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 5

post #161 of 287
Jury can not give Apple total victory for slide to unlock patent. Android phones will become clumsy to use without it.
post #162 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


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.

 

Incorrect - Samsung's incentivized retail marketing has destroyed a sales opportunity the rest of Android.

 

But that marketing is not responsible for its profits from copies of Apple's tech. Samsung makes its money from selling copycat products that infringe. Look at its knockoff Dyson vacuums or its phones before Apple, when it was copying Sony, RIM, etc.  

post #163 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

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?

There could be if you put it in an editorial—why don't you ask Apple Insider if you could write one?
"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 #164 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Jury can not give Apple total victory for slide to unlock patent. Android phones will become clumsy to use without it.

Anyone who uses a passcode or other form of lockscreen security on Android never interacts with the slide-to-unlock mechanism. They are taken straight to the authentication page when they turn on the screen. There is no extra "slide-to-unlock" step like there is on iOS.

post #165 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
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.

agreed. the WSJ article has actually break out from Apple filed expenses for both trials.  60 total for BOTH trials combined. Of which Apple wanted Samsung to pay 16M for the cost of the second trial from the disputed $400M amount that was held back from the first trial.   So I think it fair to say this one is going to be about the same. ~$20M.  That still leaves amount $100M for Apple.   

"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 #166 of 287
I hope others are correct in this technical win for Apple will lead to bigger and easier wins for their IP going forward, although I am certainly not capable to seeing that as a distinct likelihood at this point.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #167 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

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.

Its kind of like politics. Its the seasoned warriors that have learned to keep their friends close and their enemies closer.  Its the hope that if you don't push things too far then you have a chance to convince people in the middle to your side if you at least attempt to look reasonable. Some trolls do a better job than others. 

 

but make no mistake.  The people that have been here for a while know where people really stand and why they are 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 #168 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Gut feeling based on experience,

What do you think she would rule if this came about?

$1.4 billion SWAG.
"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 #169 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Tianao View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Jury can not give Apple total victory for slide to unlock patent. Android phones will become clumsy to use without it.

When was the last time you used an Android device?? haha.  I've actually NEVER seen slide to unlock on Android (with that wording and icon sliding across) - perhaps the Galaxy S had it 6 years ago.

that seems like an odd questions to ask an Apple fan site, don't you think? If you say its 6 years ago, I doubt many here will know enough (or care) to challenge your estimate.

"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 #170 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post


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.

 

I don't really understand the general objections to GG. I think he just likes to debate things, and he clearly reads the links that he posts. Typically people who are trying to fit a preconceived agenda just google for something that fits it and mindlessly paste whatever comes up.

post #171 of 287

If you've followed Apples awarded IP for the past 18 months regarding embedded products, Samsung has a huge chasm to cross and catch up. I expect Apple to be slapping lawsuit after lawsuit with several of them, with Samsung whining that they should all be FRAND.

post #172 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
 

If you've followed Apples awarded IP for the past 18 months regarding embedded products, Samsung has a huge chasm to cross and catch up. I expect Apple to be slapping lawsuit after lawsuit with several of them, with Samsung whining that they should all be FRAND.

insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.  Unfortunately, this means more lawsuits from Apple and no settlement from Samsung out of court.

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


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...

 

Google Apologist? hahahahahahahaha

 

That's really really funny.

 

I've got Mr. Frost blocked... and for good reason apparently.

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #174 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
 

If you've followed Apples awarded IP for the past 18 months regarding embedded products, Samsung has a huge chasm to cross and catch up. I expect Apple to be slapping lawsuit after lawsuit with several of them, with Samsung whining that they should all be FRAND.

insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

I don't really understand the general objections to GG.

very interesting assertion. 

I think he just likes to debate things,

BINGO

and he clearly reads the links that he posts.

When I go and read what he posts I find that things are taken often taken out of context.

Typically people who are trying to fit a preconceived agenda just google for something that fits it and

perhaps

mindlessly paste whatever comes up.

in GG's case, its purposely pasted things out of context.    So in his defense, it not mindless pasting. Its quite calculated in the hope people won't actually read what he posts to put things into full context.

"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 #175 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

I've got Mr. Frost blocked... and for good reason apparently.

not exactly classy to gloat.   better to keep it quiet and take the high road, don't you think?

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


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.

 

No, they are trolls (esp GG). If we are to use their logic, than guilt is yes/no, black/white. Therefore it doesn't matter if a poster is saying nothing but "Apple sucks balls" or is constructing arguments to explain why Apple isn't perfect.

 

There are worse trolls than the idiots who post nothing but garbage for a day or two until they get banned. They are the ones who are trolling, but are very careful not to say anything obnoxious or insult people and try to explain their position with details or links. The problem is their arguments are full of holes and are really only half-truths. But not because they "missed" something or made a "mistake" - it's 100% intentional. Their goal is to obscure the issues (troll), not to have any reasonable discussion.

 

For example, KDarling. How many times did I ask him to back up claims he made (such as being a touchscreen expert for "decades", a software engineer, or working for a large corporation that's deploying Android tablets by the thousands)? He finally left. Too bad some others can't take the hint.

 

I'm actually quite surprised you don't see this. It's happened so many times I've lost track.

post #177 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

I'm actually quite surprised you don't see this. It's happened so many times I've lost track.

I can definitely get behind you on KDarling.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #178 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. 


The post doesn't appear to be quoting properly, but it's close in the thread anyway. You may be right about context. I still think he just likes to debate things, and we don't seem to be in disagreement there. Many of the links are fun to read anyway.

post #179 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


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.

 

No, they are trolls (esp GG). If we are to use their logic, than guilt is yes/no, black/white. Therefore it doesn't matter if a poster is saying nothing but "Apple sucks balls" or is constructing arguments to explain why Apple isn't perfect.

 

There are worse trolls than the idiots who post nothing but garbage for a day or two until they get banned. They are the ones who are trolling, but are very careful not to say anything obnoxious or insult people and try to explain their position with details or links. The problem is their arguments are full of holes and are really only half-truths. But not because they "missed" something or made a "mistake" - it's 100% intentional. Their goal is to obscure the issues (troll), not to have any reasonable discussion.

 

For example, KDarling. How many times did I ask him to back up claims he made (such as being a touchscreen expert for "decades", a software engineer, or working for a large corporation that's deploying Android tablets by the thousands)? He finally left. Too bad some others can't take the hint.

 

I'm actually quite surprised you don't see this. It's happened so many times I've lost track.

I am confident SolipsismX knows all this.   Again, it the guy who appears moderate that hopes to win over people to his side.  Its obvious to me we have people on both sides of the argument that use this tactic day in and day out. Its just another day in politics.

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

That's a big window and the $10-20MM for each side is listed as being conservative.

Why are you arguing? He has decent verifiable data. It clearly was nowhere near $120mil. Case closed. 1wink.gif

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #181 of 287
[
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

When I go and read what he posts I find that things are taken often taken out of context.
in GG's case, its purposely pasted things out of context. . Its quite calculated in the hope people won't actually read what he posts to put things into full context.
Some examples of the misleading "out-of-context" calculated comments would make your claim so much more believable. You should link a few you read.

If I didn't want people reading 'em I wouldn't point you to them to read for yourself. I make the assumption smart folks here might question my comments when they don't fit with common beliefs which is why I add resource links. You're a smart guy. So is Eric. Of course you should be reading them if you have doubts. That's why they are there.
Edited by Gatorguy - 5/2/14 at 9:06pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #182 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Why are you arguing? He has good verifiable data. It clearly was nowhere near $120mil. Case closed.

He posted a link for a different case where it was estimated up to $500MM with their $10-20MM guess noted as being conservative. But all that is beside the point as I'm talking about all of the legal fees for all parties for all the IP that infringed upon and Apple has tried to protect from the start. We're talking about nearly a decade since this all began. This wasn't the first and nor will it be the last, but I am only concerned about what all the law firms have taken up to this point for Apple's game changing IP.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #183 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

[
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

When I go and read what he posts I find that things are taken often taken out of context.
in GG's case, its purposely pasted things out of context. . Its quite calculated in the hope people won't actually read what he posts to put things into full context.
Some examples of the misleading "out-of-context" calculated comments would make your claim so much more believable. You should link a few you read.

remember you link about the Android malware only amounting to 0.0001% of downloads.

 

recall we concluded that 0.0001% figure in the article was actually the amount of people who choose to do nothing after being warned by Google that they detected malware on their devices.   Do you agree that your claim that only 0.0001% of Android downloads have malware was purposely taken out of context?  Or do we need to review that thread and article again?  

 

either you misread it, or our purposely took things out of context.  Your choice.  But I give you the benefit of that doubt that you actually read it, are intelligent and know exactly what you are doing. 

"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 #184 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
(video)

SJ: "And boy have we patented it"

 

Google: "SJ is so naive. He actually thinks some patents are going to prevent us from copying it. What a dufuss."

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #185 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

remember you link about the Android malware only amounting to 0.0001% of downloads.

recall we concluded that 0.0001% figure in the article was actually the amount of people who choose to do nothing after being warned by Google that they detected malware on their devices.   Do you agree that your claim that only 0.0001% of Android downloads have malware was purposely taken out of context?    

No sir I don't think we agreed on that at all. Which of my comments about the articles statistics was taken out-of-context to be purposely misleading? I think you should review that thread again. You should probably re-read the source article too.
http://qz.com/131436/contrary-to-what-youve-heard-android-is-almost-impenetrable-to-malware/
Edited by Gatorguy - 5/2/14 at 9:17pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #186 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

remember you link about the Android malware only amounting to 0.0001% of downloads.

recall we concluded that 0.0001% figure in the article was actually the amount of people who choose to do nothing after being warned by Google that they detected malware on their devices.   Do you agree that your claim that only 0.0001% of Android downloads have malware was purposely taken out of context?  Or do we need to review that thread and article again?  

either you misread it, or our purposely took things out of context.  Your choice.  But I give you the benefit of that doubt that you actually read it, are intelligent and know exactly what you are doing. 
Lol

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #187 of 287

Just to put things into perspective, even thought it's nowhere what they asked for, Apple got awarded ~ 1000x what samsung did.. on a pie chart, Samsung's slice would not even be visible.

post #188 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

remember you link about the Android malware only amounting to 0.0001% of downloads.

recall we concluded that 0.0001% figure in the article was actually the amount of people who choose to do nothing after being warned by Google that they detected malware on their devices.   Do you agree that your claim that only 0.0001% of Android downloads have malware was purposely taken out of context?    

Yes I do. Which of my comments about the articles statistics was taken out-of-context to be misleading? I think you should review that thread again.

oh GG, you are amazing. LOL.

"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 #189 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post
 

I am happy that it ended SOON!

But WORLD, be aware... still, this will not stop SAMSUNG copying !!! 

Cant wait for their coming event. --- Ahead of Apple! 

 

ended SOON?  It's just the beginning.. 

post #190 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

oh GG, you are amazing. LOL.

Well, you could just make stuff up to accuse another member of and be done with it I suppose It was your claim of dishonesty on my part, If you can't back that up. . .
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #191 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post
 

 

How is what they asked for in any way relevant to the decision the jury handed down? Apple was awarded 782x more than Samsung and you are trying to say they are equally guilty. I think your math is way more wrong than you're grasping at trying to say mine is. (It is becoming apparent that you know you are wrong and really are running out of legs to stand on in the argument. Is Samsung paying you to come on here and defend them in any way possible?)

 

An interesting argument, but I think it is exactly what Samsung was looking for in their countersuit.  Guilt is binary.  You are either guilty of infringing or you are not.  Samsung was found guilty of infringing on Apple's patents.   Apple was found guilty of infringing on Samsung's patents.  They are both guilty of patent infringement.  That is what Samsung wanted to establish.

 

Samsung didn't add a $6 million countersuit because they are worried about $6 million in a $2.2 billion suit.  Without the countersuit the whole focus would have been along the lines of "Samsung is GUILTY, therefore they must pay what we are asking- 2.2 billion!"

 

The suit changed the argument from that to- well Samsung is GUILTY and Apple is also GUILTY.  Do they each owe each other $2.2 billion because they are both GUILTY?  No.  The patents have a worth, and that worth needs to be determined.

 

Both sides stole from each other.  Samsung stole property with higher value and so had to pay higher damages.

 

Forcing the jury to deliberate *value* instead of just INNOCENCE or GUILT was the primary purpose.  I think the real hope from Samsung was that Apple would dispute the validity of Samsung's patents in which case Samsung would have gone to town on Apple's patents.  They would have been in the tremendous position of Apple's own lawyers arguing that the patent process isn't exhaustive or infallible.   Fortunately for Apple their lawyers are smarter than that- but without disputing the patents it did open the door to the lesser evil of having to allow Apple's infringement to be established.

 

In the end I think you can choose to look at the verdict alot like the iPhone 5c.

 

You can take the 'Wall Street' approach and consider the verdict a failure.  Making $199,000,000 is a big letdown when you are projecting to make $2,200,000,000.

 

Or you can take the DED approach and consider it a huge win.  $199,000,000 stomps the competition's amount into the ground by a factor of 782 times, therefore its a huge success.

 

Personally I think the decision is pretty fair.  Samsung is guilty and has to pay a pretty sizeable chunk of dough.  Slide to unlock is pretty nifty, but not worth 10% of a phone's price (or even 1%).


Edited by Frood - 5/2/14 at 9:28pm
post #192 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post
 You're a smart guy. So is Eric. Of course you should be reading them if you have doubts. That's why they are there.

thanks for the complement.  Actually the difference between you and I is that I am fully aware that there are plenty of people smarter than I. When I am wrong, I am quick to admit it here and don't try to take things out of context, split hairs or attempt to weasel my way in some hope into winning some pointless debate.  I don't try to play dummy, holding an ace in by back pocket, trying to lure people in traps either. When I am wrong, I admit it. and say sorry, I was wrong.    Give it a try.  You don't have to be right all the time. Just honest. IMHO, you would get a lot more respect and credibility.   You can start with admitting you either took things out of context or misread the article about the 0.001% of malware downloads. You choice.  I promise not to rub it in if you are honest with me.

 

I apologize up front if this is offense. I am being frank and honest with you and have you grow as a person. No offense intended.  The ball is in your court..

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

I can definitely get behind you on KDarling.
Whatever happened to KDarling? He slink back to MacRumors?
post #194 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
 

Just to put things into perspective, even thought it's nowhere what they asked for, Apple got awarded ~ 1000x what samsung did.. on a pie chart, Samsung's slice would not even be visible.

A counter suit is just another legal strategy by Samsung in an attempt to show that Apple wasn't clean, to try and show Apple also violated the law. Samsung has to deflect as much as possible because the bar is lower in civil court, all you have to do is prove by a preponderance of evidence.

 

It's simple, in a trial if the fact are on your side you stick to the fact, when they aren't you try to move as far away from the facts as possible which is what Samsung did by deflecting to Google and Android. Samsung put on a good defense to limit damages. 

post #195 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

No, they are trolls (esp GG). If we are to use their logic, than guilt is yes/no, black/white. Therefore it doesn't matter if a poster is saying nothing but "Apple sucks balls" or is constructing arguments to explain why Apple isn't perfect.

There are worse trolls than the idiots who post nothing but garbage for a day or two until they get banned. They are the ones who are trolling, but are very careful not to say anything obnoxious or insult people and try to explain their position with details or links. The problem is their arguments are full of holes and are really only half-truths. But not because they "missed" something or made a "mistake" - it's 100% intentional. Their goal is to obscure the issues (troll), not to have any reasonable discussion.

For example, KDarling. How many times did I ask him to back up claims he made (such as being a touchscreen expert for "decades", a software engineer, or working for a large corporation that's deploying Android tablets by the thousands)? He finally left. Too bad some others can't take the hint.

I'm actually quite surprised you don't see this. It's happened so many times I've lost track.
I've actually found Gatorguy to be, if not always factual, to be at least a bit entertaining in his comments. Unlike some of the other trolls he's one I don't mind too much.
post #196 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
 

Just to put things into perspective, even thought it's nowhere what they asked for, Apple got awarded ~ 1000x what samsung did.. on a pie chart, Samsung's slice would not even be visible.

A counter suit is just another legal strategy by Samsung in an attempt to show that Apple wasn't clean, to try and show Apple also violated the law. Samsung has to deflect as much as possible because the bar is lower in civil court, all you have to do is prove by a preponderance of evidence.

 

It's simple, in a trial if the fact are on your side you stick to the fact, when they aren't you try to move as far away from the facts as possible which is what Samsung did by deflecting to Google and Android. Samsung put on a good defense to limit damages. 

too funny.. I see you are practicing exactly what assert in your last paragraph.  Touche and a hat tip to you.

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

When I am wrong, I admit it. and say sorry, I was wrong.    Give it a try.  You don't have to be right all the time.  You can start with admitting you either took things out of context or misread the article about the 0.001% of malware downloads. You choice.  I promise not to rub it in if you are honest with me.

I apologize up front if this is offense. I am being frank and honest with you and have you grow as a person. No offense intended.  The ball is in your court..

I'm not aware of either one. and I even took the time to re-read the article, linked again in my previous post. And yes I've been wrong a few times here and have been exceptionally quick IMHO to admit as much as soon as it's pointed out to me. I generally even thank the poster for the correction. It saves a lot of accusations and arguments just to admit to it. Even thanked Mr Eric frecently for his mention I was looking at an older article on Microsoft indemnity and he had a better more recent one. Told Soli a few days back thanks for correcting me on Apple partners. There's no shame in making a mistake.

And thanks for the change in tone. Peace back at'cha. We're good.
Edited by Gatorguy - 5/2/14 at 9:39pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #198 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
 

Just to put things into perspective, even thought it's nowhere what they asked for, Apple got awarded ~ 1000x what samsung did.. on a pie chart, Samsung's slice would not even be visible.

To be fair, it's only 750x.

post #199 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

not exactly classy to gloat.   better to keep it quiet and take the high road, don't you think?

 

I think it best that you replace your dictionary.

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #200 of 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
 

Just to put things into perspective, even thought it's nowhere what they asked for, Apple got awarded ~ 1000x what samsung did.. on a pie chart, Samsung's slice would not even be visible.

To be fair, it's only 750x.

lol, talk about horse shoes and hand grenades batman. 

"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
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