Sidebar Sidebar
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

DakotaGuy said:
There are other companies that make just as good if not better LED HDTVs then Samsung. You don't have to give the world's worst copy cats your money. I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Panasonic Plasma GT / VT50 > Any of Samsungs/Lgs/Sony/etc LED-LCD's
 
RalfTheDog said:
There is a difference between patenting Pinch to Zoom and a method of implementing Pinch to Zoom.
Click to expand...

Yeah the method to implement it is coding the software for it to work. I very much doubt that samsung have written a single row of code to do that. I would guess google have done that work.
 
mdriftmeyer said:
Samsung works with Apple to manufacturer Apple's designs and in return Samsung copied many of Apple's implementations without working to license the tech like Microsoft and others have done.

Samsung will steadily see less and less work orders from Apple moving forward. There are much bigger fab corporations out there that don't include Intel.
Click to expand...

Doubt it. And similarly - Apple used Samsung's tech without actually licensing it like others have done.

Both companies proceeded to bring products to the marketplace knowing they would one day wind up in court.
 
No injunctions until September 20th the earliest. We'll all be waiting for our new iPhones to arrive by then. :D
 
SpectatorHere said:
The case itself probably cost almost nothing considering the judge was there anyway...as was the court staff.

But you're taking me too literally. Let me be more precise and remove governmental revenue and outlays from consideration and say that this doesn't help CONSUMERS.

It is extremely inefficient to have transnational mega corporations using a governmental legal/judicial system to negotiate and compete.

Consumers would be far better served to have companies compete in the marketplace.
Click to expand...

That is a fair enough statement but is far different than your following quote I was replying to.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SpectatorHere
Good news for attorneys in IP.

But on a serious note, this IS unfortunate in the sense of wasting TAXPAYER money. Apple and Samsung were, are and will be closely lined businesses. They should have to pay for their own dumbass negotiating by binding arbitration (just as these companies force on consumers).
 
penajmz said:
"And boy have we patented it!" - Steve Jobs
Click to expand...

As I wrote earlier - patents don't mean a thing unless they are enforced. In this case, Apple was able to enforce a handful. Keep in mind - there were several more they tried for and they were dismissed before trial.

It will be interesting to see what happens in appeal.
 
TylerDurden71 said:
This is total BS. This is what happens when important decisions are left with people who can't tell the difference between their earhole and their @sshole.
We are not talking about inventions. Pinch zoom, bounce back? Icons on the screen? While Samsung's patents cover communication and power savings. Actual technical inventions, not some irrelevant little software feature. It's a shame that patent offices allow obvious things to be patented and abused. Here are some more ideas that Apple might be able to patent:
"The way the user is holding the phone with the right hand"
"Conveying verbal information through sound waves to the mobile device"

Apple can't keep all competition away with lawsuits. The market is won be making a better product and right now Samsung has a better device. Just like RIM and Nokia, Apple can easily lose their lead in the next few years.
Click to expand...

These patents are ridiculous. The patent office never should have allowed these. There are actually parents on file for the right way to swing, these are just as crazy. Patents don't equal innovation.
 
KPOM said:
They will consider whether the denial of admission of evidence was permissible.
Click to expand...

Surely it will be more a case of whether Samsung can come up with a good enough reason for why it should have been allowed after they missed the deadline? Maybe if it was new evidence that had only just become aware of, but something they had been sitting on for years and simply forgot about?
 
isoft7 said:
lol, the real winners here are the lawyers... even just 30% they're rich as bitches now.
Click to expand...

Ummm, it's not like Apple called 1-800-Lawyer. Most of those lawyers are apple employees, they get paid handsomely, but no where near 300 million.

the 30% or 40% are for the 'no win no fee' lawyers, most respectable lawyers charge by the hour, regardless of the outcome.
 
zaphon said:
This is MacRumors, not iPhone or GTFO rumors! I own and use a Mac Pro (I run Windows 7 on it) and Macbook Pro (Mac OS X), but use a Galaxy S3 and Nexus 7 tablet (I owned several iPhones, but switched away from iPhone to Android prior to apple expanding beyond AT&T, and have no intention of going back either). I use whatever tools/devices that get the job done, and for me the above do.
Click to expand...

Um my comment wasn't directed at you. Nobody cares what phone you use.
 
So if the jury had ruled in favor of Samsung would they still be stupid?
 
samcraig said:
Doubt it. And similarly - Apple used Samsung's tech without actually licensing it like others have done.
Click to expand...

Apple buys Qualcom chips that uses Samsung ip, Qualcom has paid Samsung. Now Samsung want to be paid, again.
 
Last edited:
Verge has info on the injunctions motions scheduling. that is going to be the next giant shoe to drop with a willful infringement finding
 
DakotaGuy said:
There are other companies that makes just as good if not better LED HDTVs then Samsung. You don't have to give the world's worst copy cats your money. I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

I agree (and learned it the hard way with 2 out of 3 Samsung 50"+ flat panel TVs dying after 13 months of ownership). :mad:

Today, I wouldn't buy a Samsung toaster even if it was on triple-marked down clearance price.
 
People are so idiotic

I have a Samsung refrigerator. Its awesome. I have a Samsung TV. Its awesome. My friend has android phone and its nice too. Samsung copied Apple so bad on the iphone that its silly. Silly! This is obvious. This fact should not be in dispute. Anybody disputing that Samsung copied the Iphone to produce theirs is irrational at best. End of story. Now you can say you believe there should be no patents etc and that is fine. You can say you hate Apple and hope they die, and that is fine. But to say Samsung did not rip off Apple in regards to the phones they produced after the Iphone is idiotic.
 
babyj said:
Surely it will be more a case of whether Samsung can come up with a good enough reason for why it should have been allowed after they missed the deadline? Maybe if it was new evidence that had only just become aware of, but something they had been sitting on for years and simply forgot about?
Click to expand...

Technically they didn't miss the deadline. They did the equivalent of notifying the court at 11:59pm the night before so that Apple wouldn't have time to prepare before discovery closed.

It's a long shot, but it's Samsung's best shot, since it seems pretty clear that the "timeline" swayed the jury. We'll see if any of them grant interviews.
 
TylerDurden71 said:
This is total BS. This is what happens when important decisions are left with people who can't tell the difference between their earhole and their @sshole.
We are not talking about inventions. Pinch zoom, bounce back? Icons on the screen? While Samsung's patents cover communication and power savings. Actual technical inventions, not some irrelevant little software feature. It's a shame that patent offices allow obvious things to be patented and abused. Here are some more ideas that Apple might be able to patent:
"The way the user is holding the phone with the right hand"
"Conveying verbal information through sound waves to the mobile device"

Apple can't keep all competition away with lawsuits. The market is won be making a better product and right now Samsung has a better device. Just like RIM and Nokia, Apple can easily lose their lead in the next few years.
Click to expand...

did you mean to post in the fandroidrumors.com forums?
 
linkgx1 said:
Oh apparently you are a fanboy. Or just mad you live in South Dakota. Who the hell lives there anyways? Cows?

Samsung is the number one TV manufacturer IN THE WORLD. With consistently high reviews.
Click to expand...

You appear to be child-like in your discussion technique.
 
You all realize what this means. This means that you can't force someone to pay again for tech they already paid for when they bought the qualcomm chips.
 
Rogifan said:
So if the jury had ruled in favor of Samsung would they still be stupid?
Click to expand...

The jury was not stupid to begin with, the judicial system is stupid when it can be used in this way.

The jury did what they can, but I don't believe they did know enough about what they where deciding. And I don't think most people would know anywhere in the US or the rest of the world.

They did what they could, a trial like this should not be allowed to have jury of peers to start with its the system that is stupid not the people.
 
Let's see what happens when apple releases a TV. They will claim they invented or patented it. Lol


James
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back