android should be stopped. It’s illegal copy bad done. So the verdict is the minimal. My opinion that Apple have right to have 1 billions dollars from samsung. Anyway pay attention dear google with new android p copy IPhone X gestures.. iPhone X is patented. And you can’t stop it writing fake news like happened about the sell. He became the number 1 in the market.
Samsung lawyer John Quinn told Judge Judy Koh he had some issues with the verdict that would be addressed in post-trial motions.
Yeah... we all have issues with the verdict. Samsung should have been forced to pay the original $1B verdict!
Either way, this is perfect. Samsung once again got smacked in the face. Now stop stalling and pay the damn judgement!
In the end, Samsung still laughed to the bank. It made billions of dollars off the iKnockoffs over the years. It's like robbing at bank, paying a fine with the stolen money, and getting to keep the rest of the stolen money.
To Samsung, this is just a business expense, a cost of doing business.
Samsung continues to invest in negative publicity for itself. Just when you think that people may have forgotten about this patent battle — one that started when Steve Jobs was still alive, for God’s sake — these bozos keep reminding us about what a bunch of unrepentant thieves they are.
Samsung lawyer John Quinn told Judge Judy Koh he had some issues with the verdict that would be addressed in post-trial motions.
Yeah... we all have issues with the verdict. Samsung should have been forced to pay the original $1B verdict!
Either way, this is perfect. Samsung once again got smacked in the face. Now stop stalling and pay the damn judgement!
In the end, Samsung still laughed to the bank. It made billions of dollars off the iKnockoffs over the years. It's like robbing at bank, paying a fine with the stolen money, and getting to keep the rest of the stolen money.
To Samsung, this is just a business expense, a cost of doing business.
Yeah $500 Million is a lot, but in the end its still a bargain and the amount of time and money Apple's legal team spent on this is got to be in the millions of dollars alone. Samsung made out in the end. I still think they knew they were in the wrong and were purposely dragging the case on to make Apple lose as much money as possible on this.
This was a trial from 2012, covering only Samsung handset models sold in the United States up to that point. While Samsung may have quickly changed the snap-back behavior and swipe-to-unlock to avoid infringing in future models, it doesn’t appear they changed, or even could have changed, their phones’ overall designs to avoid continuing to infringe the design patents that made up the vast majority of the damages in this case. And so it’s possible Apple could seek to add later models to this verdict, which would then potentially amount to a multiple of the current damages awards given the way the overall smartphone market, and Samsung’s unit volumes, expanded in the years since 2012. Food for thought.
theres plenty more in S.Korea than just Samdung...
Hyundai and Kia car manufacturers for example. POSCO, worlds 4th largest steel maker. LG Chem, a leading supplier of batteries. Hyundai heavy industries - worlds largest shipbuilding company SK Hynix, the worlds 2nd largest memory chip maker
Samsung Group (the entire thing, nearly 80 companies and affiliates in total) accounts for about 1/5 of the countries GDP.
It seems like the only winners here are the blood sucking lawyers. I would be nice if Samsung had to pay all legal costs at the end, bringing the total up to one billion.
So I have avoided this case for the most part, knowing it would be decades before it was settled. But can someone explain to me this idea of "sum of the parts" and why that lets Samsung off the hook?
Would that mean I can make a car that looks just like a Ferrari (but performs noticeably worse in order to make this comparison to Samsung equivalent!) and sell it without any ramifications? The car is just a summation of parts after all, and I didn't replicate the Ferrari engine or drivetrain.
This was a trial from 2012, covering only Samsung handset models sold in the United States up to that point. While Samsung may have quickly changed the snap-back behavior and swipe-to-unlock to avoid infringing in future models, it doesn’t appear they changed, or even could have changed, their phones’ overall designs to avoid continuing to infringe the design patents that made up the vast majority of the damages in this case. And so it’s possible Apple could seek to add later models to this verdict, which would then potentially amount to a multiple of the current damages awards given the way the overall smartphone market, and Samsung’s unit volumes, expanded in the years since 2012. Food for thought.
They could, but Apple and Samsung came to some kind of agreement a few years ago to prevent escalation like you're talking about, as a result of:
News flash Thomas Edison comes back from the dead to sue modern day LED lightbulb manufacturers for stealing his idea. The iPhone is still the best phone you can buy but it is a mature product and competitors with quite good phones abound. I guess this is about pride.
Comments
Either way, this is perfect. Samsung once again got smacked in the face. Now stop stalling and pay the damn judgement!
In the end, Samsung still laughed to the bank. It made billions of dollars off the iKnockoffs over the years. It's like robbing at bank, paying a fine with the stolen money, and getting to keep the rest of the stolen money.
To Samsung, this is just a business expense, a cost of doing business.
Please keep appealing, Samsung.
Think of the judgment as the convergence of design theft.
This was a trial from 2012, covering only Samsung handset models sold in the United States up to that point. While Samsung may have quickly changed the snap-back behavior and swipe-to-unlock to avoid infringing in future models, it doesn’t appear they changed, or even could have changed, their phones’ overall designs to avoid continuing to infringe the design patents that made up the vast majority of the damages in this case. And so it’s possible Apple could seek to add later models to this verdict, which would then potentially amount to a multiple of the current damages awards given the way the overall smartphone market, and Samsung’s unit volumes, expanded in the years since 2012. Food for thought.
Hyundai and Kia car manufacturers for example.
POSCO, worlds 4th largest steel maker.
LG Chem, a leading supplier of batteries.
Hyundai heavy industries - worlds largest shipbuilding company
SK Hynix, the worlds 2nd largest memory chip maker
Samsung Group (the entire thing, nearly 80 companies and affiliates in total) accounts for about 1/5 of the countries GDP.
Would that mean I can make a car that looks just like a Ferrari (but performs noticeably worse in order to make this comparison to Samsung equivalent!) and sell it without any ramifications? The car is just a summation of parts after all, and I didn't replicate the Ferrari engine or drivetrain.
They could, but Apple and Samsung came to some kind of agreement a few years ago to prevent escalation like you're talking about, as a result of:
The iPhone is still the best phone you can buy but it is a mature product and competitors with quite good phones abound.
I guess this is about pride.