The intellectual property battle between Apple and Samsung continues. On January 29, the US federal court has refused Apple’s request to increase the $1 billion in damages. The court ruled that Samsung did not “willfully” violate Apple’s patents and refused to triple the damages that were owed by Samsung. Furthermore, the court has refused to impose a sales ban on Samsung Galaxy Nexus, which had been banned in June of 2012 and lifted in October of 2012. The two companies are expected to meet next month.

Patentability of Software

The US Court of Appeals will be rehearing CLS Bank Int’l v. Alice Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2012) en banc this Friday (February 8, 2013). The initial panel held that computer-implemented methods were patentable subject matter, unless it was “manifestly evident” that they cover an abstract idea. Just few days later, Federal Circuit panel distinguished CLS Bank from Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, and held that a computer-implemented process was an unpatentable abstract idea. The questions presented in the en banc order are:

1. What test should the court adopt to determine whether a computer-implemented invention is a patent ineligible “abstract idea”; and when, if ever, does the presence of a computer in a claim lend patent eligibility to an otherwise patent-ineligible idea?
2. In assessing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. sec. 101 of a computer-implemented invention, should it matter whether the invention is claimed as a method, system, or storage medium; and should such claims at times be considered equivalent for sec. 101 purposes?

By revisiting these questions, the hope is that there will be more guidance on whether certain software is patentable.

Privacy Issues

The California Supreme Court ruled that online retailers like Apple could require California customers making purchases with credit cards to give personal information as a way to verify purchases and to minimize fraud. While minimizing fraud is very important for online retailers, this decision could lead to more private information being vulnerable. Companies like Twitter and Washington Post have reported that their system had been hacked and some personal information was compromised last week.

Kodak Sells Its Digital Patents

Kodak has completed the sale of its patents on digital imaging for about $527 million. Kodak had wanted to get a price in the neighborhood of $2 billion but was unable to find a buyer. With the proceeds of the sale, Kodak will try to get itself out of bankruptcy.

This is not the end of the story, of course. As the case developed in the United States, Apple and Samsung were, and continue to be, in a legal battle all over the world. Seoul Central District Court compromised and ruled that Samsung didn’t copy the look and feel of Apple. It further ruled that Apple had infringed upon some of Samsung’s wireless technology, while Samsung had violated Apple’s bounce-back effect. The result was a light slap on the wrist. Both companies had to pay a minimal amount in damages and had some of their older devices banned. More recently on September 21, 2012, a German court ruled that Samsung’s products didn’t violate Apple’s patents.

The discrepancy between the federal jury decision and those of other international courts brings into question whether juries are equipped to handle these types of technical cases. The jury instruction was reportedly over 100 pages, but the jury was able to deliberate after only 3 days. Of course, patents are not the only technical subject where the jury has a say, and there may have been other factors that led to these differing opinions, such as having a home court advantage.

Regardless, Apple and Samsung plan to continue the case in the US. Apple reportedly has been seeking about $700 million in additional damages and a permanent injunction preventing the sale of several of Samsung’s products, while Samsung plans to appeal the verdict and may include a patent infringement claim for violation of Samsung’s patents in LTE technology. LTE is a technology that provides faster connectivity than the standard 3G technology included in the previous generations of iPhones and is included in the new iPhone 5.

Stakes are very high for both companies as they continue their legal battle. There are many differing arguments as to whether patents on software and the magnitude of Apple’s award really promote innovation and new inventions. However, it is important to note that most of the claims were directed towards Samsung’s implementation of Android and Google has already responded to the lawsuit by making changes like implementing a new way to integrate pinch-to-zoom in its latest software.

Furthermore, it likely gives a window of opportunity for Microsoft and Nokia, which increases consumers’ choices. Nokia has opted to stop the development of its own software and decided to bet its future on Microsoft’s new Windows 8 platform. Microsoft’s operating system features a completely different interface and Nokia’s Lumia phones sport a distinct look. While Microsoft has had trouble gaining traction, this controversy could arguably help Nokia and Microsoft’s push to be more main stream.

The mobile market is one of the fastest growing areas in technology. Despite the fact that software patents are controversial and the boundaries are not fully defined, with more companies trying to tap the growing market, consumers will see a lot of new options in the market.