Originally Posted by Macnewsjunkie
When pressed to comment on the odds of Apple winning this lawsuit Horace replied: "Again, I don’t have an opinion on legal matters. Broadly speaking, IP litigation is similar to playing the lottery."
Apple has now made the point that it should not be copied directly and protected their intellectual property rights.
The real question now is will Apple take the high road, and lock in the win they have made in this case and offer to cross license technology with their partner, Samsung. There is plenty of money to be made by both parties.
The smartphone and tablet markets taken together is the largest market by gross product that has ever been conceived of. Hundreds of billions of Dollars of profits are on the table at this point.
A simple effort to avoid infringing on each other's trade dress, and a cross license of all technical and software patents would be a huge win for both Apple and Samsung.
Please remember that Apple never made any great products until they quit fighting Microsoft and put the heart and soul of the company into the effort to make new products for the "digital life"
The problem with Horace's analogy is that there are billions of losing outcomes in a lottery. In a court case, there are only 2: lose, and split decision. Apple had done all the good faith stuff up front. It had lived the good life. Their odds were better than a Lottery. Also, Apple was playing with money it could lose, and it was money well spent in that defending your IP is important in all other IP cases (both in legal, and perception of the litigant).
It was Samsung that was shown as willfully avoiding any sort of 'partnership,' hence the claim they willfully infringed... this wasn't accidental. You want Apple to say all is forgiven? The High road is pure capitalism... if you can build something that is innovative and is less expensive, it will drive Apple to do the same, and that consumer benefit of innovation and low cost will be achieved.
Profits... Build a better tablet/phone, and you'll share in the profits... Apple wants to compete, not build a cartel, as you propose.
Cross Licensing works when there is legitimate means to gain mutual advantage. There was no advantage in Samsung's portfolio. You gotta have something to trade.
Point Last: Apple stopped trying to be a computer company fighting for corporate 'least cost' bids. Apple/NeXT made innovative products, it was just hamstrung with the 'just good enough' corporate crapware that the MS OEM model forced on us all. The race to the bottom was a no-win situation for the underdog. Apple just realized that winning wasn't 'seats', but it was building compelling product in markets where none existed, and where the user was the decision maker not the corporate purchasing agent.