Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:21 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple Calls in Experts to Explain Why Samsung Owes $2B in Damages




In the ongoing Samsung vs. Apple lawsuit, two experts hired by Apple took the stand on Tuesday to explain to the jury why Samsung deserves to pay $2 billion in damages for infringing on Apple's patents.

First up was John Hauser, a professor of marketing at the MIT Sloan School of Management, who argued (via CNET) that the specific features patented by Apple, such as slide to unlock, made Samsung's devices far more appealing to consumers.

To reach that conclusion, Hauser surveyed 966 Samsung device users (507 phone owners and 459 tablet owners) to measure the percentage of consumers who would buy devices with specific features, including universal search, background syncing, quick links, automatic word correction, and slide-to-unlock, among others.

Those metrics were then used to determine how much people would pay for the Apple-patented features that Samsung included in its devices, with Hauser coming to the conclusion that customers would shell out $32 to $102 for each feature.
Quote:
"The features that were enabled by the patents at issue in this case have a measurable impact on consumer demand for Samsung devices," Hauser said during his testimony Tuesday.
During cross examination, Samsung objected to Hauser's methodology, which had concluded that Samsung largely sold devices due to the features copied from Apple, and criticized it for overlooking the importance of the Samsung brand and the Android operating system.

Following Hauser's testimony, MIT-trained economist Chris Vellturo took the stand (via Re/code) to explain how Apple arrived at its $2 billion number. The damages, he said, are a mix of lost profits and estimated reasonable royalties on the millions Samsung devices that have been accused of infringing on Apple's patents.
Quote:
"It's a very large market and Samsung has made a lot of sales into that market," Vellturo said, before getting into the specifics of how he came to his estimate. Samsung's alleged infringement, he said, came at a time of dramatic growth in the market as many people were buying their first smartphone.

"It's a particularly significant period for Samsung to have been infringing," Vellturo said, adding that one's first smartphone purchase is a key determining factor in future phone and tablet purchases. He added that Samsung was behind in ease of use and took Apple's know-how to aid its effort to be more competitive.
In the original Apple vs. Samsung trial, Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $890 million in damages. The latest suit focuses on newer devices, including the Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note II, Galaxy Tab 10.1, the iPhone 4/4s/5, the iPad 2/3/4, the iPad mini, and fourth and fifth generation iPod touch.

Following today's expert testimony, Apple is nearing the end of its case against Samsung. Next week, Samsung will present its infringement case against Apple, where it is asking for $7 million in damages. The entire trial is expected to continue until April 29 or 30, at which point the jury will enter deliberations.

Article Link: Apple Calls in Experts to Explain Why Samsung Owes $2B in Damages
MacRumors is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:25 PM   #2
0xyMoron
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: California
I can't wait for this to be over.
__________________
Twitter
0xyMoron is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:26 PM   #3
apolloa
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
And in one day this thread will reach 30 pages of samesung comments...
apolloa is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:27 PM   #4
epic-retouching
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
good on Apple. Tear that controversial company to pieces one hit at a time. Maybe Samsung will learn after a few more hits maybe not, either way is win/win for the world
epic-retouching is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:28 PM   #5
OrangeSVTguy
macrumors 601
 
OrangeSVTguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Northeastern Ohio
Ok apple. Empty out your couch cushions and pay that 7 million.
__________________
Browsing the forums from my Powerbook G4
OrangeSVTguy is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:29 PM   #6
DakotaGuy
macrumors 68030
 
DakotaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: South Dakota, USA
Glad my home is Samsung free except for Samsung components inside of my Apple products. Sort of ironic isn't it?
__________________
Mac: 21.5" iMac Core i5 2.5 Ghz "Sandy Bridge"
iPad Air 16 GB WiFi - iPod Classic 80GB - LG G3
DakotaGuy is offline   17 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:31 PM   #7
apolloa
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
And also, Apple is demanding 2 billion based on what a tiny 1000 people example group state? When it is an Android feature to have slide to unlock is it not? Oh and let's not forget Apple was not the first with the slide to unlock feature.

This seriously smells of desperation
apolloa is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:31 PM   #8
keterboy
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Earth's Core
Ok now the comments of those two MIT experts made my day haha.

Im praying for a huge win, which will hopefully set an example once and for all.

Amen.
keterboy is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:33 PM   #9
coolfactor
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC CANADA
Quote:
Originally Posted by DakotaGuy View Post
Glad my home is Samsung free except for Samsung components inside of my Apple products. Sort of ironic isn't it?
Well, nobody is arguing against Samsung being technically capable. That's why Apple pays them for several components. But those are not consumer-facing, so there's no marketing vector at work. Apple does not say "Buy this iPhone because it has a Samsung display!". It's the finished products and the end-user experience that are on trial here (ie. the marketable stuff). Samsung took key Apple designs and used them in its own products to give them a competitive edge. That's stealing.
coolfactor is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:35 PM   #10
carjakester
macrumors 68000
 
carjakester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Lagrange Park, Illinois
what really is 2 billion to these companies? apple just wants to send a message to its competitors.
__________________
Late 2013 rMBP iPad 4 Retina Ipad Mini Iphone 5s Apple TV 3
carjakester is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:38 PM   #11
apolloa
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolfactor View Post
Well, nobody is arguing against Samsung being technically capable. That's why Apple pays them for several components. But those are not consumer-facing, so there's no marketing vector at work. Apple does not say "Buy this iPhone because it has a Samsung display!". It's the finished products and the end-user experience that are on trial here (ie. the marketable stuff). Samsung took key Apple designs and used them in its own products to give them a competitive edge. That's stealing.
Yeah we will all conveniently forget Apple stole the idea in the first place from the 2005 smartphone the Neonode N1m.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by carjakester View Post
what really is 2 billion to these companies? apple just wants to send a message to its competitors.
Yes, that it will sue you to gain market share.
apolloa is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:39 PM   #12
tech4all
macrumors 68040
 
tech4all's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NorCal
Quote:
Originally Posted by DakotaGuy View Post
Glad my home is Samsung free except for Samsung components inside of my Apple products. Sort of ironic isn't it?

Nobody cares and neither does Apple.
__________________
I use OS X because of Windows. And I use Android because of iOS.
tech4all is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:40 PM   #13
Giuly
macrumors 68040
 
Giuly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: That depends whether you ask for timezone, state of mind or GPS coordinates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samsung
overlooking the importance of the Samsung brand and the Android operating system.


There was no "Samsung brand" prior to the Galaxy S, and Android was this:
Thumb resize.

Last edited by Giuly; Apr 9, 2014 at 11:44 AM.
Giuly is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:40 PM   #14
MrRez
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Apple really has no right to be taking the morale high ground here. Stealing ideas and products is what apple is built on. The only people that lose is these type of cases are the consumers.
MrRez is offline   11 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:40 PM   #15
inkswamp
macrumors 68020
 
inkswamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by apolloa View Post
And also, Apple is demanding 2 billion based on what a tiny 1000 people example group state? When it is an Android feature to have slide to unlock is it not? Oh and let's not forget Apple was not the first with the slide to unlock feature.

This seriously smells of desperation
I take it you've never studied statistics and polling methodologies. Assuming the participants were randomly chosen and the survey was conducted scientifically, 1000 people should be more than enough to get an accurate view of things.

Also, what's your source for Apple not being the first with slide-to-unlock? That's the first I've heard it.
inkswamp is offline   11 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:41 PM   #16
DShap5
macrumors 6502a
 
DShap5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Wow, that was rather impressive. When I first read the headline I thought, "Oh great... another stupid reason with barely any common sense behind it..." and though I still mostly stick to that opinion, I was surprised at the way he put together his argument. Quite interesting...
__________________
If you want a cool new feature on a Samsung phone, just suggest it to Apple.
DShap5 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:42 PM   #17
initwithnibname
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolfactor View Post
Well, nobody is arguing against Samsung being technically capable. That's why Apple pays them for several components. But those are not consumer-facing, so there's no marketing vector at work. Apple does not say "Buy this iPhone because it has a Samsung display!". It's the finished products and the end-user experience that are on trial here (ie. the marketable stuff). Samsung took key Apple designs and used them in its own products to give them a competitive edge. That's stealing.
Yep, and proved it with 132 pages of advice to implement blatant plagiarism.
initwithnibname is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:43 PM   #18
inkswamp
macrumors 68020
 
inkswamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRez View Post
Apple really has no right to be taking the morale high ground here. Stealing ideas and products is what apple is built on. The only people that lose is these type of cases are the consumers.
It's not about stealing ideas per se. It's about using someone else's patented ideas and not paying for it.

Give me an example of Apple using someone else's patent and refusing to pay for it. They have used patented ideas in their products previously and have paid for it.

Samsung, however, refuses to acknowledge it. That's the difference.
inkswamp is offline   23 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:43 PM   #19
apolloa
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkswamp View Post
I take it you've never studied statistics and polling methodologies. Assuming the participants were randomly chosen and the survey was conducted scientifically, 1000 people should be more than enough to get an accurate view of things.

Also, what's your source for Apple not being the first with slide-to-unlock? That's the first I've heard it.
I posted the phone above. And no, when you are asking for an utterly ridiculous over bloated amount of money, 1000 is no where near enough, is it basing that 2 billion on international sales or American sales?
apolloa is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:46 PM   #20
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
I hope Steve's holy war is worth it. Make no mistake, Tim Cook is just finishing what Steve started.
__________________
"I have a very optimistic view of individuals. As individuals, people are inherently good. I have a somewhat more pessimistic view of people in groups." -- Steve Jobs , Wired interview
Rogifan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:46 PM   #21
initwithnibname
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by apolloa View Post
I posted the phone above. And no, when you are asking for an utterly ridiculous over bloated amount of money, 1000 is no where near enough, is it basing that 2 billion on international sales or American sales?
You want them to do a survey of hundreds of millions of people?

Okkk
initwithnibname is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:49 PM   #22
Android who?
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech4all View Post
Nobody cares and neither does Apple.
Lol, I care. I care for the greater good. xD
Android who? is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:52 PM   #23
coolfactor
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC CANADA
Quote:
Originally Posted by apolloa View Post
And also, Apple is demanding 2 billion based on what a tiny 1000 people example group state? When it is an Android feature to have slide to unlock is it not? Oh and let's not forget Apple was not the first with the slide to unlock feature.

This seriously smells of desperation
I agree. Apple should not have been granted a patent for Slide-to-Unlock based on prior art. But that doesn't excuse Samsung from using the same interface to sell their products. Clearly, they intended to ride on Apple's success, so they should reimburse Apple.
coolfactor is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:52 PM   #24
apolloa
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by initwithnibname View Post
You want them to do a survey of hundreds of millions of people?

Okkk
Erm, yes? You are attempting to sue a corporation for an idea you already stole based on an utterly tiny example size compared to the millions and millions and millions who have bought Samsung devices with Androids slide to unlock





Oh and here you go for those with very short memories, I present the 2004 Windows CE Neonode N1m WITH Slide To Unlock:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...KS2kfIr0#t=193

And here is a news story from the VERY respectable BBC news where it reported on how Apple LOST it's case against HTC for using the slide to unlock in the UK because it had already existed in other devices BEFORE the iPhone:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18709232

Quote:

The judge said that HTC's "arc unlock" feature - which also involves a predefined gesture along a path shown on-screen - would have infringed Apple's technology had it not been for a device released in 2004.

The Neonode N1 showed a padlock on its screen with the words "right sweep to unlock" when it was in its protected mode. A later version replaced the text with an arrow.

The judge said it would have been an "obvious" improvement for the developers to have offered users visual feedback in the form of a "slider" in the way that Apple later used.


So yes, whilst in other countries Apple is LOSING it's court cases on the slide to unlock feature due to the Neonode device, apparently in America it can sue you for it and they choose to ignore the Neonode, well I guess that depends on if Apple wins, if they do then we will all know American courts lack any common sense, or sense or right and wrong.

But then again it's sad enough that they are claiming their current models and previous 3 years of models all breach whatever patents they most likely shouldn't have been given.

Last edited by apolloa; Apr 8, 2014 at 07:13 PM.
apolloa is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2014, 06:53 PM   #25
Zaqfalcon
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
A sample size ten times this amount is required here.

Besides; are these really saleable features, honestly.
Zaqfalcon is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Samsung Expert Says It Only Owes Apple $40 Million in Patent Case, Not $2 Billion MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 37 Apr 22, 2014 01:43 PM
New Damages Trial in Apple v. Samsung Set for November MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 68 May 7, 2013 03:18 PM
Judge Voids Nearly Half of Apple's $1 Billion Judgment Against Samsung, Calls for New Trial to Settle Revised Damages MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 214 Mar 8, 2013 11:36 AM
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 1383 Sep 5, 2012 03:46 PM
Apple ordered to pay damages to Samsung by Dutch court Androidpwns iPad 5 Jun 21, 2012 10:25 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:03 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC