or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung expert says Apple patents worth $38.4M, not $2.2B
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung expert says Apple patents worth $38.4M, not $2.2B - Page 2

post #41 of 91

Remind me not to take economics and finance at Yale.

post #42 of 91
To repeat what others have said over and over: The patents in question here are not "standards essential" and therefore "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" do not come into play. Apple can choose ANY price for these patents. They can charge $1 per device to HTC and $1000 per device to Samsung. They can also decide not to license the patents to anybody at any price - or so they should be able to. Samsung took that option away from them by stealing them. Willful theft (in my opinion) should automatically triple whatever the final award is - with Apple receiving 2/3 of that award and the remaining third going into a fund to reform the entire patent process. But I digress...

Samsung knew that Apple did not want to license these patents, so their only option was deliberate infringement. Samsung as a company may be unethical, untrustworthy and the company may be run by thieves and liars - but it is definitely not run by "stupid" people. Samsung *knew* that they would have to pay for the use of these patents eventually - via legal actions exactly like this one - and therefore Samsung's very own internal calculations must have determined that the inclusion of these 5 stolen features would result in enough additional devices being sold to more than make up for any damages awarded via a legal action. These facts alone should serve as proof positive that the features in question are very valuable.

In my opinion, $40 per device is too little and not enough to prevent Samsung from using the same tactic in the future. Apple needs to be compensated fairly for the unauthorized use of their technology as well as for lost device sales and the lost income that would have come from onboarding those users into the Apple Ecosystem - including lost commissions on music sales, app purchases, advertising revenue, etc. (not just the initial purchase of the hardware itself)

And in order to discourage Samsung and other companies from using this technique on an ongoing basis, there needs to be a punitive portion to the award. My suggestion would be to require that Samsung send out a communication to ALL owners of the infringing devices with an explanation/apology for their theft of Apple technology as well as an offer to SUBSIDIZE the purchase of a new iPhone by $40.
Edited by tenly - 4/21/14 at 10:58pm
post #43 of 91

Will damages be calculated based on the number of infringing phones that Samsung has "sold", or the number they have "shipped"?

(Since the media and analysts seem to think that shipped=sold, I think we should definitely use the numbers the Analyst's have been reporting in any damages calculation!)

 

Will Samsung be required to take out a newspaper ad and modify their web-site to include an admission of guilt and an apology for stealing Apple technology as well as a link to Apple's "Shop iPhone" web-page?

(I would love to hear Samsung's response to this type of order and their reasoning for why this would be extremely unfair.)

post #44 of 91

Would someone check the calculations.

 

My calculations of $.35 x 5 (number of patents) x 37 Million units doesn't come out to $38.4 Million.

post #45 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post
 

I'm shocked they are trying to have multiple defenses.

 

It's all part of their cunning plan to eventually plead, insanity! 

post #46 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Speaking of, last night's Cosmos episode was excellent.

I've been following Cosmos, but I haven't seen the last episode yet. Obviously, there's something that I'm missing here.

post #47 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post
 

I can't help but wonder what would really happen if Apple decided to make a line of cheap plastic iPhones (maybe call them something else for the low-end market) to utterly gut Samsung's worldwide position as "top Android phone."

It is called the iPhone 5 C.

post #48 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by leighr View Post

Well at least they're admitting that they stole/copied from Apple - let's face it, it was obvious to everyone - but now they're going into damage control, while they continue to profit from stolen IP.

My sentiments exactly! They are finally up against the wall and having to admit they did copy. Game over, just waiting for jury to award massive damages. :D

post #49 of 91
Talk about dog bites man! You would expect to them to make a competitive lower bid but $38million is ridiculously low when considering the income those patents have generated in the sum of Apple's patents. It's the march of the Me2's
post #50 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Would someone check the calculations.

My calculations of $.35 x 5 (number of patents) x 37 Million units doesn't come out to $38.4 Million.
$64,750 mill to be precise
post #51 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Maybe Samsung will turns state's witness against Sony. 1wink.gif

well, that is unfair to drag Sony into this!. besmirching the good name of Sony!...
Seriously, have you noticed that Sony DOES NOT copy?.... look at the products that they made and make, they are all diffferent from apple's products.

Sony, had the number one name and product the music business!... (Walkman) did they try to copy apple to regain the business back?... really all they had to do was add they AAC codec to the their walkmans!.

Some of the reasons why the late Steve Jobs loved Sony products.
post #52 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

$64,750 mill to be precise

is it 64 . 750 billion?... or 64 . 750 million?... "mill" as in million.
BUT on the other hand, i like the 64 billion number as damages better!..1biggrin.gif
post #53 of 91

So apple has to pay $21m dollars to SSB for using a clock face, Marvell Technology Group has to pay $1.5 bn dollars to the University of Pittsburgh for patents used in hard disks ( http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2014/04/01/324944.htm ), and Samsung thinks that ripping off technology used in probably the largest consumer product of the current time is only worth $38.4m?  Apples lawyers need to bring in reference to the Marvell case when discussing damages.  The legal precedent has been set.

post #54 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

It's how all crime drama interrogations unfold with the less intelligent criminals.

First they claim to have no idea what the detectives are talking about. Then once they are caught they finally admit they did know or see whatever was previously mentioned but that they didn't know them that well or see much of anything. The only part that is different is when they get pinned for the murder (usually) they finally come clean about some other bad crime they were committing that is less than murder.

In all the TV shows I watch (my source of legal knowledge) if they 'didn't cop a plea and fess up at the start, it'll go harder on them' ....
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #55 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatrix View Post

Talk about dog bites man! You would expect to them to make a competitive lower bid but $38million is ridiculously low when considering the income those patents have generated in the sum of Apple's patents. It's the march of the Me2's

I was thinking the same thing. I would have thought it was actually partially quantifiable. Let's not also not forget, not only Apple's losses are involved but Scamsungs illicit gains too, there are two dogs in the race when counting monies here I would hope. It's a shame Apple can't get them under the Rico Act and seize all their other assets. See, I said I watch too much Netflix ... 1biggrin.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #56 of 91
Testimony at trial: For iOS 4, 5 and 6 Apple deferred about $10 in revenue for iOS upgrades. Each update has hundreds of features, so each only worth 5-10 cents.

In unrelated news Motorola has finally signed a patent licensing deal with Microsoft.









Just not the Motorola Mobility soon to be owned by Lenovo. The licensee is Motorola Solutions. Someone is sure to misreport it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #57 of 91
$38.4 million.... That judge really needs to throw the book at them. SO you think only $38.4 million huh? How much have you spent on lawyers and such on this upto now? More than $38.4 million. So why did you not just pay them in the first place... right because that is not the figure Apple would have charged you, more like the figure they have set. And you r units would have been more expensive, and not sold as many units. Now sit down and shut up and let the grown ups talk about how much your actually going to pay, besides the legal fees....

You don't want to make me curmudgeon, you would not like me when I am curmudgeon.  I go all caps, bold, with a 72PT font and green lettering.  

Reply

You don't want to make me curmudgeon, you would not like me when I am curmudgeon.  I go all caps, bold, with a 72PT font and green lettering.  

Reply
post #58 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post


$64,750 mill to be precise

Same number i got.  If that person that gave testimony can't do the most simple of calculations, then I would have that "expert" thrown out off the case in terms of figuring out how much they owe.  I'm surprised the Judge didn't catch that one.  LOL.

post #59 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by haar View Post

well, that is unfair to drag Sony into this!. besmirching the good name of Sony!...
Seriously, have you noticed that Sony DOES NOT copy?.... look at the products that they made and make, they are all diffferent from apple's products.

Sony, had the number one name and product the music business!... (Walkman) did they try to copy apple to regain the business back?... really all they had to do was add they AAC codec to the their walkmans!.

Some of the reasons why the late Steve Jobs loved Sony products.

I choose Sony because they are a Japanese company and Samsung is S. Korean. IOW, longstanding feuding between each and in no way a comment about Sony stealing or copying others.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #60 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... a Samsung damages expert said Apple should be granted $38.4 million for all five alleged-infringed patents, far from the $2.19 billion Apple is seeking.
...
Samsung expert witness Judith Chevalier, an economics and finance professor at Yale University, said her calculations of reasonable royalty rates came out to 35 cents per patent per infringing device, reports CNET. If a lump sum payment were to be doled out to Apple, Samsung would pay around $38.4 million for more than 37 million devices.

"My analysis compensates Apple through a reasonable royalty and...I have determined Apple has not lost sales as a result of Samsung's practice of the patents," Chevalier said, explaining why she did not include damages for lost profits.

The number is leagues away from Apple's patent valuation arguments that put total damages at $2.19 billion for patents infringed between August 2011 and the end of 2013. That equates to an average $40 per infringing Samsung device.

"We have to conclude that the differences in profitability across these products is being driven by something else other than the practice of these patents," Chevalier said. "The value created by these products is really negligible."

On cross-examination, Apple attorney Bill Lee went after Chevalier's methods. In her evaluation, the Yale professor incorporated reviews from customers, one of which came from an iPhone user who claimed "Seerei" shot him with a gun.

Apple is asserting five patents against various Samsung products running Google's Android operating system, including "swipe-to-unlock," data detectors and universal search.

For its part, Samsung calls Apple's patent damages claims a "gross exaggeration" of their actual worth and has been presenting testimony in line with that thinking. Last week, Samsung experts presented studies that sought to prove Apple was "elevating artificially the importance" of certain features covered by the five patents.

Following Chevalier's testimony, Samsung rested its defense case and proceeded to call witnesses for a countersuit against Apple. The Korean company is leveraging two patents against a number of Apple products.

 

Is it just me or has Samsung spent its whole defense not saying we aren't guilty but trying to minimize the damage claim?  Their own testimony says "we are guilty but actually owe a smaller amount."

 

Apple can charge $100 per patent per phone if it feels like it since they own the patents.  Samsung should fire its lawyers.

post #61 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I choose Sony because they are a Japanese company and Samsung is S. Korean. IOW, longstanding feuding between each and in no way a comment about Sony stealing or copying others.

Sony can make decent products when they put their minds to it, but they usually charge a LOT more money for the better products. Same goes with a lot of these mfg that make the main component and finished products.   You still have to be a little careful just because it has the name Sony on it.  But people can get easily brainwashed into thinking that just because it has a certain name on the outside that it's a high quality product.  Some have been control standards from their bottom end products to their top end products, some don't.  BMW has different levels of quality from their 3 series to their 7 series.  The 3 series are made in places like Mexico, and the 7 series are made in Germany.  Things like that.  In the musical instrument industry, not all Fender guitars are made by experience Luthiers in the US, the cheaper products are made in Japan and Mexico, etc. by mass assembly lines, hence the price difference.  One is just spit out like any other product and some have a lot more handwork, hand selection of woods, and more quality control in the mfg process that can't be mfg on a big assembly line.

 

Yeah, there's been a long standing feud between Japan and Korea.  It's like the McCoys and Hatfields.   It dates back from a LONG time ago.   I dated a woman from Korea and she explained it to me.  in some areas even the Sushi bars are owned and operated by Koreans, yet the average Joe doesn't know this.  I know several of these in my area.  It's funny because most people are oblivious as to how to tell the difference.

post #62 of 91

Notice that Samsung is only bring in experts from universities, why not any industries experts who actually have real world experience making and selling product and knows the real value of a product. Verse hiring a bunch of arm chair quarterback who are can analysis the data verses actually playing the game.

post #63 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Notice that Samsung is only bring in experts from universities, why not any industries experts who actually have real world experience making and selling product and knows the real value of a product. Verse hiring a bunch of arm chair quarterback who are can analysis the data verses actually playing the game.

Both Apple and Samsung are using the same types of experts. Both are coming up with what I consider silly numbers too.
http://recode.net/2014/04/22/understanding-the-crazy-math-apple-and-samsung-use-to-calculate-patent-damages/
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #64 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Both Apple and Samsung are using the same types of experts. Both are coming up with what I consider silly numbers too.
http://recode.net/2014/04/22/understanding-the-crazy-math-apple-and-samsung-use-to-calculate-patent-damages/

Apple also had there own people from inside the company who claimed it cost them sales, and they probable could show sales figures, Apple used outside people to valid the numbers, whether right or wrong, Samsung is just using no industries expert and funny math.

 

As it was already said, juries are funny and you never know which way it will go, they could ignore the experts and rely on apple own information and say apple lost sales at the hands of samsung due to the market confusion they caused.

post #65 of 91

Looks like Google just stepped in it. They are now exposed for providing legal support for Samsung.

 

This could provide the opening Apple has been looking for to deliver the deathblow to Android.

 

http://recode.net/2014/04/22/google-agreed-to-pick-up-at-least-some-of-samsungs-legal-defense-in-apple-case/

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #66 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Looks like Google just stepped in it. They are now exposed for providing legal support for Samsung.

This could provide the opening Apple has been looking for to deliver the deathblow to Android.

http://recode.net/2014/04/22/google-agreed-to-pick-up-at-least-some-of-samsungs-legal-defense-in-apple-case/
They even said at least some of the features Samsung is accused of "stealing" are integrated in Android. They don't seem too concerned. At least this answers some who were faulting Google for not indemnifying licensees. I guess they do despite what Eric , DED and a couple other claim. It's the right thing.

The odd thing about Apple bringing it up is it kinda goes against their constant hammering that Google isn't part of this case.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #67 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


The odd thing about Apple bringing it up is it kinda goes against their constant hammering that Google isn't part of this case.

 

It's not odd at all. Apple may be making this connection to prove Google is responsible for real financial harm as the drug dealer supplying free Android drugs to phone manufacturers. Their involvement isn't just that of a detached observer.

 

This connection may set up Google for liability claims by Apple?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #68 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

It's not odd at all. Apple may be making this connection to prove Google is responsible for real financial harm as the drug dealer supplying free Android drugs to phone manufacturers. Their involvement isn't just that of a detached observer.

This connection may set up Google for liability claims by Apple?

Google's always been responsible for whatever is in Android. What makes you think this is anything new?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #69 of 91

Oh, and this is hilarious... Mike Elgan just posted this on Google+:

 

Quote:

Samsung is preparing for a 'post-Google era.'

Samsung Medial Solution Center President Hong Won-pyo told reporters today that Samsung is rapidly developing its Tizen operating system as an alternative to Android in preparation for a "post-Google era."

He said Samsung will release products that run on Tizen "as early as possible" and is looking for mergers and acquisitions to speed up the process of moving off Android.

 

If this isn't proof enough that Android is screwed, I don't know what is! Remember, Samsung is currently the only company making money off of Android devices. If they abandon Android.... Well, hahahahahahahahahahahaaaa!


Edited by SpamSandwich - 4/22/14 at 3:23pm

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #70 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Google's always been responsible for whatever is in Android. What makes you think this is anything new?

 

It's different because Google used to have no financial connection to Samsung. Now there is a clear link. That opens them up to liability claims.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #71 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

It's different because Google used to have no financial connection to Samsung. Now there is a clear link. That opens them up to liability claims.

Google has always been open to liability claims too. Why did you and others think they didn't? There's never been anything preventing Apple from suing Google directly.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #72 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Google has always been open to liability claims too. Why did you and others think they didn't? There's never been anything preventing Apple from suing Google directly.

 

Sure there has... Financial liability. With Google connected to Samsung, Samsung's harm becomes Google's harm. This is a smoking gun.

 

Regardless of what of either of us thinks, we'll soon see how Apple uses this to their advantage.

 

Howard Mintz, reporter for the San Jose Mercury News just wrote:

Quote:
last afternoon break, Apple nearing end of its witnesses. It will be interesting to see what Samsung does with the Google indemnity material, as it doesn't cover all five patents, so they do have some wriggle room. That may have to be left for closings...

Edited by SpamSandwich - 4/22/14 at 3:44pm

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #73 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Sure there has... Financial liability. With Google connected to Samsung, Samsung's harm becomes Google's harm. This is a smoking gun.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/containers/fix380/1495569/000119312510271362/dex1012.htm
The indemnity clause isn't a secret. Google has always accepted financial liability and Apple surely was aware of it. You apparently still want to believe this is a new revelation. It isn't.

Ever hear the term "contributory infringement"? Apple could go for it whenever they they felt froggy.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #74 of 91

Ina Fried wrote:

 

 
Quote:
First real #appsung bombshell as e-mails confirm Google picking up some defense cost, liability in latest Apple case http://on.recode.net/1kYwMfP 

 

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #75 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/containers/fix380/1495569/000119312510271362/dex1012.htm
The indemnity clause isn't a secret. Google has always accepted financial liability and Apple surely was aware of it. You apparently still want to believe this is a new revelation. It isn't.

 

I think you're sorely mistaken if you are under the impression that this doesn't open the door wide open for Google liability. It's as good as an admission of guilt for Samsung's misdeeds.

 

I also noticed you have nothing to say regarding Samsung's comments about moving into a POST-GOOGLE ERA.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #76 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I think you're sorely mistaken if you are under the impression that this doesn't open the door wide open for Google liability. It's as good as an admission of guilt for Samsung's misdeeds.

I think the mistake is yours. Read this older FOSSPatents article explaining different theory's on what damages could be collected from Google for "stealing" IP. Apple has always been able to make the same patent infringement damage claims as Oracle did.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/09/terms-of-potential-oracle-google.html
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #77 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I think the mistake is yours. Read this older FOSSPatents article explaining different theory's on what damages could be collected from Google for "stealing" IP. Apple has always been able to make the same patent infringement damage claims as Oracle did.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/09/terms-of-potential-oracle-google.html

 

Florian Muller has turned against Apple over this latest case. He reads like a Samsung shill now. I've stopped reading his posts.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #78 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I also noticed you have nothing to say regarding Samsung's comments about moving into a POST-GOOGLE ERA.

Whatever happens, happens. It doesn't have any effect on me one way or the other if that's what you're implying. I've got not stock or derive finanancial benefits from any of the players. If Android disappears altogether at some point something or someone else will just fill the void left behind. Apple isn't capable of supplying the entire market, nor should anyone want them to.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #79 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Florian Muller has turned against Apple over this latest case. He reads like a Samsung shill now. I've stopped reading his posts.

He made the same general "Apple may be over-reaching" patent damage claims months ago. That's not new either. And back when the comments were first made Apple didn't want anywhere near the $40/unit they're striving for now. But in any event the article I pointed you to was in his "everything Android bad, everything Google bad" days so it's safe for you to read. 1hmm.gif
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #80 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post
 

 

Florian Muller has turned against Apple over this latest case. He reads like a Samsung shill now. I've stopped reading his posts.

Probably a PAID expert.  :-)

 

I'm surprised they didn't have a little advertisement video at the end of the testimony that said "This sworn testimony has been paid for by Samscum"

 

All Samsung's doing is trying to get out from paying tons of money.  They'll go to all ends of the earth to plead this one down.  It's totally obvious.  They are whiney rip off artists.  They'll get it in the end as they are so far behind in 64 bit mobile devices, I think that's what will take them and Android down to just selling cheap money losing products in the end.


Edited by drblank - 4/22/14 at 5:20pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung expert says Apple patents worth $38.4M, not $2.2B