"Samsung sold 10.7 million infringing products. Samsung, the company that broke the law, took in $3.5 billion. You will decide how much of that $3.5 billion will be returned to Apple."
Apple is seeking $113 million in lost profits for 360,000 iPhones the company believes it could have sold without competing against its own work, another $231 million in improper profits collected by Samsung on its own sales, and $34 million in patent royalties for the intellectual property Samsung infringed, a total of $379 million."
Is the Apple lawyer nuts? They're only asking for $21.59 per infringing product?!? That's $231M in profits on 10.7M in infringing products. And those 10.7M of infringing products only displaced 360,000 iPhones?!? Seems to me that the Apple lawyers are asking for way too little.
My jaw is dropped so far, that I am speechless. I don't know what say or think. Is this venality? Stupidity? Chutzpah? Shamelessness? Crassness? Naivete? All of the above?
What is the strategy here? Seeking Tim Cook's forgiveness?!
No, that's not what was said. "This is a case not where we're disputing that the 13 phones contain some elements of Apple's property, He didn't say the jury has decided & we will abide by their decision. He said there is no dispute that these phones contained some elements of Apple's property.I have no idea why you think you can spin that.
It's not spin. It's simple legal fact. Of course they wouldn't dispute something that's not at issue with this court and won't be considered nor addressed by the judge now. That's a settled case and Samsung is guilty....
until the almost certain appeal may reopen some of the issues.
Is the Apple lawyer nuts? They're only asking for $21.59 per infringing product?!? That's $231M in profits on 10.7M in infringing products. And those 10.7M of infringing products only displaced 360,000 iPhones?!? Seems to me that the Apple lawyers are asking for way too little.
Why not look up the breakdown of it? How it sounds doesn't really matter. Each of those numbers is calculated from a number of factors. It shouldn't be difficult to comprehend.
"This is a case not where we're disputing that the 13 phones contain some elements of Apple's property,
He didn't say the jury has decided & we will abide by their decision. He said there is no dispute that these phones contained some elements of Apple's property.I have no idea why you think you can spin that.
It's not spin. It's simple legal fact. Of course they wouldn't dispute something that's not at issue with this court and won't be considered nor addressed by the judge now. That's settled already and Samsung is guilty....
until the almost certain appeal may reopen some of the issues.
Let me ask you this Gatorguy -- know that I believe you when you say you're not siding with Samsung -- but do you think that the massive success of subsequent Samsung touch-based smartphones (e.g., SG II, III, IV) might have had a lot to do with the initial, even if limited success, of the '.....13 phones that contain some elements of Apple's property'?
If the answer is 'yes,' what has that been worth to Samsung's shareholders?
Because the willfulness is not at question anymore than infringement is. That was settled in conjunction with the finding of infringement months ago. The only remaining issue (and holdup before the appeals from both parties) is the final dollar figure for the non-willful infringement as previously decided by Judge Koh. You shouldn't need a legal degree to figure that out. Just do some reading. It's all been explained .
[SIZE=14px]Let me ask you this Gatorguy -- know that I believe you when you say you're not siding with Samsung -- but do you think that the massive success of subsequent Samsung touch-based smartphones (e.g., SG II, III, IV) might have had a lot to do with the initial, even if limited success, of the '.....13 phones that contain some elements of Apple's property'?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14px]If the answer is '<span style="line-height:1.4em;">yes,' what has that been worth to Samsung's shareholders?</span>
[/SIZE]
I hadn't even thought about it but the quick answer would be yes. To what degree I've not the slightest. If Apple wants to now go after newer Samsung devices I say have at it.
Because the willfulness is not at question anymore than infringement is. That was settled in conjunction with the finding of infringement months ago. The only remaining issue (and holdup before the appeals from both parties) is the final dollar figure for the non-willful infringement as previously decided by Judge Koh. You shouldn't need a legal degree to figure that out. Just do some reading. It's all been explained .
Can you suggest a reading -- given your statement that it is quite obvious, I am sure you should have no trouble -- that explains it all?
My jaw is dropped so far, that I am speechless. I don't know what say or think. Is this venality? Stupidity? Chutzpah? Shamelessness? Crassness? Naivete? All of the above?
What is the strategy here? Seeking Tim Cook's forgiveness?!
This isn't a trial to determine guilt or innocence. Samsung is guilty. Period.
The jury's job is to determine the amount of damages owed and that's it. The original jury came up with an amount that was calculated incorrectly. This was caught after the jury had long gone home. The judge can't just simply 'tweak' the amount to fix it- so they had to vacate the portion of the original settlement that was done incorrectly and the new jurors' task is simply to calculate that amount using the correct method.
Samsung is going to pay Apple a big chunk of dough. That is a given. Samsung's lawyers don't want the jury discussing innocence or guilt- because that can lead to passion which can lead to higher damages. They're just defusing the whole need for an argument by saying, yep we're guilty and we're not disputing the verdict that can't be changed in this trial anyway. From the subset of phones found to infringe we profited 52 million and that huge sum is what we owe Apple.
Apple's lawyers want as much passion as possible in the trial and to make the focus on things like 'theft', 'crime', and 'making Apple whole again' They want 370ish million instead.
Samsung will pay Apple somewhere between those two numbers. This particular trial isn't about guilt or innocence, it is about lawyers arguing over money.
Why not look up the breakdown of it? How it sounds doesn't really matter. Each of those numbers is calculated from a number of factors. It shouldn't be difficult to comprehend.
Oh, thanks for the advice! Math calculations?!? Never heard of them.
It is true at this stage that the defense, Samsung, must no longer dispute facts in evidence, I.e. Samsung stole Apple's ideas. The jury has spoken, so don't chide the attorneys for agreeing, they really have no choice but to agree, and plead mercy.
This is a civil case, so it's just about money. I like round numbers!
Oh, thanks for the advice! Math calculations?!? Never heard of them.
There is always some basis of valuation. Note that the amount being re-evaluated relates to a mistake on the part of the jury. Part of the original problem was the ambiguity. Note the link. The original trial had a matrix of claims. It wasn't just all patents against every device. I am unsure how the jury ended up with such ridiculous forms to determine infringement and damages.
Gatorguy behaves like a shill in my opinion... and doesn't work for Apple!
fyi: Jurors don't often know this, but attorneys can say almost anything they want in opening and closing statements. What matters is sworn testimony (which the opening/closing statements are not).
I now a person that has a Galaxy Ace and someone else just said that that things a iPhone 4 knock off. Samsung should just sell them selves cause there gonna end up in a jack loud of dept.
I now a person that has a Galaxy Ace and someone else just said that that things a iPhone 4 knock off. Samsung should just sell them selves cause there gonna end up in a jack loud of dept.
You've written something in English here... I simply cannot make heads or tails of what you're talking about.
Comments
Apple is seeking $113 million in lost profits for 360,000 iPhones the company believes it could have sold without competing against its own work, another $231 million in improper profits collected by Samsung on its own sales, and $34 million in patent royalties for the intellectual property Samsung infringed, a total of $379 million."
Is the Apple lawyer nuts? They're only asking for $21.59 per infringing product?!? That's $231M in profits on 10.7M in infringing products. And those 10.7M of infringing products only displaced 360,000 iPhones?!? Seems to me that the Apple lawyers are asking for way too little.
My jaw is dropped so far, that I am speechless. I don't know what say or think. Is this venality? Stupidity? Chutzpah? Shamelessness? Crassness? Naivete? All of the above?
What is the strategy here? Seeking Tim Cook's forgiveness?!
until the almost certain appeal may reopen some of the issues.
If they admitted the guilt like this, it is not far from 'willfulness', grounds for increasing the penalty.
Why Judge Koh did not 3x the final figure remains a mystery. And a source of debate I think in legal circles.
Can she still do this in this new trial?
No.
What are you, an IP lawyer?
Care to explain why "no"?
Is the Apple lawyer nuts? They're only asking for $21.59 per infringing product?!? That's $231M in profits on 10.7M in infringing products. And those 10.7M of infringing products only displaced 360,000 iPhones?!? Seems to me that the Apple lawyers are asking for way too little.
Why not look up the breakdown of it? How it sounds doesn't really matter. Each of those numbers is calculated from a number of factors. It shouldn't be difficult to comprehend.
No, that's not what was said.
"This is a case not where we're disputing that the 13 phones contain some elements of Apple's property,
He didn't say the jury has decided & we will abide by their decision. He said there is no dispute that these phones contained some elements of Apple's property. I have no idea why you think you can spin that.
It's not spin. It's simple legal fact. Of course they wouldn't dispute something that's not at issue with this court and won't be considered nor addressed by the judge now. That's settled already and Samsung is guilty....
until the almost certain appeal may reopen some of the issues.
Let me ask you this Gatorguy -- know that I believe you when you say you're not siding with Samsung -- but do you think that the massive success of subsequent Samsung touch-based smartphones (e.g., SG II, III, IV) might have had a lot to do with the initial, even if limited success, of the '.....13 phones that contain some elements of Apple's property'?
If the answer is 'yes,' what has that been worth to Samsung's shareholders?
Because the willfulness is not at question anymore than infringement is. That was settled in conjunction with the finding of infringement months ago. The only remaining issue (and holdup before the appeals from both parties) is the final dollar figure for the non-willful infringement as previously decided by Judge Koh. You shouldn't need a legal degree to figure that out. Just do some reading. It's all been explained .
I hadn't even thought about it but the quick answer would be yes. To what degree I've not the slightest. If Apple wants to now go after newer Samsung devices I say have at it.
Because the willfulness is not at question anymore than infringement is. That was settled in conjunction with the finding of infringement months ago. The only remaining issue (and holdup before the appeals from both parties) is the final dollar figure for the non-willful infringement as previously decided by Judge Koh. You shouldn't need a legal degree to figure that out. Just do some reading. It's all been explained .
Can you suggest a reading -- given your statement that it is quite obvious, I am sure you should have no trouble -- that explains it all?
Sure.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/11/the-truth-is-neither-court-nor-parties.html
My jaw is dropped so far, that I am speechless. I don't know what say or think. Is this venality? Stupidity? Chutzpah? Shamelessness? Crassness? Naivete? All of the above?
What is the strategy here? Seeking Tim Cook's forgiveness?!
This isn't a trial to determine guilt or innocence. Samsung is guilty. Period.
The jury's job is to determine the amount of damages owed and that's it. The original jury came up with an amount that was calculated incorrectly. This was caught after the jury had long gone home. The judge can't just simply 'tweak' the amount to fix it- so they had to vacate the portion of the original settlement that was done incorrectly and the new jurors' task is simply to calculate that amount using the correct method.
Samsung is going to pay Apple a big chunk of dough. That is a given. Samsung's lawyers don't want the jury discussing innocence or guilt- because that can lead to passion which can lead to higher damages. They're just defusing the whole need for an argument by saying, yep we're guilty and we're not disputing the verdict that can't be changed in this trial anyway. From the subset of phones found to infringe we profited 52 million and that huge sum is what we owe Apple.
Apple's lawyers want as much passion as possible in the trial and to make the focus on things like 'theft', 'crime', and 'making Apple whole again' They want 370ish million instead.
Samsung will pay Apple somewhere between those two numbers. This particular trial isn't about guilt or innocence, it is about lawyers arguing over money.
Samsung = Donkey
'Nuff said.
Sure.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/11/the-truth-is-neither-court-nor-parties.html
Fair enough.
Let's see what happens.
Why not look up the breakdown of it? How it sounds doesn't really matter. Each of those numbers is calculated from a number of factors. It shouldn't be difficult to comprehend.
Oh, thanks for the advice! Math calculations?!? Never heard of them.
Can anyone confirm if this is still connected to the 2012 trial?
What are the Samsung phone models involved in this?
This is a civil case, so it's just about money. I like round numbers!
$2 billion, small bills preferred...
Oh, thanks for the advice! Math calculations?!? Never heard of them.
There is always some basis of valuation. Note that the amount being re-evaluated relates to a mistake on the part of the jury. Part of the original problem was the ambiguity. Note the link. The original trial had a matrix of claims. It wasn't just all patents against every device. I am unsure how the jury ended up with such ridiculous forms to determine infringement and damages.
Gatorguy behaves like a shill in my opinion... and doesn't work for Apple!
fyi: Jurors don't often know this, but attorneys can say almost anything they want in opening and closing statements. What matters is sworn testimony (which the opening/closing statements are not).
You've written something in English here... I simply cannot make heads or tails of what you're talking about.