Jurors credit CPA witness for Apple's $290M victory in Samsung patent retrial

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 66
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    boltsfan17 wrote: »
    I hope Dyson wins big against Samsung. 

    Agreed. Dyson is a true innovator. I bought a refurbished Dyson twelve years ago. It still runs like a tank. It has added a few improvements to newer models, but I just cannot justify the cost of buying a new one when the old one works great. Its blade less fan, and hand dryers are great as well.

    Besides its vacuuming ability. I live how it is very easy to get to all parts of the vacuum channel to clear blocks, the aluminum handle, long hose, and long electrical cord.
  • Reply 42 of 66
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,356member
    kibitzer wrote: »
    Efforts to harass, harm, denigrate or intimidate federal jurors - whether prospective, present or past - may be violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245. This who may be tempted to make such posts on this site - be forewarned.

    If Ms. Allen doesn't seek the limelight as Hogan did to spout flawed reasoning for the jury findings I don't think she'll have any problems at all. Why would she? Hogan's problems were of Hogan's making.
  • Reply 43 of 66
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rameshjha View Post



    Jury verdicts in US are very often biased in favor of American companies. This happened in the SAP Oracle case as well. Eventually it gets appealed and the learned judge throws out the verdict.

    Why would the appeal matter? The appeal would still be within the United States system, and so poisoned by your alleged reasoning.

  • Reply 44 of 66
    tbell wrote: »
    Agreed. Dyson is a true innovator. I bought a refurbished Dyson twelve years ago. It still runs like a tank. It has added a few improvements to newer models, but I just cannot justify the cost of buying a new one when the old one works great. Its blade less fan, and hand dryers are great as well.

    Besides its vacuuming ability. I live how it is very easy to get to all parts of the vacuum channel to clear blocks, the aluminum handle, long hose, and long electrical cord.

    The British accent in their advertisements sold me.
  • Reply 45 of 66
    rameshjha wrote: »
    Jury verdicts in US are very often biased in favor of American companies. This happened in the SAP Oracle case as well. Eventually it gets appealed and the learned judge throws out the verdict.

    The US jury system is based on the idea that fairness can be consciously chosen, despite whatever internal biases a person has. Are you accusing American jurors of (1.) conscious disregard for court instructions to be fair, (2.) unconscious influence of bias on their conscious effort to be fair, and/or (3.) insinuating that American jurors are less fair than jurors in other countries? Please clarify.
  • Reply 46 of 66
    lantznlantzn Posts: 240member
    I'm glad Apple won. I will not buy anything Samsung! (I know, there are Samsung parts in Apple stuff!)

    I hope Dyson wins, too! :)

    I'm with you. They are banned in my house. As far as SS parts in Apple gear goes I just view it as a dig by Apple since the big profits from the entire product goes into Apples pocket. Samsung should have been happy as Apples supplier and listened to Google to not so closely copy Apple, which is the pot calling the kettle black anyway.
  • Reply 47 of 66
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,385member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GoonerYoda View Post



    I'd love to sue one of my business partners and still continue to do business with them.

     

    When you're giving that business partner billions of dollars for components, I'm sure that partner would not mind in the least continuing to do business with you. 

  • Reply 48 of 66
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lantzn View Post





    I'm with you. They are banned in my house. As far as SS parts in Apple gear goes I just view it as a dig by Apple since the big profits from the entire product goes into Apples pocket. Samsung should have been happy as Apples supplier and listened to Google to not so closely copy Apple, which is the pot calling the kettle black anyway.

    Thanks...Good points. I'd forgotten about that Google advice! :)

     

    I just think of all the time and resources wasted (not to mention lost income for Apple) that could be used for R&D. It's a major distraction.

     

    To those who say competition is good for Apple, to some degree, it's true. But what Samsung and Google have done is cheated and that's immoral and evil. BTW, Apple never rests on it's laurels, they had 80% of the MP3 market and still introduced new models every year! (Except this year b/c of the impact of the iPhone)

     

    Best 

  • Reply 49 of 66
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    When you're giving that business partner billions of dollars for components, I'm sure that partner would not mind in the least continuing to do business with you. 


     

    I need to find a business partner like that.  But let's chop off a few zeros first to bring it down to my reality.

  • Reply 50 of 66
    Innovate, Or, Copy... We should create a new word for next year's dictionary... "COPYVATE" defined as: the act of renewing product cycles by obfuscating copyright infringement while zealously promoting and defending same as innovation.
  • Reply 51 of 66
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Boltsfan17 View Post

     

    I hope Dyson wins big against Samsung. 


    Hey, heyyyyy!...watch it... on that accusation of copying Dyson's vacuum steering mechanism... there's no patent on "rounding corners".

    :D

  • Reply 52 of 66
    I wonder if Apple also got the legal fee paid by Samscum... Btw…is there a difference for Apple's tax treatment if Samscum cut the check and hand to Apple in Korea or Ireland instead on US soil? (I know, it will be paid on US soil.). What's the impact on Apple's goodwill amount in Apple's financial report?
  • Reply 53 of 66
    Originally Posted by svesan03 View Post

    Innovate, Or, Copy... We should create a new word for next year's dictionary... "COPYVATE" defined as: the act of renewing product cycles by obfuscating copyright infringement while zealously promoting and defending same as innovation.

     

    It’d be easier to get new definitions added.

     

    Samsung (v.); 1. to copy egregiously, 2. the act of denying an action that has damaged reputation, 3. see: schmidt

     

    Ex: “The local company samsunged their most popular product from the national chain.” “Even when he was caught cheating on the test, he samsunged.”

  • Reply 54 of 66
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post





    When you can't innovate in your R&D lab, you innovate by copying.



    Fixed it for ya.

     

    Nope I think he had it right the first time. Copying is wrong but I would rather see Apple use the money it spends on litigation on R&D. After all it was Tim Cook said all the patent wars were, and I quote, "A pain in the ass"

  • Reply 55 of 66

    Samsung (v.); 1. to copy egregiously, 2. the act of denying an action that has damaged reputation, 3. see: schmidt

    Ex: “The local company samsunged their most popular product from the national chain.” “Even when he was caught cheating on the test, he samsunged.”

    Brilliant!
  • Reply 56 of 66
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,020member
    If this doesn't show our how broken legal system is with respect to patents and IP, I don't know what does. Any layperson with half a brain can see clearly how Samsung not just infringed, but wantonly copied Apple's designs. It's so obvious that it's comical. I recall the evidence Apple submitted, where Samsung itself had written comparisons of the products and notes indicating how they should copy Apple's designs. The fact that this is still going on is ludicrous.
  • Reply 57 of 66
    sockrolid wrote: »
    LOL @ Samsung vowing to "continue to innovate."
    I'm certain they will innovate a thousand more ways to be weasels.

    Weasel is the word that always springs to mind when I think of Samsung—well described, SockRolid.
  • Reply 58 of 66

    Forgive me if you do not agree with this next statement but how can anyone have a patent on a rectangular phone with rounded corners. Please tell me how else do you design a phone with a rectangular touch screen? I mean look at flat screen TVs   

     

    This is a Samsung Smart TV (top) and a Panasonic TV (bottom). Do you hear Panasonic suing Samsung over the TV designs or visa versa? Nope cos neither has a patent on something as basic as a rectangular screen with a border around it. If the brand name was not on either of these products, could you honestly tell by looking...which was which? Doubt it

     

     

  • Reply 59 of 66
    This case is about different patents, which Apple has cornered. And Samsung got cornered.
  • Reply 60 of 66
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

     

    Maybe the Irish will buy them?

     

    OK, that was mean! Sorry.

     


    Amadan

Sign In or Register to comment.