or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jurors credit CPA witness for Apple's $290M victory in Samsung patent retrial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jurors credit CPA witness for Apple's $290M victory in Samsung patent retrial - Page 2

post #41 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Retailers paying them is what I understood from @Gatorguy, hopefully corrrectly. He will no doubt have a link if you'd like.

Returned items is a very good point, and as I understand it, a large portion were returned.

I'm not going back again to find it but the OP is welcome to look at International Accounting Standards, used by Samsung in reporting results. Essentially the IAS says sales are recognized in much the same way and using the same general rules as Apple does under US GAAP. Accordingly those requirements are usually met when the product/service is shipped.

As for returns I don't know that any of these guys, Apple included, generally report them.
Edited by Gatorguy - 11/22/13 at 11:21am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #42 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Gotta feel sorry for Colleen Allen as the jury foreperson. I don't think she has a clue what's coming her way. Losers/trolls/shills everywhere are going to dig into her personal life for anything they can find to paint her as biased. Just like they did with Koh and Hogan before and with anyone else who rules in Apple's favor.

Efforts to harass, harm, denigrate or intimidate federal jurors - whether prospective, present or past - may be violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245. This who may be tempted to make such posts on this site - be forewarned.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #43 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan17 View Post

I hope Dyson wins big against Samsung. 

Agreed. Dyson is a true innovator. I bought a refurbished Dyson twelve years ago. It still runs like a tank. It has added a few improvements to newer models, but I just cannot justify the cost of buying a new one when the old one works great. Its blade less fan, and hand dryers are great as well.

Besides its vacuuming ability. I live how it is very easy to get to all parts of the vacuum channel to clear blocks, the aluminum handle, long hose, and long electrical cord.
post #44 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post

Efforts to harass, harm, denigrate or intimidate federal jurors - whether prospective, present or past - may be violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245. This who may be tempted to make such posts on this site - be forewarned.

If Ms. Allen doesn't seek the limelight as Hogan did to spout flawed reasoning for the jury findings I don't think she'll have any problems at all. Why would she? Hogan's problems were of Hogan's making.
Edited by Gatorguy - 11/22/13 at 1:59pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #45 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by rameshjha View Post

Jury verdicts in US are very often biased in favor of American companies. This happened in the SAP Oracle case as well. Eventually it gets appealed and the learned judge throws out the verdict.

 

I have four words for you:

 

Go buy a Nexus7

post #46 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by rameshjha View Post

Jury verdicts in US are very often biased in favor of American companies. This happened in the SAP Oracle case as well. Eventually it gets appealed and the learned judge throws out the verdict.

Why would the appeal matter? The appeal would still be within the United States system, and so poisoned by your alleged reasoning.

post #47 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Agreed. Dyson is a true innovator. I bought a refurbished Dyson twelve years ago. It still runs like a tank. It has added a few improvements to newer models, but I just cannot justify the cost of buying a new one when the old one works great. Its blade less fan, and hand dryers are great as well.

Besides its vacuuming ability. I live how it is very easy to get to all parts of the vacuum channel to clear blocks, the aluminum handle, long hose, and long electrical cord.

The British accent in their advertisements sold me.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #48 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by rameshjha View Post

Jury verdicts in US are very often biased in favor of American companies. This happened in the SAP Oracle case as well. Eventually it gets appealed and the learned judge throws out the verdict.

The US jury system is based on the idea that fairness can be consciously chosen, despite whatever internal biases a person has. Are you accusing American jurors of (1.) conscious disregard for court instructions to be fair, (2.) unconscious influence of bias on their conscious effort to be fair, and/or (3.) insinuating that American jurors are less fair than jurors in other countries? Please clarify.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #49 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I'm not going back again to find it but the OP is welcome to look at International Accounting Standards, used by Samsung in reporting results. Essentially the IAS says sales are recognized in much the same way and using the same general rules as Apple does under US GAAP. Accordingly those requirements are usually met when the product/service is shipped.

As for returns I don't know that any of these guys, Apple included, generally report them.

 

Revenue is recognized when items are shipped in general.  But if the reseller has the right to return unsold goods Samsung needs to estimate what percentage of sales will be returned based on history or other reasonable method.  They also need to accrue for possible damaged/warranty expense, ect.

 

Samsung ships $100,000

They estimate 10% will be returned and not sold

Estimate 2% defective rate

Samsung will show only $88,000 in net sales

 

My guess is Samsung stuffed the channel with the Gear Watch and will be getting a huge amount of returns once the holidays are over.  Then they would need to reverse out a bunch of revenue unless their estimates were high also.

post #50 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

I'm glad Apple won. I will not buy anything Samsung! (I know, there are Samsung parts in Apple stuff!)

I hope Dyson wins, too! 1smile.gif

I'm with you. They are banned in my house. As far as SS parts in Apple gear goes I just view it as a dig by Apple since the big profits from the entire product goes into Apples pocket. Samsung should have been happy as Apples supplier and listened to Google to not so closely copy Apple, which is the pot calling the kettle black anyway.
post #51 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoonerYoda View Post

I'd love to sue one of my business partners and still continue to do business with them.

 

When you're giving that business partner billions of dollars for components, I'm sure that partner would not mind in the least continuing to do business with you. 

post #52 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by lantzn View Post


I'm with you. They are banned in my house. As far as SS parts in Apple gear goes I just view it as a dig by Apple since the big profits from the entire product goes into Apples pocket. Samsung should have been happy as Apples supplier and listened to Google to not so closely copy Apple, which is the pot calling the kettle black anyway.

Thanks...Good points. I'd forgotten about that Google advice! :)

 

I just think of all the time and resources wasted (not to mention lost income for Apple) that could be used for R&D. It's a major distraction.

 

To those who say competition is good for Apple, to some degree, it's true. But what Samsung and Google have done is cheated and that's immoral and evil. BTW, Apple never rests on it's laurels, they had 80% of the MP3 market and still introduced new models every year! (Except this year b/c of the impact of the iPhone)

 

Best 

post #53 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
 

 

When you're giving that business partner billions of dollars for components, I'm sure that partner would not mind in the least continuing to do business with you. 

 

I need to find a business partner like that.  But let's chop off a few zeros first to bring it down to my reality.

post #54 of 69
Innovate, Or, Copy... We should create a new word for next year's dictionary... "COPYVATE" defined as: the act of renewing product cycles by obfuscating copyright infringement while zealously promoting and defending same as innovation.
post #55 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan17 View Post
 

I hope Dyson wins big against Samsung. 

Hey, heyyyyy!...watch it... on that accusation of copying Dyson's vacuum steering mechanism... there's no patent on "rounding corners".

:D

post #56 of 69
I wonder if Apple also got the legal fee paid by Samscum... Btw…is there a difference for Apple's tax treatment if Samscum cut the check and hand to Apple in Korea or Ireland instead on US soil? (I know, it will be paid on US soil.). What's the impact on Apple's goodwill amount in Apple's financial report?
post #57 of 69
Originally Posted by svesan03 View Post
Innovate, Or, Copy... We should create a new word for next year's dictionary... "COPYVATE" defined as: the act of renewing product cycles by obfuscating copyright infringement while zealously promoting and defending same as innovation.

 

It’d be easier to get new definitions added.

 

Samsung (v.); 1. to copy egregiously, 2. the act of denying an action that has damaged reputation, 3. see: schmidt

 

Ex: “The local company samsunged their most popular product from the national chain.” “Even when he was caught cheating on the test, he samsunged.”

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #58 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


When you can't innovate in your R&D lab, you innovate by copying.

Fixed it for ya.

 

Nope I think he had it right the first time. Copying is wrong but I would rather see Apple use the money it spends on litigation on R&D. After all it was Tim Cook said all the patent wars were, and I quote, "A pain in the ass"

Always happy to debate an issue with anyone. Once it turns into name calling, I am out of there. 
Reply
Always happy to debate an issue with anyone. Once it turns into name calling, I am out of there. 
Reply
post #59 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Samsung (v.); 1. to copy egregiously, 2. the act of denying an action that has damaged reputation, 3. see: schmidt

Ex: “The local company samsunged their most popular product from the national chain.” “Even when he was caught cheating on the test, he samsunged.”

Brilliant!
"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 #60 of 69
If this doesn't show our how broken legal system is with respect to patents and IP, I don't know what does. Any layperson with half a brain can see clearly how Samsung not just infringed, but wantonly copied Apple's designs. It's so obvious that it's comical. I recall the evidence Apple submitted, where Samsung itself had written comparisons of the products and notes indicating how they should copy Apple's designs. The fact that this is still going on is ludicrous.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #61 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

LOL @ Samsung vowing to "continue to innovate."
I'm certain they will innovate a thousand more ways to be weasels.

Weasel is the word that always springs to mind when I think of Samsung—well described, SockRolid.
post #62 of 69

Forgive me if you do not agree with this next statement but how can anyone have a patent on a rectangular phone with rounded corners. Please tell me how else do you design a phone with a rectangular touch screen? I mean look at flat screen TVs   

 

This is a Samsung Smart TV (top) and a Panasonic TV (bottom). Do you hear Panasonic suing Samsung over the TV designs or visa versa? Nope cos neither has a patent on something as basic as a rectangular screen with a border around it. If the brand name was not on either of these products, could you honestly tell by looking...which was which? Doubt it

 

 

Always happy to debate an issue with anyone. Once it turns into name calling, I am out of there. 
Reply
Always happy to debate an issue with anyone. Once it turns into name calling, I am out of there. 
Reply
post #63 of 69
This case is about different patents, which Apple has cornered. And Samsung got cornered.
"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 #64 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post
 

Maybe the Irish will buy them?

 

OK, that was mean! Sorry.

 

Amadan


Edited by KnightoftheWord - 11/24/13 at 1:45pm
post #65 of 69
Originally Posted by Bondm16 View Post
Forgive me if you do not agree with this next statement but how can anyone have a patent on a rectangular phone with rounded corners.

 

You can’t. Fortunately, Apple doesn’t.

 
Please tell me how else do you design a phone with a rectangular touch screen? I mean look at flat screen TVs

 

 

Are TVs phones?

 

Do you hear Panasonic suing Samsung over the TV designs or visa versa?

 

Do you see either of them innovating whatsoever?

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #66 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondm16 View Post

Forgive me if you do not agree with this next statement but how can anyone have a patent on a rectangular phone with rounded corners. Please tell me how else do you design a phone with a rectangular touch screen? I mean look at flat screen TVs   

...

Different patents. Plus we think all smart phones are like that one but Apple took a risk in 2007 with the iPhone. No other smart phone looked like it back them. The critics/ analysts complained about the lack of a physical keyboard. Then all of sudden it becomes a hit. And the copycat artists then try to make their own version. The shape is part of Apple's trade dress just as much as the wavy bottle is part of Coke's.
post #67 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

You can’t. Fortunately, Apple doesn’t.

Apple did eventually get their design patent for an electronic device in the shape of a rectangle with rounded corners.
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1701443/USD670286S1.pdf

That really is the only thing claimed: a rectangle with rounded corners, no other design elements whatsoever. Not a button, a microphone cutout or anything else. There's lots of superfluous dotted lines included in various drawings but the only design feature Apple is asking protection for is shown with a solid line. And the only thing with a solid line? A rounded rectangle.

Little to worry about tho IMO. You'll never see Apple assert this one in an infringement case as it's highly likely invalid.
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/world-of-tech/apple-gets-what-it-always-wanted-patent-for-round-edge-rectangle-1110942
Edited by Gatorguy - 11/24/13 at 3:49pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #68 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightoftheWord View Post
 

Amadan

I learned a new word today! :)

post #69 of 69
Samsung doesn't "Continue to Innovate" they continue to "Imitate".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jurors credit CPA witness for Apple's $290M victory in Samsung patent retrial