I don't think that direct restrictions should be placed on an individual consumers.
Last edited:
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 vs. Samsung Verdict: Preliminary Injunction Hearing, Possible Consequences, and an Appeal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think that direct restrictions should be placed on an individual consumers.
You see, that's just it KnightWRX ... it's more black and white than you'd care to admit. Your angle is constantly looking for the devil in the details ... that does nothing but entice endless debate.
It didn't take a trial and unanimous victory to know without doubt that Samsung was on a mission to copy Apple in the smartphone and tablet industry as fast as they could. They sought out to profit from Apple's years of R&D. Samsung couldn't be Apple on their own, at least not fast enough, so they copied them.
Product, software, accessories, packaging, marketing, now retail stores it's an absolute rip off of what Apple's spent years accomplishing.
It's not innovation it's plagiarism.
This is a victory to anyone who enters into business and patents something, a victory to all designers, innovators and inventors. I wrote that statement before Tim Cook coincidentally wrote similar comments to the Press and Apple Staff.
It's serious stuff. Asian companies have been knocking off products for over 70 years, it's hurt business in every corner of the world. Thank goodness Apple stood up and made it very public. Knock offs suck, period.
Although the eye-popping $1 billion verdict is capturing most of the attention, the real battle is over the issuance of a future injunction. Apple doesn't need the cash and Samsung is big enough to absorb the payout. But a permanent injunction will force Samsung to err on the side of non-infringement for any future products or face a contempt action. This will substantially impact the industry.
In addition, a patent owner often chooses to go after a smaller player in order to obtain favorable claim construction rulings and overcome prior art. The theory is that the smaller player can't afford to put on a good defense. It then can use that victory over the smaller player to convince others in the industry to license the patents or stop using the infringing design. In this case, Apple chose to go after a defendant that had the ability to put on a good defense (whether Samsung's lawyers did that is a separate question). This adds to the leverage that Apple now has over the rest of the industry.
Judge Koh can decide to issue an injunction, but then stay it pending the inevitable appeal. However, it seems unlikely she would stay the injunction given her earlier rulings. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals can itself stay the injunction pending appeal, but it often refuses to do that. An appeal can take a couple of years to decide.
So even if this case gets reversed on appeal, Apple will have bought itself a lot of protection for a couple of years with this win.
In addition, a patent owner often chooses to go after a smaller player in order to obtain favorable claim construction rulings and overcome prior art. The theory is that the smaller player can't afford to put on a good defense. It then can use that victory over the smaller player to convince others in the industry to license the patents or stop using the infringing design. In this case, Apple chose to go after a defendant that had the ability to put on a good defense (whether Samsung's lawyers did that is a separate question). This adds to the leverage that Apple now has over the rest of the industry.
Judge Koh can decide to issue an injunction, but then stay it pending the inevitable appeal. However, it seems unlikely she would stay the injunction given her earlier rulings. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals can itself stay the injunction pending appeal, but it often refuses to do that. An appeal can take a couple of years to decide.
So even if this case gets reversed on appeal, Apple will have bought itself a lot of protection for a couple of years with this win.
Uh, no. An argument that this decision will have implications for an economy does not make for a winning argument for cert. And in any event, it has to go through the 9th circuit first. Try again.
EDIT...
"The next "lower court" in this case would be the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Wash. DC" from another poster... i think that is correct. my bad on the 9th circuit.
All this talk about how this hurts competition are either trolls or lack the necessary capacity for processing information and coming to logical conclusions about it.
Look at what Microsoft is doing. Now that's competition. Competition is coming up with your own ideas and running with it on the fair, open market. We'll see how well Metro does in the mobile space. I don't particularly like it, personally, but I respect Microsoft for the choices they made, and for doing their own thing. Apple won't be suing them. Apple has no grounds for suing them, under the law or under common sense.
What Samsung has been doing is not even close to competition. The copying was blatant. The copying was willful. We know this from Samsung's own internal documents. It was Samsung's goal to create cheap clones of Apple's products, rush them to market, and take advantage of Apple's efforts in R&D and marketing to coast along.
Competition is fair, the winner chosen strictly on the merits. Microsoft spent their own money on R&D, and they're spending their own money on advertising their products. That's fair, and if Windows 8 does well in the mobile space, they will have earned it. Samsung spent no money on R&D, copied Apple's hard work, and coasted along into the market on the wake of Apple's advertising. That's not fair at all, Samsung clearly has an advantage in cost-to-market. If Samsung does well, it's because they made their product cheaper through stealing designs from their competitor, resulting in lower carrier subsidies and greater push from those carriers in the stores accordingly.
Apple is a pretty confident company, I would wager. I believe them when they say they don't mind competition, because they believe that on a level playing field they can win. They just want everyone else to make their own stuff.
Consumers should want everyone else to make their own stuff too. That's how we get interesting new ideas like Microsoft has been working on (and, wow, who'd have thought anyone would be able to say that with a straight face?). If every product looks like an iPhone running iOS, what, exactly, is the advantage to the consumer? I can't think of any. This verdict isn't going to hurt the consumer one bit, it's just going to result in more companies doing their own thing and coming up with actual new ideas.
Look at what Microsoft is doing. Now that's competition. Competition is coming up with your own ideas and running with it on the fair, open market. We'll see how well Metro does in the mobile space. I don't particularly like it, personally, but I respect Microsoft for the choices they made, and for doing their own thing. Apple won't be suing them. Apple has no grounds for suing them, under the law or under common sense.
What Samsung has been doing is not even close to competition. The copying was blatant. The copying was willful. We know this from Samsung's own internal documents. It was Samsung's goal to create cheap clones of Apple's products, rush them to market, and take advantage of Apple's efforts in R&D and marketing to coast along.
Competition is fair, the winner chosen strictly on the merits. Microsoft spent their own money on R&D, and they're spending their own money on advertising their products. That's fair, and if Windows 8 does well in the mobile space, they will have earned it. Samsung spent no money on R&D, copied Apple's hard work, and coasted along into the market on the wake of Apple's advertising. That's not fair at all, Samsung clearly has an advantage in cost-to-market. If Samsung does well, it's because they made their product cheaper through stealing designs from their competitor, resulting in lower carrier subsidies and greater push from those carriers in the stores accordingly.
Apple is a pretty confident company, I would wager. I believe them when they say they don't mind competition, because they believe that on a level playing field they can win. They just want everyone else to make their own stuff.
Consumers should want everyone else to make their own stuff too. That's how we get interesting new ideas like Microsoft has been working on (and, wow, who'd have thought anyone would be able to say that with a straight face?). If every product looks like an iPhone running iOS, what, exactly, is the advantage to the consumer? I can't think of any. This verdict isn't going to hurt the consumer one bit, it's just going to result in more companies doing their own thing and coming up with actual new ideas.
Question
Judge Koh, can she still opt to triple damages since the jury found the infringement willfull?
Judge Koh, can she still opt to triple damages since the jury found the infringement willfull?
I'll admit one thing : posters here make it more black and white than anything else. Court and lawsuits obviously don't work that way or we wouldn't lawyers and judges and juries, months of discovery, stacks of motions and evidence.
I don't play paltry partisan games, for either side. I'm in these threads to get educated on the issues, not to brush over them and chant the "party line" for a side I would have to pick (I don't even want to pick one).
afaik, apple didnt make the first silver/black laptop.
----------
_Their_ WIMP innovations?
Yes, Apple's innovations on the WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointer) concepts that were pioneered by Xerox PARC.
Overlapping windows and the graphical file manager are Apple innovations that weren't in the original Xerox PARC designs for one thing. The things that Microsoft "stole" to make Windows, resulting in one of the biggest lawsuits in history, ending with defeat for Apple on pretty all the claims except the ones relating to a few secondary items (the Trash can).
Did Apple's courtroom loss result in stagnation of innovation in the industry ? Of course not. Did Apple stop innovating because the IP couldn't be protected anymore (an argument oft cited here) ? Of course not.
Shut up fanboy. This means Google will definitely be on the offensive l. With over 17,000 patents, not to mention their parteners, they will attack aggressively
----------
I'm sorry fanboy but......
Google does have uglier execs
It's Okay my friend, I understand your pain!
Coke - Pepsi... who cares? At least we have both.
Now we will all have fewer choices because a dozen "peers" magically became engineers and decided most of our devices should be monopolized by the largest and most powerful corporation on the planet.
Right or wrong... it's really that simple.
You'd want to buy it because as the sole shareholder you could order the termination of all the lousy managers who decided to reduce the "prices" paid by those "customers" who paid them kickbacks, who decided at the same time to "invest" billions in initiatives in Afghanistan and Iraq with no return, and who do their best to sabotage their boss in the hope that they can get the job for themselves.
Clean those deadbeats out, and you'd have the "company" doing just as well as it did the last time good managers were in charge.
No No, a dozen of our peers didn't magically become Engineers
They did something none of us did. They examined both sides cases and the facts at hand and made a decision based on US Laws, that resulted in a unanimous decision for Apple.
What that means now is companies are going to have to innovate and make their own recipe instead of Pepsi trying to copy Coke. To succeed they're going to have to make a "better Pepsi" not a clone of Coke. I like genuine products, not clones. Innovations are great, knock offs suck.
Microsoft/Nokia did it right, Samsung could of too, instead they copied and willfully violated patents and lost.
I believe in IP and protecting it. When it was so obvious what Samsung was doing it was hard not to pick sides, for me at least.
IMO no matter how you look at it, black, white, details no details Samsung's intentions where crystal clear ... to short cut and fast track on the back of Apple's R&D. I don't like that, it's ***** business and it absolutely does not stem innovation. That's not only my belief it's my experience in business.
It's important, two big companies fighting it out, it's a subject that needs attention brought to it. There are thousands and thousands of inventors in USA who have made great products, properly patented them and the moment they introduce these products at Trade Shows they're bought or stolen from tables and Fedex'd to China or Korea for duplication. A trillion dollar industry for Asia, research that.
No sooner do many US inventors get to market a few short months later their hard work and products are copied in Asia and already here for sale. Inventors are beat the moment they start, it's an epidemic and its killing small business and entrepreneurism - two things I'm a strong proponent of.
Sure these inventors should hire Lawyers and fight like hell, but the damage is already done ... long story short said inventor ends up working at Wal Mart ... freaking sad.
I'll speak out against knock off's, copying, plagiarism as long as I can.
What they did was tread the line in hopes that they would be able to defend their design choices in court if the situation ever came up. Further - if a company believes strong enough - whatever the company and industry - that a patent isn't enforceable - it's easy to see why a company would roll the dice. Out of iPhone 20(+) patents - so many of them are relatively useless and have been dismissed in court. A handful haven't and in this case, prevailed. You know what? It could have easily gone the other way. So when Cook says this lawsuit wasn't about money or patents - that's rhetoric. Because at the end of the day - that's what decides the case and the punishment. And it's naive (not saying you are) for anyone to believe Apple was only in this to get Samsung to stop copying and that it was an ethics issue. Samsung poses a real threat and with their newer phones, a comparison in technology that Apple often loses on (screen size, memory, processing, etc). You can say it doesn't matter. But the general public doesn't care about the lawsuit or who wins or who loses. They want whatever phone they want. And often times - they are sold on specs. Especially, for example, screen size.
I am just hoping more high end handsets use WinMO8 but they probably STILL will just shove Android on a trillion devices.
Be better in the long run. Of the big three google would be missed the least. Any google IO it's weird how much the net flips out as if they are some kind of gods. Just look back at all how in teh futrez and amazing JB is. When its okay, WinMO8 has WAY more potential from a real OS maker. Wish Apple and MS could F google real good and just block them for their OS's just so everyone gets the hate equally.
A company like google getting circled jerk for average sh** gets more annoying than the Apple or MS fanboys.
Also did webcrawler have fanboys? I never could find em.
Be better in the long run. Of the big three google would be missed the least. Any google IO it's weird how much the net flips out as if they are some kind of gods. Just look back at all how in teh futrez and amazing JB is. When its okay, WinMO8 has WAY more potential from a real OS maker. Wish Apple and MS could F google real good and just block them for their OS's just so everyone gets the hate equally.
A company like google getting circled jerk for average sh** gets more annoying than the Apple or MS fanboys.
Also did webcrawler have fanboys? I never could find em.
I have to ask why you hate Google and Android so much. If you don't like either company - don't use their services or OS. Are you aware how much rage your posts shows?
You should have seen me go in on Apple, its way worse when I do that.
I am sorry but I find it plain stupid google as much circle jerking for the average sh** they put out. OH yeah they jumped out of a plane and zip lined down a building and rode a bike on stage with those glasses. JB is better than windows 10 and OS12 just because of that.
I dont hate either thing, I think the net nerds should hear the chant
"OVERRATED" when it comes to google. Apple is as well.
ALSO: Let's see the monopoly here....OH LOOK its Google with their adorable little robot and amazing phones that could edit 1 hour of 4k video in 1 second cause they are actually magical. Google saved the world, they really did. It's on everything, people like it cause they are forced to use it. Where is the other OS like webOS to choose from? Where is WinMO on flagship high end phones? I dont see it? People bitch about MS having a monopoly, and it happens all over again on phones, fantastic. Way to go guys.
Last edited:
OK. I see it as this - tech is tech. I don't personify it. The right tool for the right job. Some things Google does well. Some things Apple does well. Some things Samsung does well. Some things COmpany X, Y or Z does well. - and it's ALL subjective based on one's own use case. Too often, here and on other message boards, people think what they want or need is what everyone else does.
Wow... I gotta admit I'm way stoked that Apple got this win, proving that an objectively chosen jury could agree the copying was purposeful & blatantly illegal. I hope it really hurts Samsung financially. However, thinking Google's Android project is doomed and that their company is in free fall is a bizarre Google hater's pipe dream.. really couldn't disagree with you any more...
I don't care what anyone uses. I don't like monopoly's forming though. And tech getting over-rated. Apple gets sh** non stop on the net anyway, non stop so they havent been getting the over-rated as much as google. MS does something new and gets a lot of meh. Where is the sense.
I see people say their Android device is not working right. Calm usually on a forum, but if its Apple or MS on the device, boy are they just such bastards and deserve and get hate for it. Double standards. This can clearly be seen all over the net, not hard to see.