Apple seeking damages of $2B in new trial, Samsung says claims are 'gross exaggeration'

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 62
    ronmgronmg Posts: 163member
    When people actual think they are buying an iPhone but end up with a Samdung phone, there is a very serious problem.
  • Reply 22 of 62
    sgaijsgaij Posts: 1member

    The dude from FOSS patents says it best:

    "When all is said and done including any appeals, Apple is not going to get an average damages award of $400 million per patent in a country whose chief patent judge said a $300 million damages claim against Apple over "one patent in a crowded field" was "crazy". Samsung will remain the global market leader no matter what Judge Koh and the jury will do or what effect certain methods of indoctrination will have, and Android will continue to be the most popular mobile platform in the world among end users and developers. In more than four years of litigation Apple has not been able to prove Steve Jobs's allegation of Android being a "stolen product", and the five patent claims in California aren't strong enough to change this"

  • Reply 23 of 62
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    The OP said



    How did that turn into 'copied' or a 'Sony phone'? He could of worded it better, but nowhere is it implied that Apple copied the design of a Sony phone.

    He's trying to equate inspiration to copying. He says everyone does "competitive analysis". Then brings up the Sony inspired prototype. So my question is what Sony phone did Apple use for its "competitive analysis"?
  • Reply 24 of 62
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    hjb wrote: »
    Have you read that document?  Well, we all do this sort of analysis ,don't you think so?  Speaking of 'Copying', have you heard about Goophone? 

    Yes, we all do this sort of analysis. It's the post-analysis implementation that determines whether there's been copying or not. If the implementation suggests copying, then it's not unreasonable to look at the process of analysis for supportive evidence, which is what seems to have happened here.
  • Reply 25 of 62
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,254member

    Samsung: You reap what you sow.

  • Reply 26 of 62
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    jungmark wrote: »
    He's trying to equate inspiration to copying. He says everyone does "competitive analysis". Then brings up the Sony inspired prototype. So my question is what Sony phone did Apple use for its "competitive analysis"?

    He said
    That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.

    And used a example of a design. It doesn't need to be a phone, or product that was ever made.
  • Reply 27 of 62
    constable odoconstable odo Posts: 1,041member

    The courts will never grant Apple that amount of money or anything even close.  The courts are already sick and tired of Apple's whining.  Although I'd like to see Apple run Samsung and Android, it's not going to happen.  Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.

  • Reply 28 of 62
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dabe View Post

     
     

    Yes, we all do this sort of analysis. It's the post-analysis implementation that determines whether there's been copying or not. If the implementation suggests copying, then it's not unreasonable to look at the process of analysis for supportive evidence, which is what seems to have happened here.

    So what implementation suggested here copying?  Have you seen or heard of Goophone?  

  • Reply 29 of 62
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member

    "I'll prove to you that is a gross, gross exaggeration, and an insult to your intelligence," Quinn said.

    "It's an attack on Android," Quinn said. "It is trying to gain with you in this courtroom what it has lost in the marketplace."

     

    This guy seems like such a fuckface. I recall numerous idiotic statements from him from the 1st trial. 

  • Reply 30 of 62
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

     

    The courts will never grant Apple that amount of money or anything even close.  The courts are already sick and tired of Apple's whining.  Although I'd like to see Apple run Samsung and Android, it's not going to happen.  Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.


     

    Incredible you would bring up Apple's "whining", when whining is literally all you do on this forum. Every single one of your posts is a tiresome, mind-numbing rant, almost a carbon -copy of the one before, and you have the gall to mention "whining"? Unreal.  Apple has never played in the profit-less junk-market, which you're shrieking for them to do,  and in spite of that have become the most successful company in the world. 

     

    Oh, and what "game" is already over? Is it the one where Apple has the most successful phone on the planet, or the one where Apple is making the most profits and revenues in the smartphone market, or the one where the iPhone has the most web usage, or the one where it has the largest US marketshare, or is it the one where they have the best reviewed phone in the world? The only thing pitiful is your incessant, obsessive doomsday whining, which seems like some sort of strange mental disease which we all have to suffer through in every fucking thread. 

  • Reply 31 of 62
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    hjb wrote: »
    So what implementation suggested here copying?

    A phone that resembles an iPhone so much that consumers are confused...
  • Reply 32 of 62
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    He said


    And used a example of a design. It doesn't need to be a phone, or product that was ever made.

    Again, there's a diff between 1 to 1 copying and inspiration.
  • Reply 33 of 62
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    slurpy wrote: »
    Incredible you would bring up Apple's "whining", when whining is literally all you do on this forum. Every single one of your posts is a tiresome, mind-numbing rant, almost a carbon -copy of the one before, and you have the gall to mention "whining"? Unreal.  Apple has never played in the profit-less junk-market, which you're shrieking for them to do,  and in spite of that have become the most successful company in the world. 

    Oh, and what "game" is already over? Is it the one where Apple has the most successful phone on the planet, or the one where Apple is making the most profits and revenues in the smartphone market, or the one where the iPhone has the most web usage, or the one where it has the largest US marketshare, or is it the one where they have the best reviewed phone in the world? The only thing pitiful is your incessant, obsessive doomsday whining, which seems like some sort of strange mental disease which we all have to suffer through in every fucking thread. 

    Slurpy, just block him. He isn't worth it.
  • Reply 34 of 62
    imemberimember Posts: 247member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

     

    The courts will never grant Apple that amount of money or anything even close.  The courts are already sick and tired of Apple's whining.  Although I'd like to see Apple run Samsung and Android, it's not going to happen.  Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.


    Are u lost? here let me help you www.shamesunginsider.com, i think you forgot the most important thing who earns more money? Apple! but also sells a lot less products than Samsung shamelist

    Apple: Macs, iOS Devices, Software and Apple TV's

    Shame Shame Shamesung: Smartphones (but lags), non-smartphones, Tablets, Smart WC,  Samsung W2014 (snapdragon 800, flip phone form factor, price $1500), non-smart tv's, smart bulbs, smart dildos, human organs, .....................................the list goes on............

  • Reply 35 of 62
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dabe View Post





    A phone that resembles an iPhone so much that consumers are confused...

    Nope you obviously confused Galaxy with Goophone.  I never seen anyone confused with plastic Galaxy.

  • Reply 36 of 62
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    jungmark wrote: »
    Again, there's a diff between 1 to 1 copying and inspiration.

    Agreed, but I don't see where there's a accusation of copying.
  • Reply 37 of 62
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Agreed, but I don't see where there's a accusation of copying.

    Ok. The original post was a bad analogy then.
  • Reply 38 of 62
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    jungmark wrote: »
    Ok. The original post was a bad analogy then.

    Did I not say he worded it badly? :lol:
  • Reply 39 of 62
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,404member
    Stop feeding the trolls.
  • Reply 40 of 62
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hjb View Post

     

    Nope you obviously confused Galaxy with Goophone.  I never seen anyone confused with plastic Galaxy.


    No, I don't even know what a "Goophone" is, but that's irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Samsung infringed on Apple's intellectual property by copying or too closely imitating certain features of the iPhone. Samsung has already admitted this. (Whether or not an experienced consumer such as yourself would ever confuse a plastic Galaxy with an iPhone has no bearing on the issue whatsoever.)

Sign In or Register to comment.