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.
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
weird reaction, but ok. There are Samsung stores now that surprisingly look exactly like Apple stores. Go ahead.
Oh stop with the bias argument. They would be presented with the arguments from both sides and would have to make an objective decision.
It's a jury, 12 people. Not a single person but 12, from different backgrounds. There will be Apple lovers and haters. The verdict was unanimous.
And by the way it's not national pride for me. I'm not an American.
No, Standardized tech becomes frand, not necessarily the most invovative. Look at the networking market. _ALL_ major manufacturers have technology and protocols which they won't share with others. Cisco has their EIGRP routing protocol, the CDP protocol and so on, Extreme has their own versions of these or use open standards.
No company _LIKES_ licensing out their own technology, they might like licensing open standards, but never proprietary protocols and tech (which almost all major companies do have).
Apple has been more than willing to help out and also, where it is due, license out their patents in standards like H.264, OpenCL, IEEE1394A/IEEE1394B. But you seem to be too focused in on the cellphone market to realize that...
Anyways, Samsung is far from dead. They seem to have move beyond copying apple (at least, I find their S3 phone looks nothing like the iPhone) and going forward, I think this will be how they differentiate themselves - through phones with larger screens and possibly styluses.
except that these units also infringe on the software patents. This isn't just about how the products physically look, Apple has major wins on the software side that will affect all Android handset makers and, ultimately, Google.
I don't understand why everyone is characterizing this ruling as bad for competition and innovation. This is protecting innovation. Why would companies bother to innovate if other companies were free to copy them. This ruling rewards innovation by saying if you do something innovative you're entitled to be compensated for it.
It's crazy to think that this decision hurts innovation.
It's crazy to think that this decision hurts innovation.
I can tell you in no uncertain terms that after owning every iPhone since the day the first model was released, I'm enjoying my Galaxy Nexus immensely. Absolutely no regrets. I know several long time iPhone users who have either switched recently or are considering it and the primary reason is seeing what a limp 'upgrade' the iPhone 5 looks to be.
then what does this mean??
After three days of deliberations, the jury reached a unanimous verdict in the Apple vs. Samsung trial. The jury found largely for Apple,
I agree.
Apple took a rather big risk taking this to verdict. Granted they knew there would be an appeal and settlement either way...nonetheless, Apple had FAR more to lose here. Really pretty ballsy of them, you have to give them credit.
That said, none of it really matters, Apple's dominant position in smartphone tech is over (this isn't flame bait, just how I see it). If they stay at the top it will be through tough litigation like this. The asian tech companies are just moving at too fast a pace and don't have time competitively to worry much about patents.
Apple is just doing the best they can to assert their early dominance in the western markets. They made, they have the patents, and they will get paid (to some degree). But I don't see how they can hope to keep up with the east.
How did you arrive at this number? When the iPhone came out in 2007, it was $199 with a 2-year contract. Back then, there was basically no competition for the iPhone.
In pre-trial motions the judge insisted Apple narrow its patent claims from dozens to a couple of the "top 5", to "simplify the trial". That reduced the award amount by at least 100%.
The $1B award is literally trivial for Samsung and Apple, and especially how much both parties have invested in legal expenses. This is, after all is said and done, a PR outcome far more than a monetary one.
Rocketman
The $1B award is literally trivial for Samsung and Apple, and especially how much both parties have invested in legal expenses. This is, after all is said and done, a PR outcome far more than a monetary one.
Rocketman
Yeah they would be presented with the evidence, some of them might have actually understood what they where talking about. But its a to complex trail in such a short time frame to come to a real decision about guilty or not guilty. Especially when it comes to rather complex laws to start with. Samsung did show a lot of prior work on everything but that did not seam to been taken in to the verdict it self. Since a patent is null and void if there are prior works, and there is a lot of prior works all from fiction to real world application about these patents like pinch to zoom.
To be able to patent an idea like that you need to be the inventor of it, and apple did not invent for an example pinch too zoom