"The facts did not sway the jury's final decision, however."
The most honest answer I have ever read concerning a "justice" system decision. I am amazed at how little the facts factor into court decisions these days. At least someone was honest enough to say it.
As for the verdict this was a farce. These twelve people pretty much gutted the patent system. I may, strongly, think that the IP system in this country needs a major overhaul, but it isn't a jury's job to do so, and finding "willful" patent infringement and then slapping Samsung with what amounts to a speeding ticket is a travesty of justice. Because, this measly fine won't stop Samsung from continuing to steal IP anymore than speeding tickets stop speeding.
Samsung successfully confused the jurors with a massive amount of unrelated detail. Strategically speaking, their lawyers did the "right" thing for their client.
"As for Google's involvement in the case, both Dunham and another juror, Pamela Sage, said revelations regarding Internet giant's promise to pay for certain legal fees were "interesting." The facts did not sway the jury's final decision, however."
Does this mean we go after google next?
First, not sure why an exec from IBM would find the fact that Google agreed to indemnify Samsung if they were sued and lost for using Android this is standard industry practices these days. If one company uses another companies IP and is sued then the owner of that IP would be expected to indemnify the user of the IP. I see this all the time in contracts. This is nothing unusual these day. Since Samsung lost now then Google will have to pay all of Samsung costs not only what is paid out to Apple.
Yes, now that Apple has won this case they now can go after ever single company using Android and make them pay a licensing fee and assuming those companies also have an indemnification clause in their agreement Google will have to pay those costs as well. Apple does not have to go after google directly and actually it make no sense since Google may zero $ off the IP so there is no money to collect directly off Google. This is why Apple went after all the phone manufacturers.
About a 1/4 of the time that I open an AI article on my iPhone it redirects my phone to the App Store and some game comes up. Presumably for me to buy. Is this some new advertising tactic? Does AI know this is going on? It's very intrusive and I'm thinking that it's a bit too much.
You know that old expression, Garbage In, Garbage Out? Here we have a perfect example of dumb jurors deliberating, dumb verdict being reached. This goes for that mindless twit of a judge in this case, who cannot make up her mind which way she wants to think, and who doesn't have the spine to impose sanctions on Samsung, even after catching them lying to the court.
This is utter garbage.
I believe judge Koh, being S. Korean, must be getting some kind of kickback from Samsung in Korea. She may have been granting Apple some wins, but at the same time she's been slashing their numbers to save Samsung hundreds of million dollars, if not over a billion so far.
It also seems like she's been giving Samsung wins for ambiguous and irrelevant patents, such as the one against FaceTime, but struggles to give Apple a win on modern straight-to-the-point patents.
About a 1/4 of the time that I open an AI article on my iPhone it redirects my phone to the App Store and some game comes up. Presumably for me to buy. Is this some new advertising tactic? Does AI know this is going on? It's very intrusive and I'm thinking that it's a bit too much.
Yes, same thing happens to me, here and on other websites.
The miscreant that Samsung is just goes beyond bottom dwellers. They truly have zero ethics. There's a great piece on Vanity Fair about the practices that Samsung uses not only with Apple, but with other competitors to essentially rob their IP, make a bundle of money on it, and leave the original companies that owned the patent in dire financial needs so to settle. Shameful behavior. Reading this article made me even more committed to never, ever directly do business with Samsung. Absolutel piece of sh!t company.
...Sam Baxter, a patent lawyer who once handled a case for Samsung. “I represented [the Swedish telecommunications company] Ericsson, and they couldn’t lie if their lives depended on it, and I represented Samsung and they couldn’t tell the truth if their lives depended on it.”
Almost everyone here will agree that Apple are not the bad guy but most people here are all ready predisposed to think of Apple that way. In the wider world if the innovate don't litigate meme becomes entrenched and becomes the predominant view then Apple will have to spend time, money etc to try and rectify it. You can look at the ratner group to see what can happen when people believe in the wrong message (it's an extreme example and I don't believe it would ever get that far).
What kind of defeatist, tuck-your-tail-between-your-legs and run kind of BS are you peddling? Are you arguing it is more cost effective to let Samsung and the copyists control the debate and that Apple should give up now, shut up and innovate more things for Samsung to copy? That Apple has no intellectual property rights to defend because you want the iPhone signature qualities in your Android clones and that Samsung shouldn't have to pay a damn license fee for it? Give me a break.
Who will stand up for Apple's IP rights if Apple won't? It is their imperative to put their story out there, to let the world know their side, not, as you so unwisely decree, go back and innovate for other companies.
I believe judge Koh, being S. Korean, must be getting some kind of kickback from Samsung in Korea. She may have been granting Apple some wins, but at the same time she's been slashing their numbers to save Samsung hundreds of million dollars, if not over a billion so far.
That would be a very serious breach of ethics for any judge, and if Apple believed such a thing were true, they would not be silent about it. Got any proof?
What kind of defeatist, tuck-your-tail-between-your-legs and run kind of BS are you peddling? Are you arguing it is more cost effective to let Samsung and the copyists control the debate and that Apple should give up now, shut up and innovate more things for Samsung to copy?
I thought you were aware than several of the claims Apple used against Samsung weren't even practiced by Apple. It's hardly product "copying" when there's no Apple product using the claimed IP.
Certainly not siding with Samsung on this and I think their business model of mimicking others successful lines rather than creating their own is sad. It's just who Samsung is. In this case tho there wasn't a whole lotta copying going on of Apple features from Apple devices available to consumers. Instead it was making use of IP Apple claimed ownership of.
The problem I have with this verdict is the fact that it concentrates on the trees and doesn't take the wood into account.
Inevitably, the jury have to concentrate on the details, in order to strive for accuracy. But once they've done that, I feel that the judge should take their verdict and then apply an overarching verdict which takes into account the big picture. The major flaw with this trial is the fact that Apple have been so restricted with the number of patents. It plays into Samsung's hands, because it would have been far more effective to present the enormity of Samsung's theft in one fell swoop.
In copying so much of Apple's look and feel, Samsung were able to get the upper hand in the Android market, which then led to market domination of Android. No other company has made any significant profits with Android. That's why the judge should really have slapped Samsung with a debilitating ban on their current phones and tablets, in order to balance out their earlier ill-gained dominance, combined with a financial penalty that took away most or all of the profits that they enjoyed due to their copying. This would probably run into the billions of dollars.
In copying so much of Apple's look and feel, Samsung were able to get the upper hand in the Android market, which then led to market domination of Android. No other company has made any significant profits with Android. That's why the judge should really have slapped Samsung with a debilitating ban on their current phones and tablets,
Even if the judge had the ability to do that, it would have been appealed too quickly to make any real difference.
I thought you were aware than several of the claims Apple used against Samsung weren't even practiced by Apple. It's hardly product "copying" when there's no Apple product using the claimed IP.
Noise has been detected in the signal. Are you aware that several claims in this lawsuit are practiced by Apple? That's copying. You're splitting hairs to defend your beloved copyist. Really. Samsung is not worth your time, unless you get ego satisfaction from being a contrarian on an Apple fan site.
I'm glad that the 4 million dollar error was just a clerical mistake. Sheesh. I question how overnight common people can become experts in patent law. The press reports there was an IBM executive, and now suddenly he's the expert because after all he's an IBM executive. I would rather see a group of judges schooled in this area handle these cases. I think the outcome of the trial was ridiculous and pretty much gives license to any foreign company to copy at will.
This is likely the "lobbyist effect". We staff Washington with people with the skills to get in office -- but they really don't know much of anything beyond people skills and minor extortion techniques. Then we send a bunch of lobbyists after them, with million dollar credit card limits who ply them with parties and educate them.
An IBM executive just happens to walk by the courtroom; "Excuse me sir, you've got a nice suit, a deep voice, and happen to work for a company that does something techy -- maybe you can educate us?" A few drinks and strippers later -- everyone is an expert.
Useful video so that next time someone accuses you of not having seen a working S5, you can say you have... and it's still terrible.
There is something seriously suspect about the S5 used in that video. First, this is a store demo being shown. Who knows what has happened to that phone sitting out in the public. Let's start with the triangle with the exclamation in it (indicating a system error). I'm sure that some tampering has gone on. Plus anyone can find a video of a malfunctioning cellphone.
I should add that I don't now or have ever owned ANY Samsung product.
I think Apple is standing on good principle in defending its IP. Realistically, they don't even have to worry about their patents, they could just adopt a strategy of always staying ahead of everybody and not even worry about all the copycats scrambling behind them, they have the resources to do that for a long time. I know they would like to control what they license and to whom, but the patent trials are at least a way of getting a license payment and acknowledgement for use of their technology versus getting nothing. Still, they should have the choice whether to license or not.
The real question is what about smaller companies like Dyson? Spent a decade polishing and refining an idea for their main product line, did the engineering and patented the result. Along comes Samsung again, scoops it up and copies it down to the last molecule and cranks them out in grey plastic for half the cost. Dyson sued but later had to drop it A lot of innovation will be stifled in the future if people know their successful ideas will be immediately be ripped off. Why bother? Seems to me the consumer is the loser when companies can't bring product to market because there is no incentive to invest in it. Without any acknowledgement that they made a specific new protected thing, it will instead be copied and even adulterated and ruined.
Something has to happen here, and I think Apple is carrying the banner for the inventors of the world. There is more to technology than 'fashion' (which does not recognize patents for some basic obvious reasons). Engineering is tough it takes a lot of time and money. It's not right for Samsung or Google or any other company to just copy the work wholesale. I'm sure Apple expects some imitation, indeed welcomes competition and new solutions to tech, but not total copying! Didn't Samsung do this same ripoff of Sony as well? Make their camera and TV parts and next thing you know they're in the TV and camera business? I won't be buying anything built by Samsung.
Elon Musk has remarked that he doesn't think much of patents, waste of time should be abolished. Fine if you make rockets and automobiles, both fields with few competitors due to high barriers. I wish he understood the need for some kind of idea protection. Maybe this means that in the future ideas will only be developed under the auspices of 'benevolent' corporate sponsors of startup incubators. If they don't like your idea you can only do it all by yourself until they do like your idea enough to steal it.
There is the bad PR angle, I'm sure Apple has thought it through. They will do what is correct.
Just thinking out loud.
So the jury make errors in working out the damages owed, go back to go over their findings again & also take into account the SGII, then afterwards, including the SGII, the outcome remains exactly the same?
Sounds very fishy to me. What are the odds on that happening?
I was thinking the same thing. It looks for all the world they came up with a total number and then just spread it around more or less randomly over the devices. I'd think the total would be arrived at by deciding the value of each patent infringed and simply multiply that number by the number of infringing devices sold. That should have produced the grand total.
Comments
Samsung successfully confused the jurors with a massive amount of unrelated detail. Strategically speaking, their lawyers did the "right" thing for their client.
"As for Google's involvement in the case, both Dunham and another juror, Pamela Sage, said revelations regarding Internet giant's promise to pay for certain legal fees were "interesting." The facts did not sway the jury's final decision, however."
Does this mean we go after google next?
First, not sure why an exec from IBM would find the fact that Google agreed to indemnify Samsung if they were sued and lost for using Android this is standard industry practices these days. If one company uses another companies IP and is sued then the owner of that IP would be expected to indemnify the user of the IP. I see this all the time in contracts. This is nothing unusual these day. Since Samsung lost now then Google will have to pay all of Samsung costs not only what is paid out to Apple.
Yes, now that Apple has won this case they now can go after ever single company using Android and make them pay a licensing fee and assuming those companies also have an indemnification clause in their agreement Google will have to pay those costs as well. Apple does not have to go after google directly and actually it make no sense since Google may zero $ off the IP so there is no money to collect directly off Google. This is why Apple went after all the phone manufacturers.
All this and their phones are still just shit.
Useful video so that next time someone accuses you of not having seen a working S5, you can say you have... and it's still terrible.
About a 1/4 of the time that I open an AI article on my iPhone it redirects my phone to the App Store and some game comes up. Presumably for me to buy. Is this some new advertising tactic? Does AI know this is going on? It's very intrusive and I'm thinking that it's a bit too much.
You know that old expression, Garbage In, Garbage Out? Here we have a perfect example of dumb jurors deliberating, dumb verdict being reached. This goes for that mindless twit of a judge in this case, who cannot make up her mind which way she wants to think, and who doesn't have the spine to impose sanctions on Samsung, even after catching them lying to the court.
This is utter garbage.
I believe judge Koh, being S. Korean, must be getting some kind of kickback from Samsung in Korea. She may have been granting Apple some wins, but at the same time she's been slashing their numbers to save Samsung hundreds of million dollars, if not over a billion so far.
It also seems like she's been giving Samsung wins for ambiguous and irrelevant patents, such as the one against FaceTime, but struggles to give Apple a win on modern straight-to-the-point patents.
Unrelated to the article:
About a 1/4 of the time that I open an AI article on my iPhone it redirects my phone to the App Store and some game comes up. Presumably for me to buy. Is this some new advertising tactic? Does AI know this is going on? It's very intrusive and I'm thinking that it's a bit too much.
Yes, same thing happens to me, here and on other websites.
Extremely annoying.
…the desire to attack South Korea with a nuclear weapon suggests Tallest Skil.
Keep your libel to yourself.
The miscreant that Samsung is just goes beyond bottom dwellers. They truly have zero ethics. There's a great piece on Vanity Fair about the practices that Samsung uses not only with Apple, but with other competitors to essentially rob their IP, make a bundle of money on it, and leave the original companies that owned the patent in dire financial needs so to settle. Shameful behavior. Reading this article made me even more committed to never, ever directly do business with Samsung. Absolutel piece of sh!t company.
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-patent-war
From the Vanity Fair article:
...Sam Baxter, a patent lawyer who once handled a case for Samsung. “I represented [the Swedish telecommunications company] Ericsson, and they couldn’t lie if their lives depended on it, and I represented Samsung and they couldn’t tell the truth if their lives depended on it.”
What kind of defeatist, tuck-your-tail-between-your-legs and run kind of BS are you peddling? Are you arguing it is more cost effective to let Samsung and the copyists control the debate and that Apple should give up now, shut up and innovate more things for Samsung to copy? That Apple has no intellectual property rights to defend because you want the iPhone signature qualities in your Android clones and that Samsung shouldn't have to pay a damn license fee for it? Give me a break.
Who will stand up for Apple's IP rights if Apple won't? It is their imperative to put their story out there, to let the world know their side, not, as you so unwisely decree, go back and innovate for other companies.
That would be a very serious breach of ethics for any judge, and if Apple believed such a thing were true, they would not be silent about it. Got any proof?
I thought you were aware than several of the claims Apple used against Samsung weren't even practiced by Apple. It's hardly product "copying" when there's no Apple product using the claimed IP.
Certainly not siding with Samsung on this and I think their business model of mimicking others successful lines rather than creating their own is sad. It's just who Samsung is. In this case tho there wasn't a whole lotta copying going on of Apple features from Apple devices available to consumers. Instead it was making use of IP Apple claimed ownership of.
Inevitably, the jury have to concentrate on the details, in order to strive for accuracy. But once they've done that, I feel that the judge should take their verdict and then apply an overarching verdict which takes into account the big picture. The major flaw with this trial is the fact that Apple have been so restricted with the number of patents. It plays into Samsung's hands, because it would have been far more effective to present the enormity of Samsung's theft in one fell swoop.
In copying so much of Apple's look and feel, Samsung were able to get the upper hand in the Android market, which then led to market domination of Android. No other company has made any significant profits with Android. That's why the judge should really have slapped Samsung with a debilitating ban on their current phones and tablets, in order to balance out their earlier ill-gained dominance, combined with a financial penalty that took away most or all of the profits that they enjoyed due to their copying. This would probably run into the billions of dollars.
In copying so much of Apple's look and feel, Samsung were able to get the upper hand in the Android market, which then led to market domination of Android. No other company has made any significant profits with Android. That's why the judge should really have slapped Samsung with a debilitating ban on their current phones and tablets,
Even if the judge had the ability to do that, it would have been appealed too quickly to make any real difference.
Noise has been detected in the signal. Are you aware that several claims in this lawsuit are practiced by Apple? That's copying. You're splitting hairs to defend your beloved copyist. Really. Samsung is not worth your time, unless you get ego satisfaction from being a contrarian on an Apple fan site.
I'm glad that the 4 million dollar error was just a clerical mistake. Sheesh. I question how overnight common people can become experts in patent law. The press reports there was an IBM executive, and now suddenly he's the expert because after all he's an IBM executive. I would rather see a group of judges schooled in this area handle these cases. I think the outcome of the trial was ridiculous and pretty much gives license to any foreign company to copy at will.
This is likely the "lobbyist effect". We staff Washington with people with the skills to get in office -- but they really don't know much of anything beyond people skills and minor extortion techniques. Then we send a bunch of lobbyists after them, with million dollar credit card limits who ply them with parties and educate them.
An IBM executive just happens to walk by the courtroom; "Excuse me sir, you've got a nice suit, a deep voice, and happen to work for a company that does something techy -- maybe you can educate us?" A few drinks and strippers later -- everyone is an expert.
All this and their phones are still just shit.
Useful video so that next time someone accuses you of not having seen a working S5, you can say you have... and it's still terrible.
There is something seriously suspect about the S5 used in that video. First, this is a store demo being shown. Who knows what has happened to that phone sitting out in the public. Let's start with the triangle with the exclamation in it (indicating a system error). I'm sure that some tampering has gone on. Plus anyone can find a video of a malfunctioning cellphone.
I should add that I don't now or have ever owned ANY Samsung product.
Apple already won. Nothing to settle and they definitely would not settle for less than they won
So the jury make errors in working out the damages owed, go back to go over their findings again & also take into account the SGII, then afterwards, including the SGII, the outcome remains exactly the same?
Sounds very fishy to me. What are the odds on that happening?
I was thinking the same thing. It looks for all the world they came up with a total number and then just spread it around more or less randomly over the devices. I'd think the total would be arrived at by deciding the value of each patent infringed and simply multiply that number by the number of infringing devices sold. That should have produced the grand total.
It sounds very fishy.