Jury awards Apple $119.6M, Samsung $158K in damages after finding both guilty of patent infringement

1568101116

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 307
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snova View Post



    There is no freaking way.   $120,000,000,000.00?    That is enough to employ 60-100 US white color salaries for 10 years or buy six hundred $200k homes.  If one damn lawyer made $1 million a year, it would pay for 120 lawyers.   Seems like in the days of $12B What'sApp acquisition, people are loosing realistic grasp of how large $120M is.




    I thought these lawyers made a couple grand an hour and had teams of lawyers on each side for a case that I thought took a couple years to get to this point.

    $1000/hr is $2M/year.   They had 60 man years at $1000/hr working on this?  60 years worth of effort to prepare this case while making $1000/hr. seriously?   

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 142 of 307
    benjamin frostbenjamin frost Posts: 7,203member
    The UK is probably no better, but I have to say: American justice sucks.

    What's the point of Apple inventing anything? It makes my blood boil to see Samsung get away with such despicable behaviour. I sincerely hope that dreadful things happen to all who have been involved in defending Samsung. I have no faith that an appeal will reverse this gross injustice; as such, the only recourse is to hope for divine judgement.

    The judge and jury have just danced on Steve Job's grave and sided with evil.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 143 of 307
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tastowe View Post



    The google Andy Rubin is lousy computer programmer and ex apple employee. The google should not to buy Samsung phone maker vendor.

    This is what you get for using Siri to translate for you. Stick to tried and true Google, comrade!

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 144 of 307
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SirLance99 View Post



    So because Samsung was found guilty as was Apple and that Samsung will only receive roughly 2% of what they asked for and Apple will receive roughly 9% of what they asked for. I'm not seeing your logic. They both were guilty. Apple was guilty. Get that through you head. It's like you're trying to give Apple a pass.

     

    From where I'm sitting Samsung is set to recieve 2.3% of the damages they were seeking and Apple is set to recieve 5.4% of the damages they were seeking.  Of course none of these figures matter as they will all be appealled until the appeal process is exhausted.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 145 of 307
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post





    Again. It's not JUST 120mil. It tarnishes samsung a little more, they have substantially more negotiating power on patent use agreements, and it sets the president for future cases- including the S4, note, etc which is the next on the platter.



    They're going up the list of ohones and patents a few at a time. Every time they get further prescient set. It's a bigger ruling than it looks.

    Wrong. It will have little to no PR impact on Samsung. The sends a message you can steal and the penalty will be far less then what you stole. You do realize this strategy is used daily with great success. Pharmaceutical companies are pros at this risk vs reward. They sell a drug that earns them 2 billion a year and ten years later they take a 250 million fine for false clinical trials. Found guilty and a major win. Being found guilty doesn't mean you lost. 

     

    Your trying to justify in your mind how this is a loss for Samsung, it isn't its a win.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 146 of 307
    kevliu1980kevliu1980 Posts: 83member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post





    Again. It's not JUST 120mil. It tarnishes samsung a little more, they have substantially more negotiating power on patent use agreements, and it sets the president for future cases- including the S4, note, etc which is the next on the platter.



    They're going up the list of ohones and patents a few at a time. Every time they get further prescient set. It's a bigger ruling than it looks.

    It's actually the opposite. Current Samsung products aren't found to infringe, even at their release, due to them using established workarounds from the start.

     

    The biggest opportunities were in these older products that did infringe to different degrees for different periods of their lifetime.

     

    That's not to say that Apple doesn't find new patents in their portfolio, but unlike the last case where this new case was already filed, it's not clear what Apple's next steps will be.

     

    If anything, the relatively low number (when divided by the number of infringing devices) seems to support a settlement between both companies at a relatively low number per device.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 147 of 307
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    eriamjh wrote: »
     
    Vacate the verdict.  Award $2billion to Apple.

    What an insult.

    Absolutely. Even Judge Koh was ready to start kicking Samsung lawyer butt and taking names at one point.

    Not really. That dog is all bark and no bite.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 148 of 307
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    snova wrote: »
    $1000/hr is $2M/year.   They had 60 man years at $1000/hr working on this?  60 years worth of effort to prepare this case while making $1000/hr of 60 years? seriously? 

    Between both companies for 5(?) years now? Surely it's really ramped up in the last couple years but Jobs made his statement back in January 2007 and I assume that any reasonable company would have started gathering evidence as soon as possible. I've worked at companies where the retainer was millions per year just to be on the ready and it included a lot more than just the lawyers but all the people working for the law firm which doesn't include those they had to hire outside the company for certain tasks. Then you need to consider if they get any money for the win? If they do, what percentage is that?

    I spitballed and asked a question which you claim isn't worth asking but you still haven't given me a reasonable value for what it has cost both Apple and Samsung for the very drawn case. If you can give a detailed response I'd love to hear it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 149 of 307
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    The UK is probably no better, but I have to say: American justice sucks.



    What's the point of Apple inventing anything? It makes my blood boil to see Samsung get away with such despicable behaviour. I sincerely hope that dreadful things happen to all who have been involved in defending Samsung. I have no faith that an appeal will reverse this gross injustice; as such, the only recourse is to hope for divine judgement.



    The judge and jury have just danced on Steve Job's grave and sided with evil.

    This forum is bringing me to tears, just so funny.. hahaha.   Well, it makes my blood "boil" that you think Apple invented anything, frankly, so how about them apples hmm?   It's all progress my friend. There wasn't a rock, then an iPhone appeared, though in this forum you'd find a few who think so.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 150 of 307
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by snova View Post



    $1000/hr is $2M/year.   They had 60 man years at $1000/hr working on this?  60 years worth of effort to prepare this case while making $1000/hr of 60 years? seriously? 




    Between both companies for 5(?) years now? I've worked at companies where the retainer was millions per year just to be on the ready and it included a lot more than just the lawyers but all the people working for the law firm which doesn't include those they had to hire outside the company for certain tasks. Then you need to consider if they get any money for the win? If they do, what percentage is that?



    I spitballed and asked a question which you claim isn't worth asking but you still haven't given me a reasonable value for what it has cost both Apple and Samsung for the very drawn case. If you can give a detailed response I'd love to hear it.

    these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 151 of 307
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     

    Wrong. It will have little to no PR impact on Samsung. 

     

    Your trying to justify in your mind how this is a loss for Samsung, it isn't its a win.


    Exactly. Only in fairy tales is receiving 5% of the asking amount a victory in any sense.

     

    As for reputation.. apart from the fact that people won't care if Samsung is labeled a copier, Samsung themselves will spend billions reversing this if it needs to, for example suing people that claim it's a copier (eg dyson).

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 152 of 307
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    snova wrote: »
    these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?

    As previously noted, you don't think Apple started working to build a case against Android and its vendors before 2012? You think Jobs' words in January 2007 ware just hot air and they waited until 2012 before consulting with their lawyers about what Android and its vendors were doing? That seems as shortsighted as those that think that think the iPhone gets designed and built all within the span of the time its announced to the time it goes on sale.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 153 of 307
    benjamin frostbenjamin frost Posts: 7,203member
    Sure - but obviously still feel the need to take competitors to court... "It's not enough I succeed... everyone else must fail!".. 
    Here, here!!
    Too many tools on here want to see Apple as the sole company producing smart phones (only because they are shareholders - selfish!). Fortunately for the rest of the population, this "vision" will never occur, and we will all prosper in a world of choice, not a garden walled dictatorship.

    Why are you posting reams and reams of trollish manure on AI?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 154 of 307
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kevliu1980 View Post

     

    It's actually the opposite. Current Samsung products aren't found to infringe, even at their release, due to them using established workarounds from the start.

     

    The biggest opportunities were in these older products that did infringe to different degrees for different periods of their lifetime.

     

    That's not to say that Apple doesn't find new patents in their portfolio, but unlike the last case where this new case was already filed, it's not clear what Apple's next steps will be.

     

    If anything, the relatively low number (when divided by the number of infringing devices) seems to support a settlement between both companies at a relatively low number per device.


    Don't dash peoples hopes with your rational take on the situation!

    Frankly though, you can bet the house everything will play out as you summarised it. 

    A few years after the appeals are done, these legal wranglings will be but a distant memory, IOS will hold 20% (or less?) and Android will hold the rest (just like Windows / Mac balance). Maybe in 10 years Google will be bailing out Apple, just like Microsoft had to ! 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 155 of 307
    Dan_Dilgerdan_dilger Posts: 1,584member

    Even before any appeal (which Apple may likely not be interested in pursuing), the total patent damages are not over:

     

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/02/after-partial-win-apple-comments-on-second-samsung-trial-as-award-grows

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 156 of 307
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snova View Post



    these devices were made in 2012? right? how do we get 5 years?




    As previously noted, you don't think Apple started working to build a case against Android and its vendors before 2012? You think Jobs' words in January 2007 ware just hot air and they waited until 2012 before consulting with their lawyers about what Android and its vendors were doing? That seems as shortsighted as those that think that think the iPhone gets designed and built all within the span of the time its announced to the time it goes on sale.

    I'm talking about THIS case and how long they have been paying a legal firm for THIS case.

     

    FYI, the total payout from Apple over their last two cases that totalled $900M win from Samsung, resulted in $60M check to Morrison Foerster LLP.  Of that Apple wanted $17M to reimburse for legal fees from Samsung.   So I assume, legal was $17M for two cases, and $43M was the legal firms cut from the $900 take (so 5%?).    Based on this I think we are far from $120M payout to the lawyers for this single case. Maybe $10M for legal fees and $6 for cut from win, totaling $16M.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 157 of 307
    tastowetastowe Posts: 108member
    I feel like to kicking google and samsung employees butts out of my home state California. They should go to South Korea. I am sick tried of android fanboys trolls.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 158 of 307
    spjonezspjonez Posts: 5member
    d4njvrzf wrote: »
    The data detectors patent is the last patent I would have expected to be deemed infringed. Linkify just provides the application developer with a search and replace function. The developer decides when to search, what regular expressions to search for, and how to modify the matches. Claiming that Linkify infringes that patent amounts to saying that an application developer cannot search for particular strings in his own app without infringing.

    That's not true at all. Linkify is an API with constants for data structures, in this case addresses. That is a specific implementation that relies on complex regular expressions that are shielded from the developer. That does not prevent any developer from writing similar code or from doing search & replace with regex, only from creating an API in the same manner for the same purpose and selling it for profit. You're trivializing the result by focusing on the individual components.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 159 of 307
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,073member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SirLance99 View Post





    Apple was found to infringe as well. So Apple is just as guilty. 

     

    119,000,000 divided by 158,000 = Samsung was 750 times more guilty.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 160 of 307
    Dan_Dilgerdan_dilger Posts: 1,584member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bryan Tianao View Post

     

    Here, here!!

    Too many tools on here want to see Apple as the sole company producing smart phones (only because they are shareholders - selfish!). Fortunately for the rest of the population, this "vision" will never occur, and we will all prosper in a world of choice, not a garden walled dictatorship.


     

    Bryan/other accounts:

     

    Apple has never suggested that it thinks it should be the only smartphone vendor. It has only ever sued companies that were egregiously stealing its patented features that differentiated the iPhone experience: HTC, Motorola, Samsung. 

     

    Everyone else (Palm, BlackBerry, Nokia, Sony-Ericssson) it simply outperformed out of business, but that's not Apple's fault. There are no shortage of smartphone vendors left, and plenty of competition. Samsung is just squeezing Android makers out of many markets with ubiquitous advertising. That's what is hurting HTC, not its license with Apple. 

     

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/02/after-partial-win-apple-comments-on-second-samsung-trial-as-award-grows

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.