google's business model is based on selling your data to people, do you think they'll be original and invent their own operating system without copying off of apple?
Does Chrome OS copy anything from OS X or Windows?
Forget the mediation just get on with the court case so we can settle this once and for all.
If Samsung loses I suggest they immediately stop supplying Apple with any components whatsoever and just leave Apple to it.
So that Apple can sue them for breach of contract and Samsung can cut off a major revenue stream? Now that's some pretty fancy thinkin' you're doin' there.
I'm so glad Apple didn't invent the car. They would be suing everyone for things like clear windshield with curve, door handles, 4 tires, and engine under a hood, the colors red or black or white, four doors as well as two, the use of chrome accents anywhere...you get the idea.
If it is square and around 10", then it MUST be an exact copy and we must sue. I'm all for protecting what is yours, but this reeks of "we are out of new ideas so we better protect our old ones". Rather than leaving the others to copy the old stuff and making something fresh and new, Apple is starting to put out the same stuff with minor differences, so they have to protect the look of the items. Can't wait for the iPhone 5 to look like a stretched version of the 4/4S.
Coke didn't invent the bottle, but no one else can use the curved bottle. No other car company can produce a design like the Mustang. Again, at the time the iPhone was released (and patented), it was very different than every other phone available and not by just the rectangular shape.
You can't let competitors piggy back on your designs.
Am I the only one that thinks $30 per device sounds excessive? And they're only offering half of one penny back? I realize this is non-standards essential and they can basically charge whatever they want. Then again, maybe they're aiming high with the thought it will probably get bumped down a bit through this whole process anyway.
Its all relative. Apple would prefer not to have to go there but if Samsung blatantly copies their products Apple can set the value exactly where they want. Personally I don't think it is excessive at all.
So that Apple can sue them for breach of contract and Samsung can cut off a major revenue stream? Now that's some pretty fancy thinkin' you're doin' there.
Ok once the current contract expires then. I'm sure Samsung will find other revenue streams. Apple only buys it's components from Samsung because they presumably are the best and they can't source the same quality elsewhere. Let's see how well the iPad does with second rate screens from LG or whoever. That's what I would do anyway and I think it's what Samsung will do. Why would you continue to sell your industry leading inventions to your arch enemy.
I'm so glad Apple didn't invent the car. They would be suing everyone for things like clear windshield with curve, door handles, 4 tires, and engine under a hood, the colors red or black or white, four doors as well as two, the use of chrome accents anywhere...you get the idea.
If it is square and around 10", then it MUST be an exact copy and we must sue. I'm all for protecting what is yours, but this reeks of "we are out of new ideas so we better protect our old ones". Rather than leaving the others to copy the old stuff and making something fresh and new, Apple is starting to put out the same stuff with minor differences, so they have to protect the look of the items. Can't wait for the iPhone 5 to look like a stretched version of the 4/4S.
Wow, how cutting edge!
People seem to forget that patents have an expiration date. I actually think that the person who first made the windshield curved could very well have been entitled to a patent, depending on the advantages it affords. Pneumatic tires, certainly, were a fantastic invention, developed in 1887, and the inventor probably should have been entitled to exclusivity for some amount of time.
Based on your second comment, that Apple is defending its old ideas because it is out of new ones, I think your real gripe is with the term of most patents. (20 years from filing).
Ok once the current contract expires then. I'm sure Samsung will find other revenue streams. Apple only buys it's components from Samsung because they presumably are the best and they can't source the same quality elsewhere. Let's see how well the iPad does with second rate screens from LG or whoever. That's what I would do anyway and I think it's what Samsung will do. Why would you continue to sell your industry leading inventions to your arch enemy.
Because no one does (and few can do) contracts like Apple does. e.g. "Here's $10 BILLION cash for all of your capacity from factories A, B, C for the next 5 years". Apple has had massive effects on the world's solid state memory supply. When you're a supplier to a company that has 1/3 of the smartphone market containing your product, cutting them off is hurting yourself. You would rather make money playing both sides of the game. Not everyone wants a GS3 and this is a way to make money off those people too.
This is just silly. And Judges are starting to consistently dismiss damage requests for amounts that are outrageous. I haven't done the calculation, but 250 billion might be more than Samsung or Apple have made in their entire existence.
Apple has been abusing the broken patent system, and I do not appreciate Apple being bully and wasting money and energy in suing less talented competion.
I would rather see Apple donating their existing innovations to its competion, and use the multi-billions of surplus profit and energy for innovating newer technologies because, Apple can afford it and it is good to Apple and non-Apple customers.
Apple, keep up the good work of innovating, and stop worrying about competition ...
Forget the mediation just get on with the court case so we can settle this once and for all.
If Samsung loses I suggest they immediately stop supplying Apple with any components whatsoever and just leave Apple to it.
You lose all credibility when you make a statement like this. This is not common sense thinking of someone who understands business - this is the mentality of a 5 year old "If you don't play my way I'm taking my ball and going home."
Samsung Semi gets over $10 billion a year from Apple for parts. Do you think Samsung Semi is going to throw away $10 billion in sales because Samsung Mobile loses a case and might have to pay Apple a tiny portion of that business? Do you think any company is going to want to rely on Samsung to supply components if they think Samsung might "turn off the tap" whenever they feel like it?
Ok once the current contract expires then. I'm sure Samsung will find other revenue streams.
What a silly statement.
Where is Samsung going to find another $10 B in revenue? And if there's $10 B in revenue lying around waiting to be gobbled up, why doesn't Samsung have it today?
You don't simply walk away from contracts at that level. The execs would face shareholder lawsuits and the stock would plummet. Not to mention, of course, that every single one of their customers would probably start looking for a new supplier since Samsung would appear unreliable.
You lose all credibility when you make a statement like this. This is not common sense thinking of someone who understands business - this is the mentality of a 5 year old "If you don't play my way I'm taking my ball and going home."
Samsung Semi gets over $10 billion a year from Apple for parts. Do you think Samsung Semi is going to throw away $10 billion in sales because Samsung Mobile loses a case and might have to pay Apple a tiny portion of that business? Do you think any company is going to want to rely on Samsung to supply components if they think Samsung might "turn off the tap" whenever they feel like it?
Seemingly you know even less than me. Without Samsung components Apple's iOS devices would not be as good as they are today which puts Samsung in a strong bargaining position which makes good business sense to me. Samsung could simply stop supplying components tomorrow. $10Bn is nothing to Samsung. They would make that up in added Galaxy sales.
My point is you can't buy from someone and then slag them off right left and centre. If I was Samsung I would take the revenue hit and tell Apple to go f*** themselves re components. I wonder how many iOS devices Apple could shift without any Samsung components.
If Apple doesn't like Samsung then fair enough - Apple should source it's components elsewhere even if they are inferior to the Samsung components.
Apple are only suing Samsung because they don't have the balls to go after the real culprit which is Google.
Business is not just about the money. There is also honour, reputation and integrity as well. That's something Japanese and Korean companies consider to very important.
Personally I would never be a supplier to Apple no matter how much money was involved because I think they are an arrogant bully.
That would be a 2.5Billion write off in a coming quarter, and effectively a royalty on everything going forward. Substantial.
I think Apple is serious about narrowing the field of cheap knock offs... This will effectively drive the competition up to the 300-500 device range, forcing the Android Also Rans to the sidelines. Apple doesn't want to risk a monopoly here... they just want everyone selling devices at about the same price, and they assume they can stay ahead on innovation, thus making their fair share of profits. This is a shot at the Android collective... If the strongest can be made to succumb to a a $1Billion+ verdict and sets the price into the 25-50 dollar per device royalty, that pretty much drives the cost of a smartphone/tablet out of the ballpark for the others. At that point (plus all the Microsoft Royalties Android is burdened with), Windows 8 may be less expensive, and I think that's all Apple is trying to do... Make Android a substantial cost to deliver, fracturing the potential mass of Android with Win8, and making Apple's ecosystem more valuable.
Except Apple has already said that it doesn't want to licence it's patents and it has a long long history of doing exactly that. Despite the focus on money in this article, this isn't actually about making Samsung "pay" it's about making them stop using the IP.
Even with Tim Cook at the helm and even with his on the record remarks about not being as interested in "punishing" Google and Samsung as Steve Jobs was, you will definitely not ever see Apple licensing their stuff to Samsung for money.
Your out of your mind if your don't think samsung did not look at apple's product and just copy...and worst still there is evidence that they sat the products down in meetings to do exactly that compare how much they had ripped off apple....in emails.
even without emails or any evidence that they did it i cant see how anyone cant see what is clear ...if your saying its ok to do it and the court rules it's ok to copy then thats different but if your saying that they in no way copied apple's designs your " OUT OF YOUR MIND ''
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing
google's business model is based on selling your data to people, do you think they'll be original and invent their own operating system without copying off of apple?
Does Chrome OS copy anything from OS X or Windows?
Forget the mediation just get on with the court case so we can settle this once and for all.
If Samsung loses I suggest they immediately stop supplying Apple with any components whatsoever and just leave Apple to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Forget the mediation just get on with the court case so we can settle this once and for all.
If Samsung loses I suggest they immediately stop supplying Apple with any components whatsoever and just leave Apple to it.
So that Apple can sue them for breach of contract and Samsung can cut off a major revenue stream? Now that's some pretty fancy thinkin' you're doin' there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
$25 billion sounds more reasonable to me look at their designs and their profits from those designs.
Way too low. Try 250 Billion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by airnerd
I'm so glad Apple didn't invent the car. They would be suing everyone for things like clear windshield with curve, door handles, 4 tires, and engine under a hood, the colors red or black or white, four doors as well as two, the use of chrome accents anywhere...you get the idea.
If it is square and around 10", then it MUST be an exact copy and we must sue. I'm all for protecting what is yours, but this reeks of "we are out of new ideas so we better protect our old ones". Rather than leaving the others to copy the old stuff and making something fresh and new, Apple is starting to put out the same stuff with minor differences, so they have to protect the look of the items. Can't wait for the iPhone 5 to look like a stretched version of the 4/4S.
Coke didn't invent the bottle, but no one else can use the curved bottle. No other car company can produce a design like the Mustang. Again, at the time the iPhone was released (and patented), it was very different than every other phone available and not by just the rectangular shape.
You can't let competitors piggy back on your designs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LighteningKid
Am I the only one that thinks $30 per device sounds excessive? And they're only offering half of one penny back? I realize this is non-standards essential and they can basically charge whatever they want. Then again, maybe they're aiming high with the thought it will probably get bumped down a bit through this whole process anyway.
Its all relative. Apple would prefer not to have to go there but if Samsung blatantly copies their products Apple can set the value exactly where they want. Personally I don't think it is excessive at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
So that Apple can sue them for breach of contract and Samsung can cut off a major revenue stream? Now that's some pretty fancy thinkin' you're doin' there.
Ok once the current contract expires then. I'm sure Samsung will find other revenue streams. Apple only buys it's components from Samsung because they presumably are the best and they can't source the same quality elsewhere. Let's see how well the iPad does with second rate screens from LG or whoever. That's what I would do anyway and I think it's what Samsung will do. Why would you continue to sell your industry leading inventions to your arch enemy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by airnerd
I'm so glad Apple didn't invent the car. They would be suing everyone for things like clear windshield with curve, door handles, 4 tires, and engine under a hood, the colors red or black or white, four doors as well as two, the use of chrome accents anywhere...you get the idea.
If it is square and around 10", then it MUST be an exact copy and we must sue. I'm all for protecting what is yours, but this reeks of "we are out of new ideas so we better protect our old ones". Rather than leaving the others to copy the old stuff and making something fresh and new, Apple is starting to put out the same stuff with minor differences, so they have to protect the look of the items. Can't wait for the iPhone 5 to look like a stretched version of the 4/4S.
Wow, how cutting edge!
People seem to forget that patents have an expiration date. I actually think that the person who first made the windshield curved could very well have been entitled to a patent, depending on the advantages it affords. Pneumatic tires, certainly, were a fantastic invention, developed in 1887, and the inventor probably should have been entitled to exclusivity for some amount of time.
Based on your second comment, that Apple is defending its old ideas because it is out of new ones, I think your real gripe is with the term of most patents. (20 years from filing).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Ok once the current contract expires then. I'm sure Samsung will find other revenue streams. Apple only buys it's components from Samsung because they presumably are the best and they can't source the same quality elsewhere. Let's see how well the iPad does with second rate screens from LG or whoever. That's what I would do anyway and I think it's what Samsung will do. Why would you continue to sell your industry leading inventions to your arch enemy.
Because no one does (and few can do) contracts like Apple does. e.g. "Here's $10 BILLION cash for all of your capacity from factories A, B, C for the next 5 years". Apple has had massive effects on the world's solid state memory supply. When you're a supplier to a company that has 1/3 of the smartphone market containing your product, cutting them off is hurting yourself. You would rather make money playing both sides of the game. Not everyone wants a GS3 and this is a way to make money off those people too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
Way too low. Try 250 Billion.
This is just silly. And Judges are starting to consistently dismiss damage requests for amounts that are outrageous. I haven't done the calculation, but 250 billion might be more than Samsung or Apple have made in their entire existence.
I see that js, dh, suk, taj and pals are out in force.
sb's banishment makes up for it somewhat......
I would rather see Apple donating their existing innovations to its competion, and use the multi-billions of surplus profit and energy for innovating newer technologies because, Apple can afford it and it is good to Apple and non-Apple customers.
Apple, keep up the good work of innovating, and stop worrying about competition ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Forget the mediation just get on with the court case so we can settle this once and for all.
If Samsung loses I suggest they immediately stop supplying Apple with any components whatsoever and just leave Apple to it.
You lose all credibility when you make a statement like this. This is not common sense thinking of someone who understands business - this is the mentality of a 5 year old "If you don't play my way I'm taking my ball and going home."
Samsung Semi gets over $10 billion a year from Apple for parts. Do you think Samsung Semi is going to throw away $10 billion in sales because Samsung Mobile loses a case and might have to pay Apple a tiny portion of that business? Do you think any company is going to want to rely on Samsung to supply components if they think Samsung might "turn off the tap" whenever they feel like it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I see that js, dh, suk, taj and pals are out in force.
sb's banishment makes up for it somewhat......
sb?
What a silly statement.
Where is Samsung going to find another $10 B in revenue? And if there's $10 B in revenue lying around waiting to be gobbled up, why doesn't Samsung have it today?
You don't simply walk away from contracts at that level. The execs would face shareholder lawsuits and the stock would plummet. Not to mention, of course, that every single one of their customers would probably start looking for a new supplier since Samsung would appear unreliable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
You lose all credibility when you make a statement like this. This is not common sense thinking of someone who understands business - this is the mentality of a 5 year old "If you don't play my way I'm taking my ball and going home."
Samsung Semi gets over $10 billion a year from Apple for parts. Do you think Samsung Semi is going to throw away $10 billion in sales because Samsung Mobile loses a case and might have to pay Apple a tiny portion of that business? Do you think any company is going to want to rely on Samsung to supply components if they think Samsung might "turn off the tap" whenever they feel like it?
Seemingly you know even less than me. Without Samsung components Apple's iOS devices would not be as good as they are today which puts Samsung in a strong bargaining position which makes good business sense to me. Samsung could simply stop supplying components tomorrow. $10Bn is nothing to Samsung. They would make that up in added Galaxy sales.
My point is you can't buy from someone and then slag them off right left and centre. If I was Samsung I would take the revenue hit and tell Apple to go f*** themselves re components. I wonder how many iOS devices Apple could shift without any Samsung components.
If Apple doesn't like Samsung then fair enough - Apple should source it's components elsewhere even if they are inferior to the Samsung components.
Apple are only suing Samsung because they don't have the balls to go after the real culprit which is Google.
Business is not just about the money. There is also honour, reputation and integrity as well. That's something Japanese and Korean companies consider to very important.
Personally I would never be a supplier to Apple no matter how much money was involved because I think they are an arrogant bully.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I see that js, dh, suk, taj and pals are out in force.
sb's banishment makes up for it somewhat......
By all means, tell me what was wrong with my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
That would be a 2.5Billion write off in a coming quarter, and effectively a royalty on everything going forward. Substantial.
I think Apple is serious about narrowing the field of cheap knock offs... This will effectively drive the competition up to the 300-500 device range, forcing the Android Also Rans to the sidelines. Apple doesn't want to risk a monopoly here... they just want everyone selling devices at about the same price, and they assume they can stay ahead on innovation, thus making their fair share of profits. This is a shot at the Android collective... If the strongest can be made to succumb to a a $1Billion+ verdict and sets the price into the 25-50 dollar per device royalty, that pretty much drives the cost of a smartphone/tablet out of the ballpark for the others. At that point (plus all the Microsoft Royalties Android is burdened with), Windows 8 may be less expensive, and I think that's all Apple is trying to do... Make Android a substantial cost to deliver, fracturing the potential mass of Android with Win8, and making Apple's ecosystem more valuable.
Except Apple has already said that it doesn't want to licence it's patents and it has a long long history of doing exactly that. Despite the focus on money in this article, this isn't actually about making Samsung "pay" it's about making them stop using the IP.
Even with Tim Cook at the helm and even with his on the record remarks about not being as interested in "punishing" Google and Samsung as Steve Jobs was, you will definitely not ever see Apple licensing their stuff to Samsung for money.
Your out of your mind if your don't think samsung did not look at apple's product and just copy...and worst still there is evidence that they sat the products down in meetings to do exactly that compare how much they had ripped off apple....in emails.
even without emails or any evidence that they did it i cant see how anyone cant see what is clear ...if your saying its ok to do it and the court rules it's ok to copy then thats different but if your saying that they in no way copied apple's designs your " OUT OF YOUR MIND ''