Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Samsung Executive Calls Apple vs. Samsung Ruling 'Worst Scenario for Us'

Sora said:
More like....

Dear Samsung,

1. Thanks for the extra billion in our coffers - your basically paying us to build iPhones
2. Continue to fullfil your contractual obligations to us under our current contract.
3. We are currently aligning ourselves with other partners and will bypass you shortly.

Continue the good work.

Tim Cook and Co.
Click to expand...

OR Samsung could just not renew the contract, file an appeal, and get other partners.

Good luck Apple finding another processor maker that can make large batches of processors for phones (ARM at that) in a timely manner with out many flaws. :)
 
iEvolution said:
The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.
Click to expand...

ah, LICENSE it like Microsoft did ... they had the chance ... even Google warned them. Now they pay, ha ha :D

:apple:
 
linkgx1 said:
OR Samsung could just not renew the contract, file an appeal, and get other partners.

Good luck Apple finding another processor maker that can make large batches of processors for phones (ARM at that) in a timely manner with out many flaws. :)
Click to expand...

I don't think this going to happen. Apple need Samsung. Samsung need Apple. It is about money to run a business.
 
entatlrg said:
ah, LICENSE it like Microsoft did ... they had the chance ... even Google warned them. Now they pay, ha ha :D

:apple:
Click to expand...

Which gets me thinking, did Sammy not negotiate the pricing at all? I think the amount Apple was asking was excessive. I'd say $5 per device but....


It's still too early to tell.

----------
golf1410 said:
I don't think this going to happen. Apple need Samsung. Samsung need Apple. It is about money to run a business.
Click to expand...

Well at least Samsung will make it back with the sales of the iPhone and their next phones.

Unlike that kid that has to pay $650,000 for his stolen music!:mad:
 
DavidTheExpert said:
"Apple is likely to seek a tripling of the damage award based on rulings that Samsung's infringement was willful."

Ha! That is a pretty bold move on Apple's part, given that they were just awarded over a billion dollars. But Apple has always been a bold company. I don't see much chance of them succeeding in this motion, though, but then again Apple has a pretty damn good legal team.
Click to expand...

In the jury comments Apple asked for $3b+ so that would bring the amount up to what the originally asked for.

At this point it WILL be appealed for lots of reasons... Typically you get two, but I can't see this going to the Supreme Court because this case is purely a matter of law, there is no glaring precedent to set here. A smaller company won a judgement against Microsoft and actually got Microsoft to FORCE a patch to users to REMOVE the feature... That was a bigger coup than this.

The good side for Samsung is that the judge is unlikely to raise damages any more. Apple pissed her off too. So Samsung has a pretty good chance to dial that fine down.... Quite often jury awards after appeals end up way less than half. The Bigger problem is that they are probably going to get knocked out of the market for a year until they can design something that doesn't infringe "anything" of Apple's... Apple will be sitting on a big "veto" button for at least a year, maybe more. If Samsung is smart, they will hire a new team of UI engineers and get Google in an a clean smartphone/tablet UI. Then document the entire design, studies, etc from scratch... They will gain a few patents on the way.
 
linkgx1 said:
OR Samsung could just not renew the contract, file an appeal, and get other partners.

Good luck Apple finding another processor maker that can make large batches of processors for phones (ARM at that) in a timely manner with out many flaws. :)
Click to expand...

In all seriousness. I highly doubt that they will end their relationship. Apple is a huge contract for Samsung, and it will be a huge loss if they were to loose them.
At the end of the day, it comes down to dollars and cents. If Samsung makes money off of Apple they aren't going to end a lucrative relationship when they can potentially be placed to make more in the future.
That would be a poor emotional decision.
 
Sora said:
Are you kidding me? Google is smart - they told Samsung - Back OFF! But they didn't. And they got burned by Apple's thermonuclear can of whoop ass!

Lastly, the phrase, there is more than one way to skin a cat comes to mind when I think about what Apple is doing.
They aren't going after Google directly. They are going after manufacturers. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
If manufacturers who are in bed with Google are being attacked left and right, or fear being on the radar, who will Google turn to with their Android OS?

I just wish that companies would stop behaving like 3 year old kids during a pop quiz and copying over shoulders.
INNOVATE. INNOVATE. INNOVATE. That's how you win. You win when you innovate. That's the only way to defeat Apple. It's their achilles heel. Out innovate Apple and you win.
If not, and you choose to copy, just get out the cheque book and ask how much do I make it out for - because you will pay. One way or another. You will pay.
Click to expand...

Microsoft did the same. They went after Android manufacturer. The reason they can't go after Google directly because Android is open source and free.
 
mabhatter said:
In the jury comments Apple asked for $3b+ so that would bring the amount up to what the originally asked for.

At this point it WILL be appealed for lots of reasons... Typically you get two, but I can't see this going to the Supreme Court because this case is purely a matter of law, there is no glaring precedent to set here. A smaller company won a judgement against Microsoft and actually got Microsoft to FORCE a patch to users to REMOVE the feature... That was a bigger coup than this.

The good side for Samsung is that the judge is unlikely to raise damages any more. Apple pissed her off too. So Samsung has a pretty good chance to dial that fine down.... Quite often jury awards after appeals end up way less than half. The Bigger problem is that they are probably going to get knocked out of the market for a year until they can design something that doesn't infringe "anything" of Apple's... Apple will be sitting on a big "veto" button for at least a year, maybe more. If Samsung is smart, they will hire a new team of UI engineers and get Google in an a clean smartphone/tablet UI. Then document the entire design, studies, etc from scratch... They will gain a few patents on the way.
Click to expand...

First, Samsung needs to fire their incompetent lawyers.

Second, I think 1 billion was a bit excessive. $500-600million would have been better IMO.


But this is just a battle one in an entire war. 10 years from now this may not matter.
 
Sora said:
In all seriousness. I highly doubt that they will end their relationship. Apple is a huge contract for Samsung, and it will be a huge loss if they were to loose them.
At the end of the day, it comes down to dollars and cents. If Samsung makes money off of Apple they aren't going to end a lucrative relationship when they can potentially be placed to make more in the future.
That would be a poor emotional decision.
Click to expand...

I think they are more or less a feuding relationship. Both are industry leaders and will continue so after this. I'm pretty sure companies like RIM and lg wish they were in Sammy's place.
 
iEvolution said:
The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.
Click to expand...

That is the patent systems fault, not Apples (not saying you said it was Apples fault). Though if I had those patents and someone else was infringing on them you better believe I'd be protecting them also. What else are they there for?
 
twigman08 said:
That is the patent systems fault, not Apples (not saying you said it was Apples fault). Though if I had those patents and someone else was infringing on them you better believe I'd be protecting them also. What else are they there for?
Click to expand...

To look pretty.:)

It's like a stripper, you can looky, but no touchy!

----------

Okay, so I was watching Coming to America (for the first time) and realized why trade dresses are so important....


mcdowells-facade-438-091010.jpg




"Look... me and the McDonald's people got this little misunderstanding. See, they're McDonald's... I'm McDowell's. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds."
:D
 
Renzatic said:
Tell me how a grid of icons isn't obvious.
Click to expand...
How about a scrolling list from which to launch apps?
I came up with that in 2 seconds. Surely Samsung, with their thousands of engineers, coud have come up with something far better than I just did if they really wanted to. They wanted something like the iPhone.
 
linkgx1 said:
To look pretty.:)

It's like a stripper, you can looky, but no touchy!

----------

Okay, so I was watching Coming to America (for the first time) and realized why trade dresses are so important....


Image



"Look... me and the McDonald's people got this little misunderstanding. See, they're McDonald's... I'm McDowell's. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds."
:D
Click to expand...

lol, but what happens if you touch a stripper? In lots of clubs you're dead. So to stick with your analogy, Samsung touched the stripper (the patent) and Apple took action, like what would happen if you touched the stripper. :p
 
Apple Isn't Good at Predicting the Future - They Create It

Renzatic said:
I would've posted a picture of a dumb phone, and proclaimed Apple to be the inventor of everything.

See, I'll give the iPhone props. It was at least 2-3 years ahead of it's time. Apple is very good at predicting what's to come, and capitalizing on it with great products.

...but even then, they used available technologies to produce the iPhone. Apple didn't invent multitouch, high capacity batteries, LCD screens, or any of the other things that make the iPhone the iPhone. Even the UI is an extension of what's come before. Most of the work Apple did was combining these technologies into a device that worked well for the tech available at the time.

So Apple's current implementation of the touchscreen phone is theirs. But a grid of icons, or the idea of a capacitive touchscreen phone itself? No. It's anyone's to use. There was already proof that the industry was headed in that direction. Why should Apple have exclusivity on the concept of the modern smartphone just because they leapfrogged everyone by a couple of three years[/QUOTE

Apple didn't predict what the future would be and do their best to implement it. Apple, at a time when almost nobody thought the iPhone (as it turned out to be) could be a success, created a new product, the best they could make. This in turn changed phones forever and created the future of smart phones. It took them years. Samsung, a larger company at the time, copied their work in 3 months. They were behind the curve and still are. But being worse or behind the curve doesn't make it right that they infringed.

The rules of copyrights and patents were in existence when Samsung started their copying. They knew the risks, but they gambled that wouldn't be penalized. They lost their gamble.

The consumer is NOT the loser. Cheap copies may be fewer, but real innovation may increase. Even Samsung, forced to innovate for the first time in its corporate existence, may develop something far better than they ever would if they shoot for the moon instead of trying to shoot for what Apple already did.
Click to expand...
 
"It's absolutely the worst scenario for us"

No ***** Sherlock! You were openly stealing from others and selling cheaper stolen goods to your customers and got caught, that is usually the worst case scenario for thieves. Hope you pay through your eyeballs for it. "In shock" give me a break...
 
twigman08 said:
lol, but what happens if you touch a stripper? In lots of clubs you're dead. So to stick with your analogy, Samsung touched the stripper (the patent) and Apple took action, like what would happen if you touched the stripper. :p
Click to expand...

What if Apple touches it's own stripper?Does it get bitch-slapped? Or is it the pimp?:eek:

Also, if Apple lets people touchy after they pay....that's just PROSTITUTION!
 
appleguy123 said:
Remind me of the wildly popular touchscreen phones that had it before Apple.
Click to expand...

Microsoft surface used it prior to apple releasing the iphone. Theres tons of prior art. The movie Minority Report in 2002 also featured a computer very similar to surface with pinch to zoom. The only reason why it didn't become widely available until around the iphone is thats when capacitive touch screens became available in large numbers and that production ramped up. Prior to that most touch screens were resistive. This is why the form factors of cell phones changed so much. It had nothing to do with the iphone. The industry was moving in this direction regardless of whether apple had entered the market.
 
Last edited:
Plas00 said:
"It's absolutely the worst scenario for us"

No ***** Sherlock! You were openly stealing from others and selling cheaper stolen goods to your customers and got caught, that is usually the worst case scenario for thieves. Hope you pay through your eyeballs for it. "In shock" give me a break...
Click to expand...

By cheaper stolen goods, in the case of the Galaxy S3...you mean a better product?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back