Apple Asks for $379 Million in Damages Retrial Against Samsung

[wikiverse]

Simply put, Samsung is only winning the market share race in areas where cheap low-end phones are popular.

So, Samsung are only winning market share by creating products that people want to buy at a price people are prepared to pay.

It's almost like they have a range of products to cater to the needs of different consumers.

Giving people what they want? Samsung must be the worst company ever!

 

[MacMulti]

I wonder why Android is invisible from all these. They didn't copy the OS UI?

 

[Tech198]

This isn't a new lawsuit. This one's been going on for a while. This is just an update. And, shouldn't a "company you admire" do everything it can to protect its intellectual property? Since that's ultimately what separates that "company you'd admire" from one you might not?

----------



I'm sure Samsung would like that. Although I think they may believe that patent infringement is already legal...

----------



I know! $979 million isn't anywhere close to $1 billion!!

Would you pay 1 billion to keep customers happy ??

Its's just "the huge difference" that really stands out more than anything. It could even be over-the-top,, how do you know its not ?

 

[linuxcooldude]

They had a BIG monopoly during the iPod's peak. They owned about 85-90% of the market. They swallowed up pretty much all orders of NAND memory, thereby making it impossible for other players to purchase any NAND or even get any at such a price that made it possible to compete. And guess who provided them that large cut? SAMSUNG.

They're pushing for the monopoly via iOS but we all know its not going to happen with Android being an open platform.

It seems you have misconceptions about a lot of things.

Apple did not buy out all the NAND chips to stop competing manufactures. They were simply keeping up with the demand of the iPod. They would never buy out all available supplies for a product that did not sell well.

 

[thekev]

That would be, oh let's see ... all of them, no?

Can you explain how that changes the validity of his argument?

 

[alphaod]

Samsung is the biggest copycat in the history of technology. Their market share is made up of cheap low end phones. Not a fan at all. Not because I own apple products but because they have no vision and nothing of interest to me other than TV's. Ok bye.

Forget Samsung, look a lot of things they do, especially cars.

 

[iamtrip]

Last year, Samsung was ordered to pay Apple a total of $1.05 billion after a jury found the South Korean company guilty of willfully violating multiple Apple patents. Back in March, Judge Lucy Koh struck $450 million from the $1 billion awarded to Samsung after deciding the jury may have miscalculated the damages due to a misunderstanding of patent issues.

This should say:

"Back in March, Judge Lucy Koh struck $450 million from the $1 billion awarded to Apple after deciding the jury may have miscalculated the damages due to a misunderstanding of patent issues."

The damages are payable by Samsung - they were not awarded to Samsung.

 

[fortheus]

I'm so sick of Samsung.

Their playbook:
Copy success products: reason, the patent will take years (if ever settled), by the time it settled, we already won the market and likely the infringed company may already lose market share/bankrupt.

If they never copied iOS look and feel, no one will ever notice Samsung smartphone. It's huge boost to mindshare and exposure that make them this big. No other android maker as success as Samsung because they not copy iOS to build the mindshare (and think about patent fight later)

 

[Oletros]

I'm so sick of Samsung.

Their playbook:
Copy success products: reason, the patent will take years (if ever settled), by the time it settled, we already won the market and likely the infringed company may already lose market share/bankrupt.

If they never copied iOS look and feel, no one will ever notice Samsung smartphone. It's huge boost to mindshare and exposure that make them this big. No other android maker as success as Samsung because they not copy iOS to build the mindshare (and think about patent fight later)

Shocking thing is that their market share exploded when they stopped copying iOS

 

[Unggoy Murderer]

The Galaxy S3 and S4 are "cheap low end" phones?

Yes, they are. Overpriced, over reviewed, bloated, slow and pathetic quality junk. How people can even compare them to an iPhone, or any of the "premium" Android OEM's is lightyears beyond me.

 

[iBug2]

Shocking thing is that their market share exploded when they stopped copying iOS

So you are finally admitting they did copy iOS. An interesting turn of events after 3 years of denial.

 

[Oletros]

So you are finally admitting they did copy iOS. An interesting turn of events after 3 years of denial.

I'm using his words, not mines.

And the correct thing I wanted to say is what kdarling wrote.

On the contrary, Samsung's sales didn't take off until they stopped looking like an iPhone 3G, and went their own way with larger screens, slim bodies, custom homescreens and widgets, etc

 

[Hyper-X]

Yes, they are. Overpriced, over reviewed, bloated, slow and pathetic quality junk. How people can even compare them to an iPhone, or any of the "premium" Android OEM's is lightyears beyond me.

U mad bro?

 

[pgiguere1]

So, Samsung are only winning market share by creating products that people want to buy at a price people are prepared to pay.

It's almost like they have a range of products to cater to the needs of different consumers.

Giving people what they want? Samsung must be the worst company ever!

Wow, wait a minute. Where did I say that Samsung is the worst company ever?

I was only correcting someone who seemed to imply Samsung was mainly selling high-end phones like Galaxy S3/S4 worldwide, which they are not.

Factual stuff backed with recent sources that doesn't make Samsung look like the best company ever however isn't appreciated here am I right?

But obviously, the guy claiming misleading stuff and you acting like I'm saying stuff I'm not saying both get upvoted despite being irrelevant to what you're replying to.

I feel like I'm on Samsung forums, where systematically defending Samsung is more important than being factually correct/on-topic/making sense.

 

[Hyper-X]

Well it's normal for people here to be defensive of Apple products, and much so for Samsung and any other product/manufacturer forum.

The bottom line is there's a large demand for Apple products but unfortunately their grasp on the market has dwindled and namely Samsung is making a strong presence in the mobile marketplace. You can't dispute the numbers, for whatever reason each buyer has, there is a high demand for Samsung products.

What I don't seem to understand is why a person has to be a hater towards a company/product they don't personally use. I use a iPhone 4S, my wife uses a Samsung S4 and it doesn't bother me one bit. There's as many haters on each side of the fence and I don't get it. The only reason I can come up with is perhaps each side is unwilling to admit that they're jealous of the other side.

 

[mccldwll]

LOL, and they wanted a billion dollars? Did Apple get laughed out of court after that demand?

Have someone splain it to you.

----------

I was thinking the same thing... the phones are just as high end as apple's.

Of course they are. That's why Walmart is selling the S4 for 96 cents on Black Friday.

 

[kdarling]

Of course they are. That's why Walmart is selling the S4 for 96 cents on Black Friday.

A couple of years ago, Best Buy had a buy one, get one free, iPhone Christmas special.

Carriers had to give away iPhones for free in places like Japan, in order to boost subscriber sales.

Price alone does not dictate "high end", especially with subsidized phones, and most especially during holiday sales events.

 

[mccldwll]

Apple is constantly winning with the phone tech and looks, and its got billions. How about saying putting the court winnings to a good use, you know, like the Philippines typhoon victims.

With the emoticon, probably not serious. However, there's something wrong with corporations making "charitable contributions", regardless of the worthiness of the cause. A corporation's purpose is to make money benefiting the corporation and shareholders, and expenditures really are only allowable if they benefit the corporation/shareholders. That makes corporate "charitable contributions" equivalent to advertising. Thus, any such "contributions" are self-serving, not charitable.

 

[mccldwll]

A couple of years ago, Best Buy had a buy one, get one free, iPhone Christmas special.

Carriers had to give away iPhones for free in places like Japan, in order to boost subscriber sales.

Price alone does not dictate "high end", especially with subsidized phones, and most especially during holiday sales events.

The Best Buy BOGO promo you reference was for the then discontinued 32 GB iPhone4 for $199, with contracts. That was a $100 drop in price for a discontinued model. The S4 96 cents promo is a $200 price drop for Samsung's current high end model. Big difference.

I'm not familiar with the Japan promo; however, as you know, whether "free" was in fact "free" depends on subscriber plan terms. In the case of the essentially free S4, in an apples to apples comparison, that's with the same plan as for an iPhone.

 

[danny_w]

It is high time that both Apple and Samsung just hung it up and got on with business/life. Of course it could go either way, but I think Apple has far more to lose here and will be the eventual loser if they keep this up. I know this whole mess has soured me on Apple big time, and I am a long time Apple fan with a whole house of their products. But if they keep this up much longer my next PC (and then everything else that supports it) will be something else.

 

[mccldwll]

Well it's normal for people here to be defensive of Apple products, and much so for Samsung and any other product/manufacturer forum.

The bottom line is there's a large demand for Apple products but unfortunately their grasp on the market has dwindled and namely Samsung is making a strong presence in the mobile marketplace. You can't dispute the numbers, for whatever reason each buyer has, there is a high demand for Samsung products.

What I don't seem to understand is why a person has to be a hater towards a company/product they don't personally use. I use a iPhone 4S, my wife uses a Samsung S4 and it doesn't bother me one bit. There's as many haters on each side of the fence and I don't get it. The only reason I can come up with is perhaps each side is unwilling to admit that they're jealous of the other side.

Many "hate" Samsung because it copies/steals patented technology, misrepresents sales figures by using shill firms such as Strategy Analytics, hires online trolls to trash competitors, uses underhanded viral marketing, puts its money into advertising and sales instead of quality and reliability, does not stand behind its products when they fail prematurely (been there, done that) and is run by a convicted criminal. That's not jealousy, that's reality.

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...-samsungs-trickster-ways-surfaces-on-cnn.html

 

[hydr]

Actually, $0.5 billion, $1 billion or even $3 billion… I think Samsung has made profits far in excess of these sums by being the most effective copycat of Apple.

Surely.

But you have to remember, this trial is for very old products. I believe Galaxy S2,S3,S4 aren´t even included. There will be many more similar trials until Apple and Samsung can agree on licensing terms. The good thing right now is that Samsung admits to stealing apple technology, and agreeing to sharing some of that profit. That will obviously be a counter argument in the trials ahead.

Another point to remember, Microsoft alone rake in an excess of $2 billion a year on licensing to Android. Apples patents are by anybodies standard worth a lot more, and this is where the fight is. What should the terms be per phone? I believe FossPatents has mention Apple is seeking anywhere from $100-150 per phone. Microsoft currently gets about $25 per phone, which boils down to $2billion per year.

Samsung has made a killing in smartphones now, they have profited tens of billions of dollars. Apple are entitled to some of that, how much will be up to the jury to decide + executive management between Samsung and Apple.

One thing is for sure though, whenever you hear "Android is free" you know otherwise now.

 

[mccldwll]

If you get a Samsung TV, cross your fingers that it doesn't break due to a design flaw. When mine did, Samsung told me to GFY.
----------

Same with a failed high end microwave due to a known, well publicized defective part. Dealt with customer service rep with a beautiful voice who was only empowered to say no. My sister's high end just out of warranty Samsung TV bit the dust a few days ago while my low end 5+ year old Olevia still going strong.

 

[unplugme71]

Um, not to judge or anything, but I don't think anyone should be so emotionally invested in a company that they only purchase products from, to the extent that they can get "emotionally damaged" by actions that company takes....

I'm sure there are people that are really emotionally invested in a company.

----------

This isn't a new lawsuit. This one's been going on for a while. This is just an update. And, shouldn't a "company you admire" do everything it can to protect its intellectual property? Since that's ultimately what separates that "company you'd admire" from one you might not?

I never claimed it to be a new one. I knew it's been going on for a while.

 

[Poisonivy326]

Hmm ... my Samsung TV is six years old, still going strong. Use it every day.

But ... I can't believe some people here think that paid corporate shills don't troll every tech message board. I fully believe there are Apple corporate shills, Google corp. shills, and Samsung corp. shills here. And honestly a company wouldn't be doing its job if it didn't frequent message boards and take note of complaints, compliments, and whatnot about their products, and also do some self-promotion along the way.

Maybe the most obvious corporate shilling is at Apple Insider, where in one thread a couple posters became irate about criticisms of the rmbp's soldered RAM, and implied slotted replaceable RAM was "cheap."