Samsung hasn't paid, and most certainly did not pay in pennies. That's a bunk story. And IMO, by the time appeals are done, Samsung isn't going to owe anything.
----------
Of course you do...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ordered to Pay $532.9 Million in iTunes-Related Patent Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
----------
We need patent troll EMOJI's of course with adjustable face features
and color options..
Not sure what the patent covers. The idea of paying and receiving content online?
$4.5 million is what it costs just to tie up Apple's time on stuff like this.. It's basically "handout" money.
The stupid thing about these patents is that Apple has already paid out money for "iTunes stores" and "encrypted shopping carts" to plenty of other patent holders... How are these guys patents original or not infringing on all the others???. The beautiful thing about the g'damn software patents is that about twenty people submitted variations on the same "encrypted one-click shopping cart on the Internet" at the same time and it was the PTO's official policy to do **** reviews and "let the courts sort it out" while collecting fat filing fees.
Well thanks for "breaking it down" for meThis is a forum. I state my opinion.
Let me break something down for you.
...again with the contradictions... someone else pointed out your earlier contradiction. That's when you do something like condemn "A", then proceed to do that exact thing. Such as ridiculing the "break down" of your comment and then proceeding to "break down" someone else's...
Another fun term: Context. You didn't have to come out and literally type "It's OK for Apple to do xyz".... but in context with the rest of what you said, the idea was that "we can't rush to the conclusion that the plaintiff is in the wrong" and supporting evidence was "Apple has done it too". A typical and logical linking of those to statements would be that "Apple (and the plaintiff) are not necessarily in the wrong for doing it"
Apple seems to know as they made claims of such. It doesn't take much googling of the company to figure out what they are (and aren't) up to. The fact that they want to keep the trial in a specific city in TX that is notorious for favoring their side, they produce no products (That I could find), and call themselves a "...technology development and licensing corporation" is damning evidence IMO. "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...."
Yet here we are.... still commenting. Welcome to the Macrumors. This is a site built around commenting on conjecture! I can't believe I have to point that out...
Worked up? Furious? Angry? over a forum discussion of patents that have nothing to do with you? Find a new hobby.
Considering that I own AAPL stock and I personally know people who have been screwed over by patent trollsyeah I think that it has something to do with me. The whole system needs to be reworked.
Perhaps you should find a better hobby than making incorrect assumptions about people you do not know while telling them what to do on the internet.
You're injecting your personal experiences and biases into your assumption. The fact that they are going through this court proves nothing other than they know how to pick a court that will give them the best chances of winning.
Half a billion dollars?? Why not just fine them 3 pounds of dark matter or 14 vials of fairy tears. They are equally likely to pay any of the above.
Regardless of what you think about the claim that Apple violated patents, the plaintiff is just doing what other companies, including Apple, do they're using the legal system to their advantage, and that includes filing in a jurisdiction where others have had success with similar claims. Personally, I think that the patent system is in need of an overhaul, especially as it applies to software, but that's a different matter.
You are wasting your time
Dude. Don't waste your time. Rockstar is Apple's weird uncle that everyone knows about but no one will acknowledge his existence. He's an embarrassment best forgotten.
Dude. Don't waste your time. Rockstar is Apple's weird uncle that everyone knows about but no one will acknowledge his existence. He's an embarrassment best forgotten.
The term patent troll isn't used to describe someone who legitimately tries to protect their work, but someone who is trying to game the system.
There are two justifications for damages. One is that it gave Apple an unfair competitive advantage vs. the rights holder because Apple was able to introduce product features that made the rights owner or their legitimate licensees less competitive. That's clearly not the case here, as the patent holder neither makes products nor has licensed the rights to a significant Apple competitor. The other is that Apple did not negotiate in good faith to use an enabling technology. That should be the basis of the damages award. In that case, it's only worth the percentage of value that it brings to Apple products relative to other enabling technologies. That's why Apple says "$4.5M was fair." They are saying, "even were this legitimate, it would only represent a microscopic portion of the value of all the technologies we use; therefore, we would consider paying on that basis."
Nonsense. Apple vs. Google/Samsung is Godzilla vs. Mothra. Patent battles are one of the ways giant Megacorps fight for world domination. This is nothing like patent trolls, who are leeches that go after large and small companies alike. While Apple could choose to pay them off, patent trolls have happily put good companies out of business. You should applaud big companies like Apple who choose to fight; Apple may be doing this for their own reasons, but if Apple wins, these patent claims will be invalidated and small companies will benefit as well.
----------
Good point, but that's what courts are for. Not always competently in some cases, but that's the way of the world.