Jury Finds Both Apple and Samsung Guilty of Patent Infringement, Samsung to Pay $119.6 Million, Apple to Pay $158,400

[Oletros]

Yes, 150 thousand could only be from the most slightest of infringement.

There is no slightest, there is infringement or there is no infringement.

So, applying your logic, you're saying that Apple is one of the worst copycats on Earth because a jury found that they infringed ONE patent and the plaintiff was awarded $382 millions for that infringement?

 

[RobertoCravallo]

Yes, 150 thousand could only be from the most slightest of infringement.

Apple paid 100 times more than that to settle a clock face infringement

So how bad could this Samsung infringement be, relatively speaking.

A infringement ist an infringement, ist an infringement, etc.....

 

[Lennholm]

or, this...

Image

device name: Samsung RMC30D universal Touch Control TV remote
idea, courtesy of: erichohh (theverge.com)
image, courtesy of: engadget.com

Ok, what do you think of this 2006 Samsung product? http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/03/samsungpictureframe.jpg

 

[cdmoore74]

You really think the same people involved in new product development were tied up in this lawsuit?

Yes. Where's the new innovative products that Tim keeps promising investors? And I don't mean a $3000 plus computer modeled after a trash can that over 90% of Americans don't need or can afford. The last game changing product Apple had was the iPad from 2010. And they actually had the mold for the iWatch right in front of their faces with the iPod nano 6 gen but instead they changed the form factor instead of making it better. Apple would have been in complete control if they stuck with that concept.

https://www.lunatik.com/categories/ipod-nano


And just because Apple will make a larger iPhone does not make it innovative. Apple is just getting tired of seeing Android phones increase market share on a yearly basis. If it wasn't for Samsung phones Tim and company would continue to stuff 4 inches down people's throats for 2014.

 

[beosound3200]

really??

people still think samsung doesnt copy??

they are famous for it in their industry, as extremely fast copycats that crush you with their mass and distribution system.

look at this

oh yes, and a health event 5 days before wwdc? come ooon....

 

[Piggie]

Yes, basically remove the capital from the current economic system, and then patents don't mean anything. All ideas can be free like they were millions of years ago.

But in a capitalist society your reasoning is wrong.

The one ape that sharpened the knife didn't make a factory and start selling sharpened knives. All apes were free to copy it because everything was free back then. Nobody paid for a knife, nobody paid for the skin around it. Today, an idea can make you king of the apes, so ideas cost money to copy.

As someone who makes his living from new ideas, I oppose a system where everyone can copy and use everything they want. Ideas, regardless of how obvious, cost time to create. And to the outsider, that cost is not obvious. You may think that an idea is easy to come by but maybe the guy spent 2 years for that.

How far back do you wish to go ?

If I came up with the idea of putting a wheel in each corner of a car, and a wheel to steer it by, with foot pedals to control it's speed and braking.
And patented those concepts.

Would you be happy that I would sue anyone who uses a similar layout?

What about your Toothbrush? How near to a device with bristles would you want a copyright to cover?

Load of bread? A watch, mechanical movement with 3 hands that move in a clockwise direction against a static background to point to hours/mins/secs printed on this background.

Where do you want to stop ?

I agree about a product totally designed to fool, real/fake rolex. (even though a cheap fake can be fun)

Lightbulbs only made by one company?

You do realize how bad this would be for everyone is we lived in such a world?

 

[beosound3200]

And just because Apple will make a larger iPhone does not make it innovative. Apple is just getting tired of seeing Android phones increase market share on a yearly basis. If it wasn't for Samsung phones Tim and company would continue to stuff 4 inches down people's throats for 2014.

would they?

or would they wait till late 2014, iphone 6 so they can put a large high-quality display, make it thinner and more efficient with a8? smth they couldnt do in 2012 or 2013?

thinner so you actually can hold it comfortably. and use it.

i guess we'll never know, but we can guess.

all i know, large screen phones exist solely because of the oems inability to keep up with apple in design, thinness, performance and battery life. so they made larger phones. first phone that even touches iphone is xperia z1 compact. but its much thicker and larger.

then consumers, mostly asian commuters started loving large screens, phablets... and here we are now

 

[iBug2]

How far back do you wish to go ?

If I came up with the idea of putting a wheel in each corner of a car, and a wheel to steer it by, with foot pedals to control it's speed and braking.
And patented those concepts.

Would you be happy that I would sue anyone who uses a similar layout?

What about your Toothbrush? How near to a device with bristles would you want a copyright to cover?

Load of bread? A watch, mechanical movement with 3 hands that move in a clockwise direction against a static background to point to hours/mins/secs printed on this background.

Where do you want to stop ?

I agree about a product totally designed to fool, real/fake rolex. (even though a cheap fake can be fun)

Lightbulbs only made by one company?

You do realize how bad this would be for everyone is we lived in such a world?

You haven't read what I wrote did you?

Not to mention the things you wrote about are patented, most of them. Patents have expiration dates, so everyone can create a lightbulb today. But if you come up with a different lightbulb, which uses less energy and gives out more light, then you can patent it and only you can manufacture it for a while, and then it expires.

Here you go, Edison's patent for lightbulb.

http://www.archives.gov/historical-docs/document.html?doc=11&title.raw=Thomas%20Edison's%20Patent%20Application%20for%20the%20Light%20Bulb

 

[beosound3200]

How far back do you wish to go ?

If I came up with the idea of putting a wheel in each corner of a car, and a wheel to steer it by, with foot pedals to control it's speed and braking.
And patented those concepts.

Would you be happy that I would sue anyone who uses a similar layout?

What about your Toothbrush? How near to a device with bristles would you want a copyright to cover?

Load of bread? A watch, mechanical movement with 3 hands that move in a clockwise direction against a static background to point to hours/mins/secs printed on this background.

Where do you want to stop ?

I agree about a product totally designed to fool, real/fake rolex. (even though a cheap fake can be fun)

Lightbulbs only made by one company?

You do realize how bad this would be for everyone is we lived in such a world?

isnt this enough?

 

[Dave.UK]

really??

people still think samsung doesnt copy??

they are famous for it in their industry, as extremely fast copycats that crush you with their mass and distribution system.

look at this

oh yes, and a health event 5 days before wwdc? come ooon....

Samsung have taken the fitness route with the Galaxy S4, Galaxy S5 and the Gear Fit. If anyones copying, its Apple.

 

[beosound3200]

Samsung have taken the fitness route with the Galaxy S4, Galaxy S5 and the Gear Fit. If anyones copying, its Apple.

if history is any indication, their health app will look like those leaked images of ios 8

 

[Dave.UK]

isnt this enough?

What about this?

----------

if history is any indication, their health app will look like those leaked images of ios 8

You mean the S-Health app they have had since the Galaxy S4?

http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxys4/lifecare.html#page=shealth

 

[Lankyman]

Its not about the money as Tim Cook said.

Knowing Samsung is convicted copycat again is a win.

A win for whom? Do you think for one minute this will affect the buying decision of your average consumer going into a store to buy a new phone this weekend?

Neither Apple nor many other manufacturers will fight such cases in the UK as they know they will get short shrift from the UK courts. Whatever happened to common sense? The only winners in these cases are fat cat lawyers.

 

[beosound3200]

What about this?

Image

maybe you should install adblock?

You mean the S-Health app they have had since the Galaxy S4?

http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxys4/lifecare.html#page=shealth

no, more along the lines of this

 

[cdmoore74]

really??

people still think samsung doesnt copy??

they are famous for it in their industry, as extremely fast copycats that crush you with their mass and distribution system.

look at this

oh yes, and a health event 5 days before wwdc? come ooon....

No one is saying that Samsung didn't copy. The jury basically said that the value of Apple patents aren't worth what Apple said they were and that Samsung's total success was just a very small percentage of their infringement. That is a victory for Samsung. For a company worth over $500 billion dollars to pay only $120 million is not even a slap on the wrist. Samsung spends that much in 2 weeks on advertising alone. There really is no moral to this because Samsung will continue as if nothing happened and will rake in the money.
The only thing that will stop Samsung is competition in the marketplace. And I don't believe Apple can dethrone Samsung. It will come from another OEM making better product than Apple and Samsung (just look at what happened to Sony, Palm, Blackberry and WP). Apple takes too much time on making that "perfect" product at a premium cost while the competition offers it today at a fraction of the cost.

 

[GenesisST]

"Thank you for you help, fanboy forum!" Said no company ever...

 

[Lankyman]

would they?

or would they wait till late 2014, iphone 6 so they can put a large high-quality display, make it thinner and more efficient with a8? smth they couldnt do in 2012 or 2013?

thinner so you actually can hold it comfortably. and use it.

i guess we'll never know, but we can guess.

all i know, large screen phones exist solely because of the oems inability to keep up with apple in design, thinness, performance and battery life. so they made larger phones. first phone that even touches iphone is xperia z1 compact. but its much thicker and larger.

then consumers, mostly asian commuters started loving large screens, phablets... and here we are now

I own plenty of Apple gear. Do I own an iPhone? The answer to that is NO. The reason I don't own one is because I find the screen size to small for my ageing eyes. I don't like large size screen sizes over 5" either but I do find 4.5" and up to 5" just about perfect. So you see, it's not all about slimness or performance as you seem to think, though my Galaxy phone is pretty slim.

When/if Apple make a larger phone then they may have a new customer.

 

[cdmoore74]

all i know, large screen phones exist solely because of the oems inability to keep up with apple in design, thinness, performance and battery life. so they made larger phones. first phone that even touches iphone is xperia z1 compact. but its much thicker and larger.

Large screens exist today because phones like the original Samsung Note sold to people that wanted them and over the years Android and hardware has gotten better. Apple refused to meet consumer demand so they went elsewhere. Plain and simple business 101. If you have a taste for Chinese food but your favorite restaurant is McDonald's are you going to eat at McDonald's?
The Retina display was the best display for a phone when it came out. Now every manufacture makes a display that matches or exceeds Retina. Same can be said about iOS and Android.

 

[kdarling]

What a patent is worth shouldn't be measured by how much the company has spent to invent them.

The amount Samsung owes is based on the amount of revenue lost by Apple, not how much it cost Apple to create the iPhone.

I never said otherwise. Context is important:

My response was only to the incorrect idea that Apple had spent more on R&D for these patents than Samsung was ordered to pay. They had not.

Correct me if I'm wrong, jury awarded $52 million because the Galaxy S2 infringed the quick search patent, Judge Koh used construction claims that contradicted what Judge Posner and the Appeal Court stated, isn't?

Yes, Judge Koh had used a different claims contruction, but then she extended the trial to let the jury hear the higher court's version instead.

I do not know if the jury also got to hear about how much Apple had asked Motorola for this patent... 60 cents per device, a price that judge thought was too high... whereas Apple wanted over $12 per device from Samsung. Sounds like the jury decided on about $1, which is still too high a proportion of the patent's contribution to a smartphone.

You're trivializing the difficulty of pattern matching in raw user written text. Apple's 647 patent is an API to match structured data, specifically dates, addresses, and contact info. If you've ever tried to do this you'd know just how hard it is to do accurately. By using an API you can shield developers from the intricacies and enable this functionality across the entire OS. That is what they were found to infringe upon.

Hopefully you don't think that the idea of an API should be patented, which is basically all that Apple did.

I implore anyone who thinks this task is trivial to try it. You'll see exactly what I'm talking about and why this is a big deal.

I agree it's not trivial to do it, but Apple's patent had nothing to do with actual methods.

I implore you to read the patent claims. They have no details on how the matching is done, only the idea that it should be done by separate code.

There was no copying involved here. Only a generic patent that should never have been granted, and which thankfully expires in 2016.

 

[beosound3200]

No one is saying that Samsung didn't copy. The jury basically said that the value of Apple patents aren't worth what Apple said they were and that Samsung's total success was just a very small percentage of their infringement. That is a victory for Samsung. For a company worth over $500 billion dollars to pay only $120 million is not even a slap on the wrist. Samsung spends that much in 2 weeks on advertising alone. There really is no moral to this because Samsung will continue as if nothing happened and will rake in the money.
The only thing that will stop Samsung is competition in the marketplace. And I don't believe Apple can dethrone Samsung. It will come from another OEM making better product than Apple and Samsung (just look at what happened to Sony, Palm, Blackberry and WP). Apple takes too much time on making that "perfect" product at a premium cost while the competition offers it today at a fraction of the cost.

its not about money.

its about samsungs modus operandi

a complete lack of any kind of moral whatsoever

----------

Large screens exist today because phones like the original Samsung Note sold to people that wanted them and over the years Android and hardware has gotten better. Apple refused to meet consumer demand so they went elsewhere. Plain and simple business 101. If you have a taste for Chinese food but your favorite restaurant is McDonald's are you going to eat at McDonald's?
The Retina display was the best display for a phone when it came out. Now every manufacture makes a display that matches or exceeds Retina. Same can be said about iOS and Android.

why is there no premium 4 inch android handset sold? except maybe xperia z1 compact

 

[iBug2]

why is there no premium 4 inch android handset sold? except maybe xperia z1 compact

This. People kept repeating over the years that Apple should make a larger phone. Why isn't Samsung making a smaller phone? Obviously there's a huge market for a 4" handset, after all that's half of Apple's revenue.

 

[Michael Goff]

This. People kept repeating over the years that Apple should make a larger phone. Why isn't Samsung making a smaller phone? Obviously there's a huge market for a 4" handset, after all that's half of Apple's revenue.

If Apple sold a 4.5" phone, they'd likely still sell huge numbers (maybe more). Everyone here underestimates just how much people buy for the apple on the back.

 

[crabbo]

its not about money.

its about samsungs modus operandi

a complete lack of any kind of moral whatsoever

Haha...nice

So they were both found guilty of infringement.

One is a naughty boy and the other is a very naughty boy.

Lets face it, these were over patents that many courts worldwide would have kicked out.

Remind me, when did we see something new worth a keynote? Oh, and I love Apple products, but I don't see much to get excited over lately.

 

[beosound3200]

This. People kept repeating over the years that Apple should make a larger phone. Why isn't Samsung making a smaller phone? Obviously there's a huge market for a 4" handset, after all that's half of Apple's revenue.

because they cant make it

----------

Haha...nice

So they were both found guilty of infringement.

One is a naughty boy and the other is a very naughty boy.

Lets face it, these were over patents that many courts worldwide would have kicked out.

Remind me, when did we see something new worth a keynote? Oh, and I love Apple products, but I don't see much to get excited over lately.

http://samsungcopiesapple.tumblr.com

im not talking about judicial review. im talking about my review, more precisely, my eyes review.

 

[zipa]

The iPhone WAS the first "smartphone" or "touch screen" mobile telephone....

It most certainly was not, as has been proven in courts, where Apple was found guilty for infringing a crapload of patents from Nokia, Motorola and the other "original" cell phone manufacturers with the original iPhone. I do know that AAPL pays Nokia regularly on the order of hundreds of millions, and I can only assume that the same goes for Motorola as well, except maybe on a smaller scale.