Samsung to fight injunctions sought by Apple with 'all necessary measures'
After Apple asked the court to bar the sales of eight Samsung smartphones found to have violated Apple's patents, Samsung has vowed to fight back and keep some of its best selling products on the market.
Samsung will combat Apple's attempt to ban the sales of eight smartphones with "all necessary measures," the company said in a statement issued to The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday. Among the options available to Samsung are filing to stop the injunction, appealing if the injunction is granted by Judge Lucy Koh, and modifying its products to circumvent any bans.
Citing an unnamed person familiar with the matter, Tuesday's report also indicated that officials from Samsung have begun talking to wireless partners about "removing or modifying infringing features to keep products on the market if the injunctions are granted."
In a filing on Monday, Apple asked the court to bar the sale of 8 Samsung smartphones, including the company's U.S. Galaxy S II lineup. In all, the phones Apple wishes to bar from sale accounted for $1.3 billion of Samsung's U.S. sales during the first six months of 2012, documents disclosed in Samsung's lawsuit with Apple have revealed.
The eight smartphones Apple hopes to ban accounted for the lion's share of Samsung's American profits in the first half of the year. A total of 28 devices were included in the Apple-Samsung case, which earned a collective $1.5 billion in U.S. sales in the first six months of 2012.
As noted by AppleInsider on Monday, Apple's requests for injunctions target Samsung's best selling and more lucrative smartphones. However, the trial did not include Samsung's newly released flagship handset, the Galaxy S III. The iPhone maker has filed a separate complaint attempting to block sales of that device.
A jury determined last week that Samsung's products have infringed upon Apple's patented inventions. The jury awarded Apple nearly $1.05 billion in damages from Samsung as well.
Samsung will combat Apple's attempt to ban the sales of eight smartphones with "all necessary measures," the company said in a statement issued to The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday. Among the options available to Samsung are filing to stop the injunction, appealing if the injunction is granted by Judge Lucy Koh, and modifying its products to circumvent any bans.
Citing an unnamed person familiar with the matter, Tuesday's report also indicated that officials from Samsung have begun talking to wireless partners about "removing or modifying infringing features to keep products on the market if the injunctions are granted."
In a filing on Monday, Apple asked the court to bar the sale of 8 Samsung smartphones, including the company's U.S. Galaxy S II lineup. In all, the phones Apple wishes to bar from sale accounted for $1.3 billion of Samsung's U.S. sales during the first six months of 2012, documents disclosed in Samsung's lawsuit with Apple have revealed.
The eight smartphones Apple hopes to ban accounted for the lion's share of Samsung's American profits in the first half of the year. A total of 28 devices were included in the Apple-Samsung case, which earned a collective $1.5 billion in U.S. sales in the first six months of 2012.
As noted by AppleInsider on Monday, Apple's requests for injunctions target Samsung's best selling and more lucrative smartphones. However, the trial did not include Samsung's newly released flagship handset, the Galaxy S III. The iPhone maker has filed a separate complaint attempting to block sales of that device.
A jury determined last week that Samsung's products have infringed upon Apple's patented inventions. The jury awarded Apple nearly $1.05 billion in damages from Samsung as well.
Comments
And that's why so many people are so disgusted with Samsung.
There's a court decision that says that Samsung infringed Apple's patents. It's also pretty obvious to anyone that they did so. Whether the injunction is granted or not is irrelevant. They need to modify their products to stop the infringement.
But Samsung apparently doesn't see it that way. They think it's OK to be blatantly copying Apple's products as long as there's no injunction in place.
I can't wait to see Apple hammer them with the rest of the pending law suits. I'd also love to see Rule 50 put in place for the Tab and damages to be trebled.
Maybe they could hurry up and copy something... I mean, if they are going to use all "necessary measures possible", this seems like it would be their first choice.
With "all necessary measures" .... LOL sounds like paying the judge off is on the table too LOL
Samsung should be humble. I take off their lawyer shoes... snubbing and not paying attention to the American jury system will never work. They should sit down quickly and work out something with Apple then being aggressive after being found guilty. Far cheaper to do a deal with Apple then survive in their own chaos.
Samsung's Board and legal team has done a terrible time to cover-up and battle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
After Apple asked the court to bar the sales of eight Samsung smartphones found to have violated Apple's patents, Samsung has vowed to fight back and keep some of its best selling products on the market. ...
Translation: Samsung is still really mad and still not willing to admit defeat (even though they've been defeated).
In other words this is all bluster and means nothing at all. They are talking trash *after* the fight is already over. Lame.
Samsung has real issues. I'm still wondering how much of their yearly revenue comes from Apple's chips.
Between chips, screens, memory, and other components, Apple is around 7-8% of Samsung's revenue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Translation: Samsung is still really mad and still not willing to admit defeat (even though they've been defeated).
In other words this is all bluster and means nothing at all. They are talking trash *after* the fight is already over. Lame.
Samsung's five stages of grief.
Denial: "The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple’s designs."
Anger: "Samsung will combat Apple's attempt to ban the sales of eight smartphones with "all necessary measures," the company said in a statement issued to The Wall Street Journal.
Bargaining: Samsung to Judge Lucy Koh, "Please, please, please Judge, don't treble the damages. And, don't grant the injunction that Apple wants. We will modify our products to obey the law, we promise !!"
Depression: Overheard in Samsung's boardroom, "Oh, why, oh why, did we listen to that rat, Larry Page? If we had focused only on Windows mobile software, we would have avoided all this headache !! Now, our brand has been tarnished !!"
Acceptance: Samsung's CEO saying to himself, "Looks like we will have to pay Apple the $3 billion after Judge Koh's ruling, and completely redesign our smartphone product line. Maybe even dump Android altogether. Lesson learned. I don't want to go through this ever again."
They are not sorry for what they did, merely angry that they got caught.
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges
Samsung has real issues. I'm still wondering how much of their yearly revenue comes from Apple's chips.
According to this page, Apple made up just 2.6% of Samsung Electronics' total sales in 2010. They weren't even Samsung's biggest client, that was Sony.
Someone ought to investigate the jury foreman's patent experiences. The more that comes out about this, the more it suggests that he had a bad experience attempting to enforce a patent of his and was on a vendetta. It strongly suggests the possibility of a personal motivation in the outcome of the case rather than a dispassionate juror reviewing the facts and applying them to the instructions given by the court.
This case may well drag out for the better part of a decade before it is resolved with finality.
Samsung's quotes are starting to sound like pronouncements from North Korea LOL!
You might consider using more recent information. Apple is expected to buy about $11 B from Samsung this year:
http://www.mobot.net/apple-buy-11bn-worth-components-sworn-enemy-samsung-2012-39197
Since Samsung's total sales are around $140 B, that's about 8%. It is, of course, a much larger percentage of the component division's sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR
Someone ought to investigate the jury foreman's patent experiences. The more that comes out about this, the more it suggests that he had a bad experience attempting to enforce a patent of his and was on a vendetta. It strongly suggests the possibility of a personal motivation in the outcome of the case rather than a dispassionate juror reviewing the facts and applying them to the instructions given by the court.
This case may well drag out for the better part of a decade before it is resolved with finality.
Sounds like you've got your own ax to grind.
You might want to read the interviews with the jurors:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/378000/20120828/apple-samsung-verdict-fallout.htm?
None of the jury members used an iPhone. At least one had a Samsung phone owned by a family member. There is no clear evidence of bias in any respect. Furthermore, it's extremely difficult to get a jury disqualified after the close of a trial. Samsung had plenty of opportunity to get biased jurors removed before the trial.
Samsung is simply throwing more FUD. For example, they claim that they're going to appeal on the basis of invalidity of the patents. Sorry, but they can't. The patents have been found in a court of law to be valid. They can appeal IF THAT DECISION WAS REACHED ERRONEOUSLY, but they can't simply argue that the patents are invalid on appeal. They repeatedly keep using stupid arguments and missing the point entirely - which is a large part of the reason that Apple creamed them in court.
I feel sorry for Samsung's lawyers. They presumably know the law, but have to do what Samsung tells them (such as bringing witnesses into the court room in clear violation of a direct court order). They look bad in this case, but much of it is because Samsung didn't have much of a case to start with and has been forcing them to go in unproductive directions.
What an idiotic, desperate claim. I suggest you watch last night's interview of Velvin Hogan by Emily Chang of Bloomberg West (google it) -- and report back.
He comes through as careful, measured, dispassionate, and thoughtful. In other words, Samsung's worst nightmare.
He does not own an iPhone, but his wife owns a Samsung phone.
Add: Here's the link to the interview -- http://www.bloomberg.com/video/apple-jury-foreman-here-s-how-we-reached-a-verdict-RqtqHC25QbOBFg7xrWa5Wg.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
You might consider using more recent information. Apple is expected to buy about $11 B from Samsung this year:
http://www.mobot.net/apple-buy-11bn-worth-components-sworn-enemy-samsung-2012-39197
Since Samsung's total sales are around $140 B, that's about 8%. It is, of course, a much larger percentage of the component division's sales.
I saw that figure before my original post, but seeing as the source is an "unnamed Samsung exec" and confirmed figures won't be available for a long time, I went with the last confirmed numbers. Obviously its going to be a bigger percentage now as the iPad sales alone would have increased it since 2010. I think the point I was trying to make was that if Apple and Samsung stopped doing business together (which isn't going to happen), Samsung would still be fine. Losing <10% of their total sales would not be a fatal blow.