Samsung expert says Apple patents worth $38.4M, not $2.2B

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 90
    So if the patented techs have so little value, they would add little value to Samsung's products. So Samsung should have no objection to removing those functions, right?

    Samsuing?

    t
  • Reply 22 of 90
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    I can't help but wonder what would really happen if Apple decided to make a line of cheap plastic iPhones (maybe call them something else for the low-end market) to utterly gut Samsung's worldwide position as "top Android phone."

    China will take care of the low end. Squeeze Sammy at both ends.
  • Reply 23 of 90
    tastowetastowe Posts: 108member
    jungmark wrote: »
    China will take care of the low end. Squeeze Sammy at both ends.
    I don't like samsung company no more
  • Reply 24 of 90
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,843moderator
    “We din do nuffin’!"
    “No, you did.”

    “Okay, we did it, but what we did wasn’t wrong because they can’t protect it!”

    “No, they can.”

    “Okay, they can, but what we did isn’t as bad as what they said!”

    Yes. It is.

    Too bad Johnnie Cochran's no longer with us. Samsung could use his defense strategy:

    "If the patent's not void, you must blame Android."
  • Reply 25 of 90
    esoomesoom Posts: 155member

    Hopefully, the jury is smart enough to see the smokescreens Samsung is trying, as mentioned by snova:

     

    1.)  We didn't do it

    2.)  Our sales are the result of our massive advertising budget, not slavishly copying the iPhone

    3.)  Google did it

    4.)  If you think we're guilty, we owe far less $

  • Reply 26 of 90
    tastowetastowe Posts: 108member
    Whole stupid samsung smartphones are bullshit with stupid google software. So I don't like google and samsung company with lousy employees. So I feel like going to running from the California of United States. So I don't like my homes state of California with lousy samsung business.
  • Reply 27 of 90
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    I wonder how I'd go in the Samsung experience store if I ripped off one of their TV's and gave them $4.85 because that's all I think it's worth.
  • Reply 28 of 90
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member

    So basically Samsung is claiming Apple's patents are actually worth 1.7% of what Apple has assessed them at? What a bunch of thieving, shameless fucktards. 

  • Reply 29 of 90
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,200member

    All Samsung had to do was agree to not copy Apple designs--just as Nokia and HTC did--and they could have licensed these patents for much less. The patents are nonessential--Samsung didn't have to infringe--so Apple can charge whatever they wish under whatever terms they wish. Samsung of course doesn't have to accept those terms... and hasn't. Let them suffer the consequences.

  • Reply 30 of 90
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member

    “We the jury find the defendant guilty of all charges. Again.”

    Samsung: “Well, that’s to be expected. Let’s hear it; what’s the damage?”

    “They are to be made to pay the plaintiff damages in the order of thirty-eight point four…”

    Samsung: “YES!”

    “…billion dollars.”

    Samsung: *Homer shriek*

    “To be paid in full by the end of this calendar year under penalty of doubling.”

  • Reply 31 of 90
    tcaseytcasey Posts: 199member

    they would also have to a agree not to rip off apple designs and future innovation ..and they said they would not agree to that..it says it all.

     

    throw the book at them...even 2 billion wont dent them.

  • Reply 32 of 90
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    Expert witness my ass.

     

    Sounds more like paid liar.

  • Reply 33 of 90
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    apple ][ wrote: »
    Expert witness my ass.

    Sounds more like paid liar.

    Speaking of, last night's Cosmos episode was excellent.
  • Reply 34 of 90
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,776member

    Samsung may be digging a hole here. Everytime they come up with a new defense they lose a bit of credibility. I'm shocked they are trying to have multiple defenses. It's like well you've admitted you're guilty. However, given the number of defenses it hurts your credibility when you say billions of dollars worth of IP is only really worth 38.4million. 

  • Reply 35 of 90
    shardshard Posts: 96member
    So someone breaks into my house, violates me and steals my possessions and when he is caught, he gets to tell me how much my stuff is worth?
  • Reply 36 of 90
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,369member
    This is what it sounds is happening...

    Apple bought a really nice car, like a Porsche. Drove it for a year and the Samsung steals the car and disassembles it for parts. Samsung was caught stealing the car (although the judge only allows certain pieces if the car to be evaluated) and now the theif is trying not to pay for the whole car. So there defense is to belittle the price of the part.

    "Oh see, most people you ask don't see why this shifter knob is all that important or worth what Apple is asking for it. Really it's just a polished piece of mahogany. I can build that in my worship over the weekend..."

    The point is that the pieces combined make for a VERY enticing and expensive product that works great... But they are attempting to devalue the worth if the whole by making the parts seem trivial.

    Sorry Samsung, but I hope they throw the book at you and sue you into oblivion so you learn a lesson.

    PS: I will never but a Samsung branded anything. I can't support their terrible acts.
  • Reply 37 of 90
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member

    I doubt this is going to work out well for Apple. A trial like this has nothing to do with the truth it has to do with what the jury can understand. A valuation argument explained by two experts at MIT could very well be more than the jury can digest. It's also hard for a jury to see a company this  big and profitable as a victim. 

     

    In the US something like this is seen as victimless crime, stealing an idea falls on the same level as downloading a song or a movie over a P2P network. Apple is a massive company worth billions a jury may have a hard time seeing how they were actually hurt by Samsung. Unlike a criminal trial in civil court the bar is proof by preponderance of evidence, more likely true than not. 

     

    The fact that Apple went on to have record sales and earnings time and time again after the crime was committed it may be hard for a jury to see massivel damage. A royalty was honestly a brilliant way for Samsung to go. 

     

    It will all come down to who can prove their augment is more likely true than not. 

  • Reply 38 of 90
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    shard wrote: »
    So someone breaks into my house, violates me and steals my possessions and when he is caught, he gets to tell me how much my stuff is worth?

    That would be a criminal case but this is a civil case so the rules are different.
  • Reply 39 of 90
    And they think we'll belive then ???? They should stick to making screens not even TVs just screens.
  • Reply 40 of 90
    richlorichlo Posts: 46member

    Remind me not to take economics and finance at Yale.

Sign In or Register to comment.