Raj HC: Convicted Minor Gang Rapist Not Fully Barred From Open-Air Camps; Rules Allow Exceptions  ||  Calcutta High Court: Serving a Show-Cause Notice Via Email is Valid under PMLA Regulations  ||  Del HC: Candidate’s Independent Medical Opinions Don’t Justify Fresh Medical Exam in SSC Recruitment  ||  Calcutta HC: Magistrate Must Assess Grounds, Cannot Order Police Inquiry under Section 175(3) BNSS  ||  SC Grants Law Officer Exam Relief, Saying Students Can’t be Blamed When Judges Differ in Views  ||  SC: Fraudulent Diversion of Company Funds Cannot be Validated by Later Shareholder Ratification  ||  SC: Doctor’s View on a Victim’s Consciousness Prevails over Police Assessment in Dying Declarations  ||  SC: Examining Contradictions and Witness Credibility Exceeds the Scope of Section 319 CrPC  ||  Supreme Court Struck Down Section 60(4), Removing Limits on Maternity Benefits For Adoptive Mothers  ||  Supreme Court: Air Force Group Insurance Society qualifies as ‘State’ under Article 12    

Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc. - (16 Oct 2015)

Apple loses patent battle for mobile processors but pays less than expected

Intellectual Property Rights

A jury in Wisconsin has found Apple guilty of infringing patents owned by Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, or WARF. It awarded WARF $234 million in damages, which is probably less than was expected. At an earlier preliminary motion by Apple to strike out expert testimonies, a precursor to its trial strategy of proving the patent invalid, the judge had noted that Apple faced “prejudice…magnitudes greater than Microsoft” by a jury being swayed by enormous its revenue stream, despite the infringing part constituting only a fraction of the value. In Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., the jury had, after hearing submissions on Microsoft’s $19 billion revenues, awarded damages amounting to $388 million – ultimately leading to fresh trial for excessive damages.

WARF, the patent management organisation for the University of Wisconsin – Madison, had alleged that Apple had made unlicensed use of its patent in the architecture of processors, significantly improving their efficiency and performance. The infringing processors have been used in several versions of iPhones and iPads. Its complaint against Apple can be READ HERE, while Apple’s preliminary motion before commencement of trial can be ACCESSED HERE.

Tags : APPLE   PATENT   LOSE   WARF   PROCESSOR   IPHONE   IPAD   MILLION   DAMAGES  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved