Supreme Court sides with Samsung over Apple, says payments shouldn't cover whole device profits [u]

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 62
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,357member
    gatorguy said:
    When the reason for the sales appeal of the whole device to the consumer is stolen, what then?
    Then the jury is free to award the total profits. The difference is that both the original trial judge and the Federal Court interpreted the law as mandating that the entire Galaxy (US only) smartphone profits be awarded with no option for a lesser amount no matter how minor the design infringement was. TBH Apple should be happy it went this way ( and probably are in some regard IMHO). It could have been a penny saved and a pound wasted in some future design patent award if they were on the hook instead. 
    This has already happened....

    ...She (Judge Koh) also proceeded to slash the scope of the lawsuit by Apple officially not giving them there day in court -- at least for those issues she lopped off.
    Wrong, and then wrong again.

    No judge or jury has yet properly established what the proper "article of manufacture" should be. Both the trial judge and the Federal Appeals Court erred in their opinions. Apple was also the one who chose not to pursue additional patent claims against Samsung or even wait for a longer available timeframe in the court schedule to hear all possible claims at once in a single trial. It was and always is Apple's choice whether to sue over their IP. You're blaming the wrong party.
    edited December 2016 singularityloquitur
Sign In or Register to comment.