Six questions answered on Samsung’s $290m payout to Apple

What features are Samsung ruled to have copied?

Samsung is being forced to pay $290m to rival company, Apple, after a court ruled it copied some of the company’s features. We answer five questions on the payout.

Who made the ruling?

A jury in Silicon Valley ruled that Samsung must pay the significant sum to rival Apple for copying iPhone and iPad features in its devices – these are mostly older Samsung tablets and smartphones.

This verdict comes after a previous jury found Samsung owed Apple $1.05bn for copyright infringement – but a US District Judge found the jury miscalculated the amount Samsung must pay and so ordered a retrial.

Is this the only payment Samsung has to make to Apple?

No. The company also has to pay $550m as a result of the initial verdict. So, in total Samsung is being forced to pay Apple close to $930m in the case.

Apple’s shares were boosted by the news and they traded slightly higher today. Samsung closed down slightly earlier in the day.

What features are Samsung ruled to have copied?

It was found that Samsung infringed Apple patents such as one that allows users to "pinch and zoom" on smartphone and tablet screens.

What has Apple said about winning the case?

Apple said in a statement: "For Apple, this case has always been about more than patents and money. It has been about innovation and the hard work that goes into inventing products that people love.

"While it's impossible to put a price tag on those values, we are grateful to the jury for showing Samsung that copying has a cost."

And Samsung?

It is believed the company plans to appeal the ruling.

In court Samsung’s lawyer William Price, according to the BBC, argued "Apple doesn't own beautiful and sexy.”

He argued that Apple shouldn’t have ownership over the basic rectangle shape of smartphones.

Is this the end of the story?

No. This ruling only covers 13 of the 26 Samsung devices that Apple had argued copied its technology.

A separate trial is pending to determine whether or not current Samsung devices also violate Apple's patents. It is scheduled for March 2014.

Apple has also requested the judge consider a sales ban against all of the older Samsung models that used Apple's technology. However, the judge has previously refused to do so but a separate US Appeals Court has asked for this to be reconsidered.

Cutouts of Samsung Electronics' Galaxy Note 3 in a showroom at the company's headquarters in Seoul on November 22, 2013. Photograph: Getty Images.

Heidi Vella is a features writer for Nridigital.com

Getty
Show Hide image

Why Nigel Farage is hoovering up all the women I know

Beware young fogeys.

I can’t remember where I was when I first worked out that I was older than Nigel Farage. You’d think after that bombshell went off, you’d still be able to locate the crater. Anyway, there it is: the cut-price little Oswald Mosley is about a year younger than me.

I mention this not because I want to dwell on the nasty piece of shit, but because I’ve been having to face, at one remove, so to speak, the problem of young fogeyism. It seems to be all around. And not only that, it’s hoovering up women I know.

The first time it happened was with B——. She was going to come round last weekend, but then emailed to cancel the day before, because she was going to watch rugby – apparently there’s some kind of tournament on, but it never seems to end – with her boyfriend. How ghastly, I said, or words to that effect; I’d rather die.

She then made the Category One mistake of saying, “Rugby, cricket, all the same to me,” with a cheeky little “x” at the end of it.

I replied thus: Rugby is a violent and brutal game (the coy term is “contact sport”, which means you get to – indeed, are encouraged to – injure the opposing team as often as you can, in the absence of any other tactic) loved by fascists, or, at best, those with suspicious ideas about the order of society with which I doubt you, B——, would wish to be aligned. Also, only people of immense bulk and limited intelligence can play it. Cricket is a game of deep and subtle strategy, capable of extraordinary variation, which is appreciated across the class spectrum, and is also so democratically designed that even the less athletic – such as I – can play it. [I delete here, for your comfort, a rant of 800 or so words in which I develop my theory that cricket is a bulwark against racism, and rugby, er, isn’t.] Both are dismayingly over-represented at the national level by ex-public-school boys; cricket as a matter of historical accident (the selling-off of school playing fields under Thatcher and Major), rugby as a matter of policy. Have a lovely day watching it.

Two things to note. 1) This woman is not, by either birth or ancestry, from a part of the world where rugby is played. 2) You wouldn’t have thought she was one of nature’s rugby fans, as she considers that Jeremy Corbyn is a good person to be leading the Labour Party. (True, thousands of Tories think the same thing, but for completely different reasons.)

That’s Exhibit A. Exhibit B is my old friend C——, whom I haven’t seen for about five years or so but suddenly pops up from the past to say hello, how about a drink? I always liked C—— very much, largely because she’s very funny and, let’s be frank about this, something of a sexpot. She seems keen to bring someone over with her who, reading between the lines like a modern-day Sherlock Holmes, I deduce to be her latest partner. The thing is, she says, she’s not sure he can come, because he might be going beagling.

Beagling?

Well, she does come round (alone, thank goodness) and she’s looking even better than I remember, and is even funnier, too, and she shows me some of the pictures she has put up on her profile page on some dating site, and they’re not the kind of photographs this magazine will ever publish, let’s leave it at that. (One of them even moves.) And, as it turns out – and it doesn’t really surprise me that much – the young beagler she is seeing is a good thirty years-plus younger than she, and his photograph shows him to be all ears and curls, like a transporter mix-up between Prince Charles and the young David Gower. Like B——’s young man, he is not called Gervaise or Peregrine but may as well be.

What on Earth is going on here? Can we blame Farage? I can understand the pull of the void, but this is getting ridiculous. Do they not quite understand what they’re doing? Actually, C—— does, because she’s had her eyes open all her life, and B——, her youth and political idealism notwithstanding, didn’t exactly come down in the last shower, either.

So what is it with these young wannabe toffs – one of whom isn’t even rich? “You’d like him,” C—— says, but I’m not so sure. People who go beagling sure as hell don’t like me, and I see no reason not to return the favour.

Well, I can’t thrash this out here. C—— leaves, but not before giving me the kind of kiss that makes me wish Binkie Beagley, or whatever his name is, would just wink out of existence.

Nicholas Lezard is a literary critic for the Guardian and also writes for the Independent. He writes the Down and Out in London column for the New Statesman.

This article first appeared in the 16 February 2017 issue of the New Statesman, The New Times