In these conflict of laws cases, Apple met with conflicting international judicial opinions: an Australian court decision conflicted with a Canadian court decision on the copyrightability of object code. In IBM v.

Motorola, Inc. Typhoon alleged that Apple and others used its patented technology inventions without permission. The domain initially pointed to skipmusic. August 28, District Court in San Jose, California. Superior Ct, Santa Clara , The content is provided for information purposes only. A hearing has been scheduled in U.

Apple Canada, Inc. Dell, Inc. Samsung courtroom". Following the trial, in which the Nexus was found not to infringe Apple's patents, Samsung filed an appeal to remove the preliminary injunction. Archived from the original on June 13, Apple disclosed the agreement in a filing on Friday in U. Woolard Jr. Your feedback will go directly to Science X editors.

October 5, The trial opened on March 29, , in the UK. Retrieved October 23, Main article: Apple Corps v. Samsung trial. This document is subject to copyright. Retrieved 19 November Bell Albert Gore Jr. Retrieved October 5,

August 20, In April , the U. Arthur D. CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown link. Apple only agreed to cross-license some patents to Nokia. Apple Computer, Inc. Other consolidated actions related to the matter were identified by the court as: Chiu v. Graphic showing market share for smartphones in Q2 , led by Samsung with Archived from the original PDF on March 5,

Apple counterclaimed, but Samsung prevailed after a British judge ruled Samsung's Galaxy tablets were not similar enough to be confused with Apple's iPad. International Trade Commission on sales of certain Apple products after the commission found Apple had violated a Samsung patent, [7] but this was vetoed by U. See also: Apple Computer, Inc. What are the consequences? Apple's evidence submitted to the court included side-by-side image comparisons of iPhone 3GS and i Galaxy S to illustrate the alleged similarities in packaging and icons for apps. Samsung: The legal aftershocks". Xerox Corp. Sugar Susan L. They claimed that the technology behind the dual-camera systems in Apple's iPhone 7 Plus and 8 Plus infringed four patents owned by them Corephotonics.

Victor August 21, D,, D,, D,, and D, Google Inc. Retrieved December 17, History Outline. App'x Fed. A new trial is scheduled for March , in which Apple will seek to prevent Samsung from selling some of its current devices in the U. August 28,

On Sunday, October 22, district court judge Lucy Koh ordered a second retrial of damages based upon the limitations imposed by the above decision of the United States Supreme Court. List Anobit AuthenTec Inc. Retrieved Oct 11, Typhoon was successful in its patent infringement suits against some small companies, and then expanded its litigation to go after larger ones. The Mercury News. Mace, Michael, "Second open letter from Apple". Views Read Edit View history. See also Apple's patent No. The New York Times National ed. Samsung trial".

The South Korean court said there was "no possibility" that consumers would confuse Samsung and Apple smartphones—a key issue in the US trial—and that Samsung's smartphone icons do not infringe Apple's patents. Retrieved November 1, Accessed July 26, Samsung asks judge to throw out Apple patent verdict". Concepcion , and decertified the class; in April the Ninth Circuit denied plaintiffs permission to appeal. The Japanese court found that the South Korean firm did not infringe Apple's iPhone and iPad patents for some of its own Galaxy smartphones and tablet computer. Main article: Apple Corps v. Retrieved August 11,

Your name. Corephotonics said that they approached Apple over a possible partnership, but Apple's lead negotiator apparently declined the idea, with Apple going ahead and launching the iPhone 7 Plus in late , and then the 8 Plus in late A third case in which Apple was not a party but that involved the Apple decisions followed in New Zealand. In , independent Apple resellers filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging the company used misleading advertising practices by using unfair business practices that harmed the resellers' sales while boosting Apple-owned outlets, in effect by favoring its own outlets over those of its resellers. Bloomberg L. Samsung, which has steadfastly denied its rival's claims in a string of similar cases filed across the globe, hailed the Tokyo court's ruling. In the wake of the verdict, Judge Koh will be responsible for deciding whether a sales ban of Samsung products will be implemented, a decision that was deemed highly unlikely by legal experts, such as Rutgers Law School 's Michael Carrier, after the verdict announcement. Honig, Zach August 19, Retrieved July 25, Business Insider.

This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, and provide content from third parties. Computer Imports " , New Zealand, October 5, Following the trial, in which the Nexus was found not to infringe Apple's patents, Samsung filed an appeal to remove the preliminary injunction. Patent No. Judge Koh ruled that Apple's claims of irreparable harm had little merit because although Apple established a likelihood of success at trial on the merits of its claim that Samsung infringed one of its tablet patents, Apple had not shown that it could overcome Samsung's challenges to the patent's validity. Hidden categories: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter Pages containing links to subscription-only content Articles with short description Short description is different from Wikidata All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from October Apple disclosed the agreement in a filing on Friday in U.

It was never Apple's intention to cause Dr. In July , Apple Inc. Retrieved July 28, Dell, Inc. Home Technology Business. Apple Canada, Inc. A hearing has been scheduled in U. Samsung round two". Retrieved January 28, After Samsung's allegations of evidence tampering were heard, the court rescinded the EU-wide injunction and granted Apple a lesser injunction that only applied to the German market.

Archived from the original on From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Tyler Division , filed October 23, Thomson Reuters. The Asian firm held The lawsuit demands monetary compensation for the lawyers the start-up had to hire, as well as for damages. Kononchuk , F. Nominet UK Ltd. Views Read Edit View history. Links to related articles.

The journalists appealed and, in May , the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's decision, ruling that activities in question were covered by the shield law. Samsung, which has steadfastly denied its rival's claims in a string of similar cases filed across the globe, hailed the Tokyo court's ruling. July 9, Retrieved August 12, Oral argument. Apple initially sued Samsung on grounds of patent infringement, specifically European patents 2. Distributor of counterfeit software violated copyright laws. Bloomberg L.

The Canadian suits were termed Lenzi v. Motorola Mobility, Inc. Archived from the original PDF on October 13, April 8, Psystar Corporation , F. Microsoft Corporation. In March , Apple opposed a trademark application by startup Sector Labs, which sought to register "Video Pod" as a mark identifying goods associated with a video projector product. In , five parents filed a class action suit against Apple for "in-app" purchases, which are purchases that can be made within applications "apps". The ruling by the Tokyo District Court is the latest chapter in a long-running global patent war between the smartphone giants which have accused each other of stealing intellectual property for their own products.

Accessed April 13, Accessed April 17, Apple Inc. Your opinions are important to us. Apple only agreed to cross-license some patents to Nokia. Emigrant Bank , F. Sydney: Thomson Reuters. Also in early , an Australian federal court granted Apple's request for an injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab

On Friday, September 21, , Samsung requested a new trial from the judge in San Jose arguing that the verdict was not supported by evidence or testimony, that the judge imposed limits on testimony time and the number of witnesses prevented Samsung from receiving a fair trial, and that the jury verdict was unreasonable. Links to related articles. For an undisclosed amount of cash and future ongoing iPhone royalties to be paid by Apple, Nokia agreed to settle, with Apple's royalty payments retroactively back-payable to the iPhone's introduction in , but with no broad cross-licensing agreement made between the companies. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys. C RMW, adding complaints related to ringtones, [13] and Kliegerman v. The Mercury News. Apple counterclaimed, but Samsung prevailed after a British judge ruled Samsung's Galaxy tablets were not similar enough to be confused with Apple's iPad. The Recorder. Distributor of counterfeit software violated copyright laws.

Water Bath - Cooling Load Sep 26, Samsung shipped Samsung phones by series. Apple Canada, Inc. Sleet denied HTC's motion for a venue change, ruling that Apple's choice of forum would prevail. He had experience. C , bringing in allegations under the federal Magnuson—Moss Warranty Act. Court allows suit adding to Apple's woes May 13, On September 26, , Samsung counter-sued and asked the court for an injunction on sale Apple's iPad and iPhones, on the grounds that Apple does not have the licenses to use 3G mobile technology. Apple: Perfect harmony?

What are the consequences? Retrieved August 11, Japan court to rule on Apple-Samsung patent brawl Aug 30, User comments. Apple is a member of the Business Software Alliance BSA , whose principal activity is trying to stop copyright infringement of software produced by BSA members; Apple treats all its intellectual property as a business asset, engaging in litigation as one method among many to police its assets and to respond to claims by others against it. Law 1, Namespaces Article Talk. Main article: FBI—Apple encryption dispute. C JW, class action information. The lawsuit demands monetary compensation for the lawyers the start-up had to hire, as well as for damages.

Office of Fair Trading, oft. Main article: Apple v. The Verge. The lawsuit demands monetary compensation for the lawyers the start-up had to hire, as well as for damages. Apple appealed Judge Koh's ruling, and on May 14, , the appeals court reversed and ordered Judge Koh to issue the injunction. Other consolidated actions related to the matter were identified by the court as: Chiu v. Apple Computer, Inc". Int'l Trade Comm'n, June 21,

The New York Times National ed. Your Privacy This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, and provide content from third parties. The companies reported the settlement included a year agreement for licensing both companies' current and future patents to each other. Class Action Settlement website, johnsonitunessettlement. Franklin Computer Corp. In March , an Australian Trademarks tribunal denied Apple's attempt to prevent a small company from trademarking the name DOPi for use on its laptop bags and cases for Apple products. HTC in March in the U. The foreman responded that he had been asked during jury selection whether he had been involved in any lawsuits during the past 10 years, so that the events claimed by Samsung occurred before that time frame, [82] although his claim is not consistent with the actual question he was asked by the Judge. Send Feedback.

Nevertheless, users were forced to spend extra on battery replacement to restore their phones' former speed. What do you think about this particular story? Cited, among other things, was the use of overlapping and resizable windows in Windows 2. Mar 26, Apple only agreed to cross-license some patents to Nokia. On September 9, , the German court ruled in favor of Apple, with a sales ban on the Galaxy Tab Pepper in its term. Retrieved 7 April Apple Computer. Samsung has also sued Apple, claiming the iPhone and iPad infringe on Samsung patents.

Accessed July 26, Retrieved 15 November August 28, Epic subsequently filed the lawsuits against both companies after the game was pulled. What are the consequences? One of three Samsung chiefs met with Cook, but the filing did not reveal the name of the representative. Apple had sought damages and to block sales of some Samsung products in Japan, where both firms have seen their popularity rise in a market traditionally dominated by domestic giants such as Sharp and Sony. For an undisclosed amount of cash and future ongoing iPhone royalties to be paid by Apple, Nokia agreed to settle, with Apple's royalty payments retroactively back-payable to the iPhone's introduction in , but with no broad cross-licensing agreement made between the companies. Samsung appealed the jury verdict to a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in , and won in February , with the panel nullifying the jury verdict. Supreme Court of the United States.

The Associated Press. Systems, Carnegie Mellon Univ. Archived from the original on December 23, The Recorder. Asserted, inter alia, that the iPhone infringes U. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties. In two separate lawsuits, [49] [50] Apple accused Samsung of infringing on three utility patents United States Patent Nos. Ogg, Erica February 14, The Apple-Cohen dispute was a cybersquatting case where a top-level domain registrar's decision differed from prior decisions by awarding a domain name to a subsequent registrant Apple , rather than to the prior registrant Cohen. Retrieved August 4,

Main article: United States v. Superior Ct. Apple counterclaimed, but Samsung prevailed after a British judge ruled Samsung's Galaxy tablets were not similar enough to be confused with Apple's iPad. Views Read Edit View history. Sydney: Thomson Reuters. Court allows suit adding to Apple's woes May 13, Limited, et al. Bloomberg Businessweek. The Associated Press reported a pending congressional inquiry into the matter, with United States Congress members stating that commercial storage and usage of location information without a consumer's express consent is illegal under current law, but Apple defended its use of customer tracking in a letter released May 9, , by the House of Representatives. Your email.

On August 31, , The Tokyo District Court ruled that Samsung's Galaxy smartphones and tablets did not violate an Apple patent on technology that synchronizes music and videos between devices and servers. These were followed up in June of that year with a massive filing of a color design patent covering screenshots of various iPhone graphical user interfaces. Retrieved April 18, Archived from the original on March 28, Law 1, Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. Retrieved January 29,

April 8, There was an interview given by the jury foreman, [73] where, at the 3 minute mark in the video, the jury foreman Hogan said: "the software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa, and that means they are not interchangeable," and at the minute mark, in which Hogan states "each patent had a different legal premise. In a damage-only retrial court session on November 13, , ordered in relation to the first U. Business News Updated. Typhoon was successful in its patent infringement suits against some small companies, and then expanded its litigation to go after larger ones. Note Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Apple's claims that Samsung copied the designs of the iPhone and iPad were deemed invalid. Tech Dirt. Int'l Trade Comm'n,

October 5, On October 23, , U. Apple only agreed to cross-license some patents to Nokia. Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. History Issues Outline. Int'l Trade Comm'n, June 21, Limited, et al. Class Action Settlement website, johnsonitunessettlement. The patents claimed by Corephotonics to be infringed are: two patents on mini telephoto lens assembly, one patent on dual aperture zoom digital cameras, and one on high resolution thin multi-aperture imaging systems.

The Wall Street Journal. The foreman responded that he had been asked during jury selection whether he had been involved in any lawsuits during the past 10 years, so that the events claimed by Samsung occurred before that time frame, [82] although his claim is not consistent with the actual question he was asked by the Judge. Retrieved Oct 11, The decision was upheld on appeal in , but legal disputes on this topic were still ongoing until , when the two companies came to a wide-ranging agreement that included Microsoft buying non-voting Apple stocks. Business News Updated. Santa Clara Co. The settlement ended the ongoing trademark lawsuit between the companies, with each party bearing its own legal costs, and Apple Inc. Reuters Canada.

Home Technology Business. Hogan also told the Reuters news agency that the jury wanted to make sure the message it sent was not just a "slap on the wrist" and wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable. Dell, Inc. Kononchuk , F. Apple had sought damages and to block sales of some Samsung products in Japan, where both firms have seen their popularity rise in a market traditionally dominated by domestic giants such as Sharp and Sony. International Trade Commission on sales of certain Apple products after the commission found Apple had violated a Samsung patent, [7] but this was vetoed by U. Current Arthur D. Nevertheless, users were forced to spend extra on battery replacement to restore their phones' former speed. Patent discussed by Hogan during the interview, specifically that the ' patent has only one claim. C , bringing in allegations under the federal Magnuson—Moss Warranty Act.

Some of these actions have determined significant case law for the information technology industry and many have captured the attention of the public and media. LEXIS In , Apple settled out of court both an antitrust lawsuit and a related class-action suit regarding cold calling employees of other companies. Presiding Judge Tamotsu Shoji said: "The defendant's products do not seem like they used the same technology as the plaintiff's products so we turn down the complaints made by [Apple]. Following the public unveiling of the Apple iPhone at the Macworld Expo , Cisco filed a lawsuit against Apple [] in January , alleging Apple's iPhone name infringed on Cisco's iPhone trademark. It was never Apple's intention to cause Dr. Your Privacy This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, and provide content from third parties. In late October , the civil court in The Hague ruled for Apple in rejecting Samsung's infringement arguments and denied Samsung's motion made there; Samsung appealed the decision and in January , the Dutch appeals court overruled the civil court decision, rejecting Apple's claim that Samsung's Galaxy Tab The Ninth Circuit asked the question that in light of Illinois Brick, if Apple was to be treated as a manufacturer or producer, in which case the class did not have standing to sue, or if they were a distributor, in which case the class could sue for damages.

Your message. Samsung Electronics. Samsung round two". August 3, Question 8: For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung Electronics Co. Patent Nos. Apple counterclaimed, but Samsung prevailed after a British judge ruled Samsung's Galaxy tablets were not similar enough to be confused with Apple's iPad. D,, D,, D,, and D, Views Read Edit View history.

They claimed that the technology behind the dual-camera systems in Apple's iPhone 7 Plus and 8 Plus infringed four patents owned by them Corephotonics. Samsung to contest US verdict in favour of Apple Aug 25, Tyler Division , filed October 23, By Dan Levine 2 Min Read. In addition, visual elements including the scrollbar thumbs and the window close button were changed to be less similar to those in the Mac GUI. Retrieved August 4, Sugar Susan L. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. You can be assured our editors closely monitor every feedback sent and will take appropriate actions. In , Cisco Systems and Apple negotiated over allowing Apple rights to use Cisco's Linksys iPhone trademark, but the negotiations stalled when Cisco pushed for the two products to be interoperable.

Motorola, Inc. In , after Apple introduced the Apple IIgs with an Ensoniq music synthesizer chip, Apple Corps alleged the product to be in violation of the terms of their settlement. District Court on December 6, to discuss these and other issues. Concepcion , and decertified the class; in April the Ninth Circuit denied plaintiffs permission to appeal. Water Bath - Cooling Load Sep 26, FOSS Patents. The Quanta case cited the year-old doctrine of patent exhaustion which limits patent rights that survive the initial authorized sale of a patented item. The settlement ended the ongoing trademark lawsuit between the companies, with each party bearing its own legal costs, and Apple Inc. Retrieved July 25,

Judge Koh ruled that Apple's claims of irreparable harm had little merit because although Apple established a likelihood of success at trial on the merits of its claim that Samsung infringed one of its tablet patents, Apple had not shown that it could overcome Samsung's challenges to the patent's validity. Representatives for both Apple and Samsung declined to comment. The companies reported the settlement included a year agreement for licensing both companies' current and future patents to each other. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file. Trade Representative Michael Froman. In , after the introduction of Microsoft's Windows 2. On October 23, , U. Int'l Trade Comm'n, June 21, Question 8: For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung Electronics Co. Hogan's post-verdict interviews with numerous media outlets raised a great deal of controversy over his role as the jury foreman.

Accessed December 21, Chen United States Supreme Court case. August 31, Accessed May 2, App'x Fed. Other cases cover redesigns versions of FaceTime that VirnetX claim still violate their patents. He had experience. Samsung shipped

Retrieved 9 December In , Apple filed suit against Amazon. On August 24, the jury returned a verdict largely favorable to Apple. The lawsuit's allegations included that Apple's conduct constituted breach of contract, violated the state consumer fraud statute, and violated consumer protection statutes of other states. Apple Corps alleged Apple Computer's introduction of the music-playing products with the iTunes Music Store violated the terms of the previous agreement in which Apple agreed not to distribute music. Presiding Judge Tamotsu Shoji said: "The defendant's products do not seem like they used the same technology as the plaintiff's products so we turn down the complaints made by [Apple]. Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4. Shortly after this initial filing, other lawsuits were filed, and these were consolidated with the original Holman suit, bringing in additional plaintiffs and complaints: Timothy Smith, et al. In July , Apple Inc.

Related Stories. History Outline. The three-judge panel also awarded legal costs to Samsung. While the original three judges maintained their opinion from the previous hearing, the remaining judges argued that the three-member panel had dismissed the body of evidence from the jury trial supporting that Apple's patents were valid and Samsung was infringing upon them. Apple immediately removed Fortnite from their storefronts for violating their policies as apps are not allowed to bypass the App Store payment system; Google also removed the game for similar reasons from the Play Store. Retrieved April 12, Retrieved December 23, Apple's claims that Samsung copied the designs of the iPhone and iPad were deemed invalid. Cohen refused and, after several months, instead issued proceedings for judicial review.

Senate Judiciary Committee that a "software bug" caused iPhones to continue to send anonymous location data to the company's servers, even when location services on the device were turned off. Apple's claims that Samsung copied the designs of the iPhone and iPad were deemed invalid. A new trial is scheduled for March , in which Apple will seek to prevent Samsung from selling some of its current devices in the U. May 13, Reuters Canada. Main article: Think Secret. Office of Fair Trading, oft. The appeals court ruled that Psystar failed to demonstrate "copyright misuse" by Apple because Psystar must show either that the license agreement restricts creativity or that it restricts competition, and that Apple's license agreement does neither.

While the original three judges maintained their opinion from the previous hearing, the remaining judges argued that the three-member panel had dismissed the body of evidence from the jury trial supporting that Apple's patents were valid and Samsung was infringing upon them. October 17, Apple, et al. For an undisclosed amount of cash and future ongoing iPhone royalties to be paid by Apple, Nokia agreed to settle, with Apple's royalty payments retroactively back-payable to the iPhone's introduction in , but with no broad cross-licensing agreement made between the companies. Retrieved April 12, Accessed Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The court granted Apple's motion to dismiss Sagan's claims and opined in dicta that a reader aware of the context would understand Apple was "clearly attempting to retaliate in a humorous and satirical way", and that "It strains reason to conclude that Defendant was attempting to criticize Plaintiff's reputation or competency as an astronomer. In October , Nokia Corporation sued Apple for Apple's infringement of Nokia's patents relating to wireless technology; [] Apple countersued Nokia in December Your message.

Accessed August 25, The ruling by the Tokyo District Court is the latest chapter in a long-running global patent war between the smartphone giants which have accused each other of stealing intellectual property for their own products. Retrieved August 29, CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown link. I would like to subscribe to Science X Newsletter. The patent cases come as Apple loses ground to rivals including Samsung that use the Android operating system developed by Google. Senate Judiciary Committee that a "software bug" caused iPhones to continue to send anonymous location data to the company's servers, even when location services on the device were turned off. Graphic showing market share for smartphones in Q2 , led by Samsung with

Samsung also claimed that the foreman had not revealed a past personal bankruptcy. The Canadian court opined that programs within ROM silicon chips are protected under the Copyright Act of Canada and the conversion from the source code into object code is a form of translation. The Verge. Retrieved April 12, The second trial was scheduled for March and jury selection occurred on March 31, Apple initially sued Samsung on grounds of patent infringement, specifically European patents 2. Concepcion , and decertified the class; in April the Ninth Circuit denied plaintiffs permission to appeal. Main article: Motorola Mobility v. Accessed December 22,

Computer Imports , the High Court of New Zealand then considered these prior decisions and sided with the Canadian decision in ruling that, although object code is not an original literary work in its own right, it is a reproduction of source code in material form and therefore an infringement of copyright takes place if it is copied without the authorization of the copyright owner. Retrieved August 25, We've decided to do something about it In addition, visual elements including the scrollbar thumbs and the window close button were changed to be less similar to those in the Mac GUI. Patent Nos. Links to related articles. Retrieved November 1, E-mail the story Japan court rejects Apple patent claims against Samsung Update. Apple initially sued Samsung on grounds of patent infringement, specifically European patents 2. Bloomberg Businessweek.

Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file. Apple's evidence submitted to the court included side-by-side image comparisons of iPhone 3GS and i Galaxy S to illustrate the alleged similarities in packaging and icons for apps. Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4. The New York Times National ed. Sugar Susan L. Mar 25, The journalists appealed and, in May , the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's decision, ruling that activities in question were covered by the shield law. In an early domain name dispute, two months before announcing the iMac in July , Apple sued then-teenager Abdul Traya.

Accessed April 13, Retrieved 19 November Bloomberg L. The Japanese court found that the South Korean firm did not infringe Apple's iPhone and iPad patents for some of its own Galaxy smartphones and tablet computer. The case in U. After Samsung's allegations of evidence tampering were heard, the court rescinded the EU-wide injunction and granted Apple a lesser injunction that only applied to the German market. The lawsuit referenced Apple's SIM lock on the iPhone and Apple's at the time complete ban on third-party apps, and alleged that the 1. Accessed December 18, An appeal followed the California court's approval of the settlement but the appellate court upheld the settlement in December

The multinational technology corporation Apple Inc. Sydney: Thomson Reuters. Typhoon was successful in its patent infringement suits against some small companies, and then expanded its litigation to go after larger ones. Superior Court , 44 Cal. Apple v. P Giorgio Armani. Retrieved 15 November A new trial is scheduled for March , in which Apple will seek to prevent Samsung from selling some of its current devices in the U.