Samsung Executive Calls Apple vs. Samsung Ruling 'Worst Scenario for Us'

[ledlauzis]

It will not change anything for both companies. Both got significant exposure from media and will continue to get for the next few months while this case is closed completely.

Samsung will easily pay this one billion but because of these patents they become the world's largest mobile phone maker and without copying Apple it would not hold this spot.

 

[bsolar]

Now the judge can decide if they were willful, which i think there is enough evidence, and slap Samsung with a 3X settlement.

Personally, if I were the judge, I would instruct Samsung they have to pay 3X for willful intent, NO APPEALS. Ban applicable products and tell Samsung not to pull this "copy cat" products anymore and to come up with a different product that isn't trying to copy Apple to the point where it lands them in court again.

The problem is that the 1B figure was supposed to be only Apple's compensation for losses, but the jury decided to disregard the instruction they received and included punishment. The jury foreman stated:

"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist. We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."

I'm fine with that, but if you are supposed to evaluate only Apple's compensation you cannot talk about "wanting to be sure it was sufficiently high to be painful". This most likely means the actual Apple's damage figure would have been lower than the 1.05B the jury decided. It also means that it's not so correct to apply a 3X to the compensation damages as punishment, because the compensation damages include a punishment component already, since the judy decided it was a good idea to "send a message".

That's why I don't like this sentence, there is a lot of ammunition for Samsung to try their chance at the appeal, and most of this ammunition comes from the sloppyness of the jury.

 

[samcraig]

That's why I don't like this sentence, there is a lot of ammunition for Samsung to try their chance at the appeal, and most of this ammunition comes from the sloppyness of the jury.

Maybe the jury was exhausted...

“I need everyone to stay conscious during the reading of the jury instructions, including myself. … We’re going to periodically stand up, just to make sure we’re all alive.”
—Judge Koh before reading 109 pages of legal instructions to the jury.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57497649-37/apples-closing-shot-hits-at-samsung-copycat-docs/

 

[TsunamiTheClown]

I can only imagine what 1 Bil equals in revenue for Samsung. This is not just a trifle.

----------

It will not change anything for both companies. Both got significant exposure from media and will continue to get for the next few months while this case is closed completely.

Samsung will easily pay this one billion but because of these patents they become the world's largest mobile phone maker and without copying Apple it would not hold this spot.

They don't seem like their just gonna pull out the checkbook and brush it off.

 

[ledlauzis]

I can only imagine what 1 Bil equals in revenue for Samsung. This is not just a trifle.

----------



They don't seem like their just gonna pull out the checkbook and brush it off.

Last quarter Samsung made $42 billion in revenue and $5.86 billion in operating profit.

 

[Riemann Zeta]

Since Samsung makes all of the SoC components for Apple's iProducts, what would keep them from dropping Apple as a CPU fab client and telling Apple to shove it?

 

[OllyW]

Since Samsung makes all of the SoC components for Apple's iProducts, what would keep them from dropping Apple as a CPU fab client and telling Apple to shove it?

The contracts they have signed to supply components for Apple?

 

[bsolar]

The contracts they have signed to supply components for Apple?

Not to mention they actually make money supplying these components...

 

[magbarn]

Maybe the jury was exhausted...

“I need everyone to stay conscious during the reading of the jury instructions, including myself. … We’re going to periodically stand up, just to make sure we’re all alive.”
—Judge Koh before reading 109 pages of legal instructions to the jury.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57497649-37/apples-closing-shot-hits-at-samsung-copycat-docs/

No, it's because the jury is stupid. After sitting in jury selection processes in the last few years, I've noticed the predilection to bump out the jurors who are intelligent and actually work for a living, leaving only the government/pension/welfare-dependent mouth breathers. That is NOT being judged by your 'peers.'

 

[spazzcat]

No, please tell us how it's good.

It will force Samsung to come up with new ways of doing things...

----------

No, it's because the jury is stupid. After sitting in jury selection processes in the last few years, I've noticed the predilection to bump out the jurors who are intelligent and actually work for a living, leaving only the government/pension/welfare-dependent mouth breathers. That is NOT being judged by your 'peers.'

You know there was engineers on this jury...

 

[deannavni]

That's why they call it innovation... Apple made pinch zoom work, why can Samsung try to do something different/better?

Like in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jDhsbsdz28

 

[KPOM]

Yeh I just saw the stocks today and no1 has paid any1 a dime yet... Not looking good for samsung if it is indeed tripled. But I dont think in a million years would apple buy samsung nor would it be allowed. If theycould just buy the micro processor part then maybe.

----------



Yeh I saw that. Ouch! Still stock price shouldnt affect their short term cashflow, they are big enough to ride it out.

The stock price is more of a function of future cash flows. I think the market assessment is that this will cost Samsung sales in the long run.

 

[spazzcat]

Since Samsung makes all of the SoC components for Apple's iProducts, what would keep them from dropping Apple as a CPU fab client and telling Apple to shove it?

Money

 

[pulse99]

The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.

Pinch and Zoom only became an essential component of touch screens AFTER Apple unveiled it to the world. The technology is basically the same used to create the film "Avatar". But no one, even Apple, is going to charge James Cameron with patent infringement. The essential part here is the implementation of the technology. Samsung's implementation has been just to copy Apple's implementation. They didn't even bother to design a unique physical look to their phones and tablets.

 

[KPOM]

No, it's because the jury is stupid. After sitting in jury selection processes in the last few years, I've noticed the predilection to bump out the jurors who are intelligent and actually work for a living, leaving only the government/pension/welfare-dependent mouth breathers. That is NOT being judged by your 'peers.'

I've been selected for a jury, as has my sister. Neither of us are "government/pension/welfare-dependent mouth breathers." The foreman was an inventor himself, and most of the others were well educated. Juries usually wind up being a cross section. Mine was a criminal trial. The oldest was around 70, the youngest 19. There were retirees, an engineer, two nurses, me (a CPA), and a marketing professional, among others.

 

[HAMEYO]

Welcome to the new Apple! " Waaaa! We refuse to update our phones/OS and wonder why why competition starts steaming ahead ".

>I"ve been buying macs for over a decade, ・・・


Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha, TROLL always Says THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


>but the way Apple has been behaving lately, shows apple is anti innovation


Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


What Company ELSE other than Apple on This Planet is More " INNOVATIVE " right NOW????????


Ya Favourate " Samesung "????????


Congratulations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jterp7]

I've been selected for a jury, as has my sister. Neither of us are "government/pension/welfare-dependent mouth breathers." The foreman was an inventor himself, and most of the others were well educated. Juries usually wind up being a cross section. Mine was a criminal trial. The oldest was around 70, the youngest 19. There were retirees, an engineer, two nurses, me (a CPA), and a marketing professional, among others.

even as an owner of apple products, the one-sidedness of this decision really has me worried for the future of the industry as a whole.

 

[maflynn]

even as an owner of apple products, the one-sidedness of this decision really has me worried for the future of the industry as a whole.

The entire industry has decided that litigation is the best way to deal with your competitors. Its not an apple thing, or a Samsung thing. Just look at everyone suing everyone.

 

[KPOM]

even as an owner of apple products, the one-sidedness of this decision really has me worried for the future of the industry as a whole.

Perhaps it was one-sided because only one side had a strong case.

 

[HAMEYO]

I still fail to see why Apple should pay Google 2billion

That's " The Other Way Around ", NO DOUBT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Nungster]

Galaxy S3....what?

Image

Seems like a massive improvement, not a copy.

Lol! Your picture proves that u did not read an follow any of what is going on in this case. The phones in question are not what you linked. Go back an read the trial and u might learn something.

 

[devinci99]

The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.

That is not a fair statement.

Consider this:

1. Company A patents something-A.

2. I, company B, believe I need to use that something-A in my own products, I contact companyA to work out a license agreement. I pay company A, $X to use it in my products. $X gets added to the cost of making my own products.

3. Company A goes on to license something-A to 9 other companies in the same business.

4. I want to differentiate my product from the other 10 companies including company A, I come up with my own novel and unique ideas and patent them. I also come up with an improved way to do something-A, I call something-A1 and patent that.

5. Well, I still pay royalties to use something-A in my product, but now my something-A implementation is different than the implementation in the other 10 companies.

6. Company A likes my something-A1, and works out a deal with me.

7. Company C sees my something-A1, and copies me without working out any deal with me for a license fee

8. Companies D, E... decided not to go another direction and just use something-A.

9.. I sue Company C.

10. Company C cries, unfair, I am discouraging innovation.

Every product you buy now a days, your payment pays for the collective license fee the maker has to pay royalties for. Your printer, some of that costs pays Kodak and HP. Your CPU? Some of that goes to IBM. Even though you're not aware of it.

Suing for patent infringement does not stop innovation. Its meant to stop companies from copying without working out some license agreement.

Samsung could have avoided all of this, it could have worked out a license agreement (like Microsoft had with Apple) to use some of these features/patents. Instead they did want to pay anything; which is why and how they got to this point.

When you are challenged with something and has to get through it, innovation will happen if you really need to find a way around it. Or you can just pay the toll.

With Apple case, now other manufacturers, has several choices; work out a licensing agreement with Apple if they feel these features need to be added to their own; or find a different way --- innovation happens.

I do R&D for my company, and most of my work involve thinking of ways to create a new mouse-trap, find away around an idea without copying, or improve and existing mouse-trap. All of these are innovation in progress. If I do improve upon an existing idea, I am fully aware I do not not have to rights to use the idea 100% without first paying fee to use the original patent it is based on. If I attempt to patent this, I will need to disclose this.

 

[Gasu E.]

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

And I am going to patent a system of "making dumb 'I'm going to patent some existing technology and sue everyone' statements on Internet forums." I should become a very rich man!

 

[bsolar]

Lol! Your picture proves that u did not read an follow any of what is going on in this case. The phones in question are not what you linked. Go back an read the trial and u might learn something.

Maybe he meant that no matter the trial Samsung's most recent models already have a much different design that the iPhone, which means they must have "stopped copying" Apple some time ago (at least on the design of the phone itself, gesture patents are a different issue I guess).

 

[PhoneI]

Pinch and Zoom only became an essential component of touch screens AFTER Apple unveiled it to the world. The technology is basically the same used to create the film "Avatar". But no one, even Apple, is going to charge James Cameron with patent infringement.

um, because what you see in the movies isn't real. If thats the case, George Lucas can patent technology for creating a laser beam that is strong enough to blow up entire planets.