or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jury awards Apple $119.6M, Samsung $158K in damages after finding both guilty of patent infringement
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jury awards Apple $119.6M, Samsung $158K in damages after finding both guilty of patent... - Page 4

post #121 of 287

Wait - weren't these patents covered by the agreement with Google? So whatever the end amount ends up being Samsung has to pay, that it'll actually come out of Google's pockets?

post #122 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I suspect that the judge will
nullify the jury verdict and issue a directed verdict from the bench.

just a gut feeling or do you have something to base this on?

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #123 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

People (and trolls/haters) like you tend to ignore penalties and try to convert this to a black and white affair as if all companies who do something wrong are all equal. They aren't. If you commit a crime you could get a weekend in jail or 50 years in prison. Depends on the severity of that crime.

Samsung has to pay 757 times as much as Apple does. Clearly Apples patents are far more valuable and/or Samsung was the bigger thief.


Reading Foss over the last few weeks it's clear he's switched sides. While I gave him the benefit of the doubt for having critical opinions of Apple, it's now clear that something's up.

So because Foss thinks this is all BS as well he switched sides and something is up? No one is allowed to have critical opinions of Apple if they are justified? Especially a person like Foss?
post #124 of 287
Samsung and the lawyers are the clear victors here. I wonder if the legal fees cost more than the $120MM pittance Apple will receive?

"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 #125 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I suspect that the judge will

nullify the jury verdict and issue a directed verdict from the bench.
just a gut feeling or do you have something to base this on?

Gut feeling based on experience,
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #126 of 287
Terrible verdict.

American justice has decreed that crime does indeed pay. Why bother being good? Why not try getting away with as much as possible? I guess if you're an atheist, you now have a creed for life: follow Samsung.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #127 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Samsung and the lawyers are the clear victors here. I wonder if the legal fees cost more than the $120MM pittance Apple will receive?

There is no freaking way.   $120,000,000.00?    That is enough to employ 60-100 US white color salaries for 10 years or buy six hundred $200k homes.  If one damn lawyer made $1 million a year which would be huge, it would pay for 120 of those scum bags.  No way they had 120 lawyers on this for a year each. Seems like in the days of $12B What'sApp acquisition, people are loosing realistic grasp of how large $120M is.


Edited by snova - 5/2/14 at 7:02pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #128 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Gut feeling based on experience,

What do you think she would rule if this came about?
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 #129 of 287
Meh, a wins a win. This was more of a symbolic trial anyway, meant to send a message. 119M is peanuts.. But 158K? Apple makes that in what, a few seconds?
post #130 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

There is no freaking way.   $120,000,000,000.00?    That is enough to employ 60-100 US white color salaries for 10 years or buy six hundred $200k homes.  If one damn lawyer made $1 million a year, it would pay for 120 lawyers.   Seems like in the days of $12B What'sApp acquisition, people are loosing realistic grasp of how large $120M is.

I thought these lawyers made a couple grand an hour and had teams of lawyers on each side for a case that I thought took a couple years to get to this point.

"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 #131 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Samsung and the lawyers are the clear victors here. I wonder if the legal fees cost more than the $120MM pittance Apple will receive?

Again. It's not JUST 120mil. It tarnishes samsung a little more, they have substantially more negotiating power on patent use agreements, and it sets the president for future cases- including the S4, note, etc which is the next on the platter.

They're going up the list of ohones and patents a few at a time. Every time they get further prescient set. It's a bigger ruling than it looks.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #132 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

There is no freaking way.   $120,000,000,000.00?    That is enough to employ 60-100 US white color salaries for 10 years or buy six hundred $200k homes.  If one damn lawyer made $1 million a year, it would pay for 120 lawyers.   Seems like in the days of $12B What'sApp acquisition, people are loosing realistic grasp of how large $120M is.

I thought these lawyers made a couple grand an hour and had teams of lawyers on each side for a case that I thought took a couple years to get to this point.

$1000/hr is $2M/year.   They had 60 man years at $1000/hr working on this?  60 years worth of effort to prepare this case while making $1000/hr. seriously?   

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #133 of 287
The UK is probably no better, but I have to say: American justice sucks.

What's the point of Apple inventing anything? It makes my blood boil to see Samsung get away with such despicable behaviour. I sincerely hope that dreadful things happen to all who have been involved in defending Samsung. I have no faith that an appeal will reverse this gross injustice; as such, the only recourse is to hope for divine judgement.

The judge and jury have just danced on Steve Job's grave and sided with evil.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #134 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirLance99 View Post

So because Samsung was found guilty as was Apple and that Samsung will only receive roughly 2% of what they asked for and Apple will receive roughly 9% of what they asked for. I'm not seeing your logic. They both were guilty. Apple was guilty. Get that through you head. It's like you're trying to give Apple a pass.

 

From where I'm sitting Samsung is set to recieve 2.3% of the damages they were seeking and Apple is set to recieve 5.4% of the damages they were seeking.  Of course none of these figures matter as they will all be appealled until the appeal process is exhausted.

post #135 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


Again. It's not JUST 120mil. It tarnishes samsung a little more, they have substantially more negotiating power on patent use agreements, and it sets the president for future cases- including the S4, note, etc which is the next on the platter.

They're going up the list of ohones and patents a few at a time. Every time they get further prescient set. It's a bigger ruling than it looks.

Wrong. It will have little to no PR impact on Samsung. The sends a message you can steal and the penalty will be far less then what you stole. You do realize this strategy is used daily with great success. Pharmaceutical companies are pros at this risk vs reward. They sell a drug that earns them 2 billion a year and ten years later they take a 250 million fine for false clinical trials. Found guilty and a major win. Being found guilty doesn't mean you lost. 

 

Your trying to justify in your mind how this is a loss for Samsung, it isn't its a win.

post #136 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


Again. It's not JUST 120mil. It tarnishes samsung a little more, they have substantially more negotiating power on patent use agreements, and it sets the president for future cases- including the S4, note, etc which is the next on the platter.

They're going up the list of ohones and patents a few at a time. Every time they get further prescient set. It's a bigger ruling than it looks.

It's actually the opposite. Current Samsung products aren't found to infringe, even at their release, due to them using established workarounds from the start.

 

The biggest opportunities were in these older products that did infringe to different degrees for different periods of their lifetime.

 

That's not to say that Apple doesn't find new patents in their portfolio, but unlike the last case where this new case was already filed, it's not clear what Apple's next steps will be.

 

If anything, the relatively low number (when divided by the number of infringing devices) seems to support a settlement between both companies at a relatively low number per device.

post #137 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post

 
Vacate the verdict.  Award $2billion to Apple.

What an insult.

Absolutely. Even Judge Koh was ready to start kicking Samsung lawyer butt and taking names at one point.

Not really. That dog is all bark and no bite.
post #138 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

$1000/hr is $2M/year.   They had 60 man years at $1000/hr working on this?  60 years worth of effort to prepare this case while making $1000/hr of 60 years? seriously? 

Between both companies for 5(?) years now? Surely it's really ramped up in the last couple years but Jobs made his statement back in January 2007 and I assume that any reasonable company would have started gathering evidence as soon as possible. I've worked at companies where the retainer was millions per year just to be on the ready and it included a lot more than just the lawyers but all the people working for the law firm which doesn't include those they had to hire outside the company for certain tasks. Then you need to consider if they get any money for the win? If they do, what percentage is that?

I spitballed and asked a question which you claim isn't worth asking but you still haven't given me a reasonable value for what it has cost both Apple and Samsung for the very drawn case. If you can give a detailed response I'd love to hear it.

"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 #139 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

$1000/hr is $2M/year.   They had 60 man years at $1000/hr working on this?  60 years worth of effort to prepare this case while making $1000/hr of 60 years? seriously? 

Between both companies for 5(?) years now? I've worked at companies where the retainer was millions per year just to be on the ready and it included a lot more than just the lawyers but all the people working for the law firm which doesn't include those they had to hire outside the company for certain tasks. Then you need to consider if they get any money for the win? If they do, what percentage is that?

I spitballed and asked a question which you claim isn't worth asking but you still haven't given me a reasonable value for what it has cost both Apple and Samsung for the very drawn case. If you can give a detailed response I'd love to hear it.

these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #140 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?

As previously noted, you don't think Apple started working to build a case against Android and its vendors before 2012? You think Jobs' words in January 2007 ware just hot air and they waited until 2012 before consulting with their lawyers about what Android and its vendors were doing? That seems as shortsighted as those that think that think the iPhone gets designed and built all within the span of the time its announced to the time it goes on sale.

"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 #141 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Tianao View Post

Sure - but obviously still feel the need to take competitors to court... "It's not enough I succeed... everyone else must fail!".. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Tianao View Post

Here, here!!
Too many tools on here want to see Apple as the sole company producing smart phones (only because they are shareholders - selfish!). Fortunately for the rest of the population, this "vision" will never occur, and we will all prosper in a world of choice, not a garden walled dictatorship.

Why are you posting reams and reams of trollish manure on AI?
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #142 of 287

Even before any appeal (which Apple may likely not be interested in pursuing), the total patent damages are not over:

 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/02/after-partial-win-apple-comments-on-second-samsung-trial-as-award-grows

post #143 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?

As previously noted, you don't think Apple started working to build a case against Android and its vendors before 2012? You think Jobs' words in January 2007 ware just hot air and they waited until 2012 before consulting with their lawyers about what Android and its vendors were doing? That seems as shortsighted as those that think that think the iPhone gets designed and built all within the span of the time its announced to the time it goes on sale.

I'm talking about THIS case and how long they have been paying a legal firm for THIS case.

 

FYI, the total payout from Apple over their last two cases that totalled $900M win from Samsung, resulted in $60M check to Morrison Foerster LLP.  Of that Apple wanted $17M to reimburse for legal fees from Samsung.   So I assume, legal was $17M for two cases, and $43M was the legal firms cut from the $900 take (so 5%?).    Based on this I think we are far from $120M payout to the lawyers for this single case. Maybe $10M for legal fees and $6 for cut from win, totaling $16M.

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #144 of 287
I feel like to kicking google and samsung employees butts out of my home state California. They should go to South Korea. I am sick tried of android fanboys trolls.
post #145 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

The data detectors patent is the last patent I would have expected to be deemed infringed. Linkify just provides the application developer with a search and replace function. The developer decides when to search, what regular expressions to search for, and how to modify the matches. Claiming that Linkify infringes that patent amounts to saying that an application developer cannot search for particular strings in his own app without infringing.

That's not true at all. Linkify is an API with constants for data structures, in this case addresses. That is a specific implementation that relies on complex regular expressions that are shielded from the developer. That does not prevent any developer from writing similar code or from doing search & replace with regex, only from creating an API in the same manner for the same purpose and selling it for profit. You're trivializing the result by focusing on the individual components.
post #146 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirLance99 View Post


Apple was found to infringe as well. So Apple is just as guilty. 

 

119,000,000 divided by 158,000 = Samsung was 750 times more guilty.

post #147 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Tianao View Post
 

Here, here!!

Too many tools on here want to see Apple as the sole company producing smart phones (only because they are shareholders - selfish!). Fortunately for the rest of the population, this "vision" will never occur, and we will all prosper in a world of choice, not a garden walled dictatorship.

 

Bryan/other accounts:

 

Apple has never suggested that it thinks it should be the only smartphone vendor. It has only ever sued companies that were egregiously stealing its patented features that differentiated the iPhone experience: HTC, Motorola, Samsung. 

 

Everyone else (Palm, BlackBerry, Nokia, Sony-Ericssson) it simply outperformed out of business, but that's not Apple's fault. There are no shortage of smartphone vendors left, and plenty of competition. Samsung is just squeezing Android makers out of many markets with ubiquitous advertising. That's what is hurting HTC, not its license with Apple. 

 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/02/after-partial-win-apple-comments-on-second-samsung-trial-as-award-grows

post #148 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

I'm talking about THIS case and how long they have been paying a legal firm for THIS case.

FYI, the total payout from Apple over their last two cases that totalled $900M win from Samsung, resulted in $60M check to Morrison Foerster LLP.  Of that Apple wanted $17M to reimburse for legal fees from Samsung.   So I assume, legal was $17M for two cases, and $43M was the legal firms cut from the $900 take (so 5%?).    Based on this I think we are far from $120M payout to the lawyers for this single case. Maybe $10M for legal fees and $6 for cut from win, totaling $16M.

I thought I was crystal clear that I was talking about all legal fees from Apple and the companies they are trying to protect themselves against since this issue arose in 2007 when Apple completely changed the way we use mobile devices. This includes, but not limited to, patent lawyers which will be very inexpensive compared to these cases but it's all part of the same fight to protect it's IP and its future. I would assume the legal defense started about 5 years ago.

But thank you for your educated guess on how much you think this specific case has cost Apple.

"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 #149 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?

As previously noted, you don't think Apple started working to build a case against Android and its vendors before 2012? You think Jobs' words in January 2007 ware just hot air and they waited until 2012 before consulting with their lawyers about what Android and its vendors were doing? That seems as shortsighted as those that think that think the iPhone gets designed and built all within the span of the time its announced to the time it goes on sale.

I'm talking about THIS case and how long they have been paying a legal firm for THIS case.

 

FYI, the total payout from Apple over their last two cases that totalled $900M win from Samsung, resulted in $60M check to Morrison Foerster LLP.  Of that Apple wanted $17M to reimburse for legal fees from Samsung.   So I assume, legal was $17M for two cases, and $43M was the legal firms cut from the $900 take (so 5%?).    Based on this I think we are far from $120M payout to the lawyers for this single case. Maybe $10M for legal fees and $6 for cut from win, totaling $16M.

looks like I misread.

 

$43M for the first case. $17M for the second case (retrial - for money which was set aside from first trial). 

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303997604579242393615502208

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #150 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Tianao View Post

This forum is bringing me to tears, just so funny.. hahaha.   Well, it makes my blood "boil" that you think Apple invented anything, frankly, so how about them apples hmm?   It's all progress my friend. There wasn't a rock, then an iPhone appeared, though in this forum you'd find a few who think so.

I find your opinion deplorable. You seem to side with Gatorguy, Island hermit and a few other minority Google apologists, and I can't imagine why any of you bother frequenting AI. Most people visit here because they have a passion for Apple, engendered by their outstanding products. You seem to delight in laughing in the face of those who love Apple.

You are nothing but dirt in my eyes.

Get a fucking life.

I am sure there is reasonable physiological explanation why they continue to be here. 

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #151 of 287
Samsung CEO: oh Tim, FYI, our charge for component parts just went up by 120 mil, due to "production challenges."
Cook: son of a......
post #152 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

I find your opinion deplorable. You seem to side with Gatorguy, Island hermit and a few other minority Google apologists, and I can't imagine why any of you bother frequenting AI. Most people visit here because they have a passion for Apple, engendered by their outstanding products. You seem to delight in laughing in the face of those who love Apple.

You are nothing but dirt in my eyes.

Get a fucking life.

I don't disagree with most of your comment about this poster but I can't get behind comparing him to @Gatorguy or @island hermit. I don't seem to agree with them much but in no way would I consider them trolls. Each creates detailed arguments that support their positions.

I have to assume Bryan will get banned shortly. Where are @Marvin or @melgross?


Anyway, just posting this because when he's banned he won't be able to say how his free speech is being violated...

*

"It's free speech, not consequence-free speech." ~Jon Stewart
Edited by SolipsismX - 5/2/14 at 8:00pm

"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 #153 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD MBA View Post

Samsung CEO: oh Tim, FYI, our charge for component parts just went up by 120 mil, due to "production challenges."
Cook: son of a......


Do you really think supply contracts are written in such a sloppy manner? You underestimate the detail there.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

There is no freaking way.   $120,000,000.00?    That is enough to employ 60-100 US white color salaries for 10 years or buy six hundred $200k homes.  If one damn lawyer made $1 million a year which would be huge, it would pay for 120 of those scum bags.  No way they had 120 lawyers on this for a year each. Seems like in the days of $12B What'sApp acquisition, people are loosing realistic grasp of how large $120M is.

 

Good luck finding one of those in California. Is this just in billable hours for lawyers though? I suspect there's a lot in travel, hiring experts, etc. Beyond that many of the individual lawyers may not be getting rich off this. I mentioned it before but if people are angry at lawyers, their gazes should really be leveled at the partners in these firms rather than the worker bees.

post #154 of 287

Samsung pays $821/hr to legal counsel. Apple paid $582/hr to legal counsel.   Trial costs estimates were between $10-20M for each side.

 

http://blogs.findlaw.com/greedy_associates/2012/08/apple-samsung-facing-astronomical-legal-fees.html

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #155 of 287
I've read time and time again on here how it's not about the money but it absolutely is about the money. $120 million is chump change for these companies. Samsung got a slap on the wrist.

Public perception is a fickle thing. The public doesn’t always go where it seems they should. Those that think Samsung is going to take a big PR hit might be in for a big surprise.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #156 of 287

^^Note what I said about partners in those firms. The rest are not seeing the bulk of that.

post #157 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Bryan/other accounts:

Apple has never suggested that it thinks it should be the only smartphone vendor. It has only ever sued companies that were egregiously stealing its patented features that differentiated the iPhone experience: HTC, Motorola, Samsung. 

Everyone else (Palm, BlackBerry, Nokia, Sony-Ericssson) it simply outperformed out of business, but that's not Apple's fault. There are no shortage of smartphone vendors left, and plenty of competition. Samsung is just squeezing Android makers out of many markets with ubiquitous advertising. That's what is hurting HTC, not its license with Apple. 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/02/after-partial-win-apple-comments-on-second-samsung-trial-as-award-grows

It's funny how you change your tune. Just 2 weeks ago you said that it wasn't Samsung's marketing that's led to their success.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #158 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

Samsung pays $821/hr to legal counsel. Apple paid $582/hr to legal counsel.   Trial costs estimates were between $10-20M for each side.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/greedy_associates/2012/08/apple-samsung-facing-astronomical-legal-fees.html

That's a big window and the $10-20MM for each side is listed as being conservative.
Quote:
The exact amount that the lawyers made are unclear, but some suggest that the law firms involved may have made off with $500 million combined, reports The Wall Street Journal. More conservative estimates say that the firms involved may have made $10 to $20 million apiece.

"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 #159 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I don't disagree with most of your comment about this troll but I can't get behind comparing him to @Gatorguy or @island hermit. I don't seem to agree with them much but in no way would I consider them trolls. Each creates detailed arguments that support their positions.

I have to assume Bryan will get banned shortly. Where are @Marvin or @melgross?


Anyway, just posting this because I had it sitting on my desktop…

*

Thanks, Solip. I'm letting off steam; and yes, GG and island h aren't nearly as bad. I've even given them thumbs up on occasion! This Bryan seems to have history, judging from posts above, but he's new to me.

Great thing with AI is the moderation and ensuing lack of mindless trolls that permeate swathes of the web, but I guess with a hot story, it can take a while to kick in.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #160 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadbean View Post

Only time it's a touch exciting. Let's see which of DED's scenario plays out!

 

Hmmmy, fiery thermonuclear war or a new cold Dark Age?.........  Dramatic.  Sensational even.

 

Is there a 'most will not give two hoots about it and go about their merry way' scenario?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jury awards Apple $119.6M, Samsung $158K in damages after finding both guilty of patent infringement