful icons on a grid with a black background. The winning Apple utility patents include the ‘381 on the bounce-back feature when the user comes to the end of, for example, a contact list. They also include the ‘163 on the double-tap-to-zoom command and the ‘915 on the single-finger scroll/two-finger zoom gestures. The patents are likely Apple’s strongest. It is reasonable to assume the company has others forming a second tier it may now try to establish in other cases around the globe. "Apple has already asserted several dozen different patents against Android device makers in the US and abroad-most of these claims have not been adjudicated yet," said Mueller. "They have the right to reassert in California any patents they withdrew to narrow the case for trial, and they have a second lawsuit pending against Samsung in that district, which they filed in February over eight patents," he said. Hold on to your seats, this ride has just started.