or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jury awards Apple $290 million in patent infringement case with Samsung
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jury awards Apple $290 million in patent infringement case with Samsung - Page 2

post #41 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

So, Apple lost big time here. The money isn't what they want. Or need. They want others to stop copying Apple and innovate on their own. They like the competition, but not if they simply copy. My guess, there isn't any champagne flowing on IL.

I don't see it that way at all. Apple won and they won almost everything they have been asking for.

Plus, in the "court of public opinion" Samsung have been shown to be duplicitous scum.

Funny enough, I also agree with your view. I just think Apple, like Steve said himself, doesn't need the money. They want competitors to stop copying Apples inventions/implementations. That's all.

And besides, if Samsung always does this, or Asian companies in general, would they be seen as scum through Asian eyes? I kinda get the sense that Asian people are proud of copying. I could be wrong, and certainly don't want to step on anyone's toes here.
"See her this weekend. You hit it off, come Turkey Day, maybe you can stuff her."
- Roger Sterling
Reply
"See her this weekend. You hit it off, come Turkey Day, maybe you can stuff her."
- Roger Sterling
Reply
post #42 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffyzDead View Post

I wonder how long Samsung is given,
to cut the check, to Apple?

 

There will be appeals and appeals of appeals for years to come. Apple may never see a dime. Jury trials and jury decisions are easily overruled by judges and mean little to nothing. I don’t know why we even have jury trials in this country anymore. If you have enough money and are willing to spend it you can drag any court ruling out for decades.

post #43 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Samsung is just the shot across Google's bow. The real goal is to gut Android and put the heads of Google on a pike (legally speaking, of course).

I wouldn't hold my breath on that ever happening.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #44 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

So, Apple lost big time here. The money isn't what they want. Or need. They want others to stop copying Apple and innovate on their own. They like the competition, but not if they simply copy. My guess, there isn't any champagne flowing on IL.

What is it exactly that you feel is still being copied?

In general, I meant.
"See her this weekend. You hit it off, come Turkey Day, maybe you can stuff her."
- Roger Sterling
Reply
"See her this weekend. You hit it off, come Turkey Day, maybe you can stuff her."
- Roger Sterling
Reply
post #45 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

So, Apple lost big time here. The money isn't what they want. Or need. They want others to stop copying Apple and innovate on their own. They like the competition, but not if they simply copy. My guess, there isn't any champagne flowing on IL.

 

Apple won big time as Samsung is the only Android device maker making money. Other device makers have settled or will settle. For the second case scheduled to start in March of next year Apple supposedly has stronger patents in play. With this week's circuit court ruling giving Apple a much better chance of obtaining injunctions against Samsung products, it would be in Samsung's best interests to settle and stop copying.

post #46 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Funny enough, I also agree with your view. I just think Apple, like Steve said himself, doesn't need the money. They want competitors to stop copying Apples inventions/implementations. That's all.

And besides, if Samsung always does this, or Asian companies in general, would they be seen as scum through Asian eyes? I kinda get the sense that Asian people are proud of copying. I could be wrong, and certainly don't want to step on anyone's toes here.

I'm Asian. I don't copy.
post #47 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

I tell you what, if you ever get $888 Million awarded to you, just give it to me, and let's see how relevant it is.  $888 Million isn't too shabby.  It should have been more due to the amount of sales Samsung has had world wide of those models since their relative product announcements, but it's still not that bad.  I was just merely pointing out that whatever the judgement is for, there are taxes that they have to pay, so they get about 40% less than what is awarded.  People need to realize that.   Most people would LOVE to get that kind of settlement, regardless of the company.  Not too many settlements have been for more than that in history.

 

Plus, what happened in the UK should be reversed and Samsung should post for about a year, that they've been copying Apple, AND pay Apple some money on top of it.

I hope Apple starts spitting out some larger screen iPhones soon so they can erode Android's market share for the large screen market segment.

 

Here's the ultimate scenario... Apple may one day be able to almost "give away" their hardware due to geometrically multiplying profits derived from apps, music and videos (and whatever other digital or virtual products Apple offers in the future). I'm not talking about the hardware as it exists today, I'm talking about very high-end hardware in the next 5-10 years, which is likely to be completely solid-state and as inexpensive to produce as the current low-end crap from Samsung and friends. It will be luxury-level stuff made for next to nothing, which will decimate the low-end of the market. It will ALL be high end and dominated by Apple's software on amazing hardware.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #48 of 103

Get in there...

 

Almost a billion in damages.  Not nearly enough.  However, a seismic win for Apple.  And pants down for Samsung.

 

A landmark win.  It took a while.  But Apple is protecting it's IP.  And won deservedly.

 

This one's for you, Steve.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #49 of 103
Sammy can't offer the jury better than sourdough but kimchi and the final verdic is ....go pay Apple Tax!
Edited by spiced - 11/21/13 at 4:29pm
iMac i7
Reply
iMac i7
Reply
post #50 of 103
Weren't there a lot of people on this site saying Samsung would be found innocent? They don't seem to be commenting on this thread.
post #51 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronn View Post
 

 

Apple won big time as Samsung is the only Android device maker making money. Other device makers have settled or will settle. For the second case scheduled to start in March of next year Apple supposedly has stronger patents in play. With this week's circuit court ruling giving Apple a much better chance of obtaining injunctions against Samsung products, it would be in Samsung's best interests to settle and stop copying.

 

This. Apple is bringing bigger guns to the next trial. And based on the way the pre-trial motions are going, it's not looking good for Samsung.

 

Then you have to look at the sanctions coming up against Samsung. They're going to have an even harder time trying to get access to any Apple documents or agreements after they screwed up with the Nokia/Apple deal.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #52 of 103

Finally! Not enough but at least Samsung have been found guilty. I hope it gets tripled — but won't hold my breath.

 

Unfortunately the only lesson that Samsung will learn from this is that copying pays. Until copying doesn't pay there will be no justice.

AppleInsider = Apple-in-cider. It's a joke!

I've used macs since 1985 when I typed up my first research paper. Never used anything else never wanted to.
Reply
AppleInsider = Apple-in-cider. It's a joke!

I've used macs since 1985 when I typed up my first research paper. Never used anything else never wanted to.
Reply
post #53 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Samsung is just the shot across Google's bow. The real goal is to gut Android and put the heads of Google on a pike (legally speaking, of course).

I wouldn't hold my breath on that ever happening.

Me neither 1hmm.gif especially since Google literately paves the Beltway(Tax) with gold. Apple by comparison barely pays enough for street lighting.
post #54 of 103
Where is Gatorguy?
..... the greatest fame comes from adding to human knowledge, not winning battles.
Paraphrased from Napolean Bonaparte, 1798
Reply
..... the greatest fame comes from adding to human knowledge, not winning battles.
Paraphrased from Napolean Bonaparte, 1798
Reply
post #55 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frac View Post


Me neither 1hmm.gif especially since Google literately paves the Beltway(Tax) with gold. Apple by comparison barely pays enough for street lighting.

 

Are you sure you don't want to run over the figures again, seeing as how Apple is probably the USA's largest taxpayer.

 

I think they paid $9 Billion last year and that's enough for a lot of light bulbs.

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #56 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post
 

 

Here's the ultimate scenario... Apple may one day be able to almost "give away" their hardware due to geometrically multiplying profits derived from apps, music and videos (and whatever other digital or virtual products Apple offers in the future). I'm not talking about the hardware as it exists today, I'm talking about very high-end hardware in the next 5-10 years, which is likely to be completely solid-state and as inexpensive to produce as the current low-end crap from Samsung and friends. It will be luxury-level stuff made for next to nothing, which will decimate the low-end of the market. It will ALL be high end and dominated by Apple's software on amazing hardware.

Ultimate scenario?  Well, after you are done with your pipe dream, come back down to earth.  The chances of them "giving away" product because it's made for next to nothing is pretty much not going to happen in the next 5 to 10 years.  The technology required to do that isn't available to do that.   I like your wishful thinking, but I highly doubt that your ultimate scenario will happen.

post #57 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Ultimate scenario?  Well, after you are done with your pipe dream, come back down to earth.  The chances of them "giving away" product because it's made for next to nothing is pretty much not going to happen in the next 5 to 10 years.  The technology required to do that isn't available to do that.   I like your wishful thinking, but I highly doubt that your ultimate scenario will happen.

 

This is a down-to-earth projection. If you become even vaguely familiar with the direction electronics and fabrication are headed, you will realize this.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #58 of 103

If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #59 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

$888MIl less 40% in taxes equals $532 Mil.

Then they can recoup the amount they spent on attorneys and court costs.

I'm sure Apple is STILL upset about that stupid settlement in the UK where Apple was forced to publicly admit that Samsung didn't copy. Now, they might have enough evidence to have that case overturned where Samsung has to publicly admit their are copycat LOSERS.


(888- attorney and court costs) is taxable, not 888.

post #60 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by arch View Post
 


(888- attorney and court costs) is taxable, not 888.

 

I wonder. There was something about $2.00. Perhaps the actual amount was $889,998.00?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #61 of 103
They should donate the settlement to charity. Show it is about principal, not just money.
post #62 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by arch View Post
 


(888- attorney and court costs) is taxable, not 888.

 

Apple has to claim the $888Mil as income, which is taxable by both State and Federal.

 

The court costs and attorney fees, if they can't recoup that from Samsung, is an expense.

 

There are only rare instances where a court settlement is not taxable and not considered income, but this isn't one of them.  At least this is what my tax accountant told me a few years ago when we discussed how lawsuit settlements are handled.

 

The rare instances might be personal injury, at least that's how it was several years ago, but this is not a personal injury case.


Edited by drblank - 11/21/13 at 6:21pm
post #63 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

 

Apple has to claim the $888Mil as income, which is taxable by both State and Federal.

 

The court costs and attorney fees, if they can't recoup that from Samsung, is an expense.

 

There are only rare instances where a court settlement is not taxable and not considered income, but this isn't one of them.  At least this is what my tax accountant told me a few years ago when we discussed how lawsuit settlements are handled.


I meant they have to pay tax on not the entire 888 but (888 minus expenses).

 

And not to forget, they could maybe find a way to route it through Ireland.

post #64 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by arch View Post
 


I meant they have to pay tax on not the entire 888 but (888 minus expenses).

 

And not to forget, they could maybe find a way to route it through Ireland.

Well, it didn't come out that way, you said the $888 was not taxable, but the court costs and attorney fees are, which is WRONG.

 

In this case, they'll probably (if their attorneys are good and the judge doesn't do any monkey business) recoup their attorney fees and court costs on top of this from Samsung, at least that's how the laws are now. If a Plaintiff wins a case, they are supposed to be able to recoup all attorney fees and court costs from the Defendant.  It didn't use to work that way.  The other law that changed in California several years ago was that if you sue someone and you lose, then the Defendant gets to recoup their attorney fees and court costs from the Plaintiff if the Plaintiff loses.  It's to avoid more frivolous lawsuits, how well it's working, I couldn't tell you, but that's fair.

 

No, they can't route it through Ireland, since this is money gotten in the US, they only route profits derived from countries outside the US into Ireland as long as the laws stay the way they are.  So, Apple and others doing that aren't doing anything illegal.  But the profits they make from the investment of that money is brought into the US and is taxed.  That's all been discussed months ago as Apple was not found guilty of any tax law violations from the US point of view.

 

Did you wake up this stupid, or do you have to consume lots of drugs/alcohol, etc.?  I'm just curious.  Seriously, a joke is a joke, but you are past the point of joking around.

post #65 of 103
Ok, this is a no brainier case for DOJ to come up with a criminal charge to put Samscum CEO into jail for grand thief with possible 10 years of community services.
post #66 of 103
Hey guys, I don't have a lot of knowledge about this patent stuff, but what does this victory actually mean? Does it mean that Samsung can't use the pinch to zoom feature anymore? I've been running my mouth and bragging to my samsung owning friends that Samsung won't be able to use that anymore after this case (I know, I'm a stupid fanboy). So what precisely are the effects of this case? Looking for a serious answer here guys, no trolling or whatsoever.
post #67 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

Weren't there a lot of people on this site saying Samsung would be found innocent? They don't seem to be commenting on this thread.

Samsung was already found guilty. The only purpose of this trial was to award additional damages. What I found funny are the ones posting how happy they are about the moral victory when yesterday they were hoping for the largest award in history or that somehow this is going to scare Google. 

 

Samsung is guilty but this did nothing to scare anyone. I'm sure the lawyers did really well. 

post #68 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

This is a down-to-earth projection. If you become even vaguely familiar with the direction electronics and fabrication are headed, you will realize this.

Apple doesn't give away hardware. That's where the money is made to pay for software and development.
post #69 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by lannoc View Post

Show it is about principal, not just money.

If it's principal, I'd rather take it in money.

Otoh, if it's about principle......1wink.gif
post #70 of 103
I think Samsung should be forced to pay the dmages and fees going forward on each device sold.
post #71 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

$888 Million isn't too shabby.  

It is at a corporate scale. Corporations the size of Apple make this much revenue every day. Not just morally, technically, Samsung owes Apple at least tens of billions of dollars just from the lost sales. The money isn't anything for these guys, it's the legal victory that counts.

"We're surrounded by anonymous, poorly made objects. It's tempting to think it's because the people who use them don't care -- just like the people who make them." - Jony Ive, 2014
Reply
"We're surrounded by anonymous, poorly made objects. It's tempting to think it's because the people who use them don't care -- just like the people who make them." - Jony Ive, 2014
Reply
post #72 of 103
Why would any American buy a product made by Samsung, who does not have a moral compass?
post #73 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

Apple just spent something like $10M on lawyers and got a $888M payout.  That's a HUGE return on investment.

Yes, it's small compared to what Samsung, google, etc. all owe them morally.

But having now defended these patents in court they will not have to sue over them again, and will be able to simply collect royalties from people (hopefully google, and at a high rate too.)

This is good news..

Actually, this award is a penalty, has nothing to do with royalties. Apple can refuse to grant royalties to Samsung or anyone else if they want. They can easily ask for damages from other manufacturers who copied the patents, but only ask for royalties from those they want.

The next obvious step is to block the sales of Samsung products in various countries, starting with the USA.
post #74 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flabingo View Post

Why would any American buy a product made by Samsung, who does not have a moral compass?

Why does anyone buy a watch or DVD players from a guy standing in an alley...?
post #75 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

Samsung was already found guilty. The only purpose of this trial was to award additional damages. What I found funny are the ones posting how happy they are about the moral victory when yesterday they were hoping for the largest award in history or that somehow this is going to scare Google. 

Samsung is guilty but this did nothing to scare anyone. I'm sure the lawyers did really well. 

I'm not sure that the word "scare" is the best word, but Apple has served notice that they will make it expensive to infringe upon their IP. This is the purpose of following through on their threat. Having established a "value" for their patents through court action will make it far easier to collect damages from other's who have infringed, thereby mapping out their claimed territory. This also sets the stage in Apple's favor for the suits forthcoming from RockStar. Anyone thinking of having a stiff spine will reflect on what it has cost Samsung.
post #76 of 103
I'm no Apple fan, but I do hate Samsung for its dominance in pretty much all of Android. Android has become synonymous with Samsung. Who would Apple sue for copyright infringements? Answer please!
post #77 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by water cooler View Post

Ok, this is a no brainier case for DOJ to come up with a criminal charge to put Samscum CEO into jail for grand thief with possible 10 years of community services.

 

In jail, where?

 

It's not likely in South Korea.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tax-evasion-bribery-and-pricefixing-how-samsung-became-the-giant-that-ate-korea-8510588.html

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #78 of 103

Corporatism in South Korea makes corruption in the US look like amateur hour.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #79 of 103

What patents are Samsung breaching in their later phones & tablets?  Surely these older patents will have been worked around so isn't talk of any product import bans etc a bit pointless?

And without wanting to inflame the hatred of 'slightly' biased Apple fans on here :/S, how do you guys feel about the many features Apple simply borrow from Android?  Is it ok for copying one way but utterly unacceptable if its Apple being copied?

Don't get me wrong here, I'm no fanboi of Samsung & am at that lovely stage where smart phones mean nothing to me now, they're simply a phone.  That said, it would be nice if my Galaxy S2 didn't have the Micro-USB charge issue and if my iPhone 5 was actually capable of working on the UK vodafone network but apparently thats a no go.

post #80 of 103
Finally, does Samsung have to come up with the cash immediately or is another retrial a possibility? How long can they spin this out?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jury awards Apple $290 million in patent infringement case with Samsung