Samsung to Appeal $119M Patent Verdict as Foreman Says Apple Should Target Google Instead

[unplugme71]

The problem is Apple HAS the money.
It simply does not want to make items customers want.

It makes items, then persuades customers they want it.

For years (and it nearly killed them) People wanted cheap desktop mac's great graphics cards. Mac's could of been THE gaming platform but they just kept it all too locked down and lost and it pretty much killed them till Steve came back with the iToy stuff.

Same with phones.

Apple COULD for the past few years of been offering various sized phones at various price points running iOS and not allowed Android to take over.

But no, again, like the desktop they kept things locked down and now Android in ownership terms is miles ahead.

They are great at making what THEY want to make, and making money from their loyal fanbase.

Locked down systems NEVER win in the long term.

I beg to differ. $600/sh says a lot right now.

Lots of companies limit their scope. It works. It's been proven.

You don't need to be successful by catering to every single person, just most of them. It costs a lot of money to design something for each person. That cost can kill a business quick.

Apple is profitable. That's all that matters.

 

[the8thark]

I would happily take either company's profits. As if either is doing "poorly."

Agreed 100%.

Apple are at a peak, people move on in time and want more
Apple have to give more or lose.

Bit by bit Apple has to give in and open up

Not so. What Apple is doing now is working. That might still work in the future too. Who knows.

 

[funkybudda]

Apple is profitable. That's all that matters.

And so is Samsung.

 

[TrentS]

It's Downright Criminal!!!

Prison terms need to be established for corporate officers in charge of making these decisions to copy other companies to keep up or to get ahead. They also should forfeit any compensation while in office once they are found guilty of copyright infringements.

A lot of this crap would happen less in the future if they would start locking up these CEO's that are at the helm of these large entities. Board Of Directors included! Imagine how other corporatinos would react if the CEO of Samsung was given a 20 year prison term along with fines in the 10's of millions.

 

[gauchotee]

It makes sense to me

I don't know anything about law what-so-ever.

Having said that, and correct me if I'm wrong. The first trial had samsung paying over a billion dollars, the second trial got that number down to 119 million. That's almost 900 million dollars in savings. I highly doubt legal fees cost samsung 900 million. So from samsungs point of view, I don't see why they shouldn't fight this. At the same time apple shouldn't relent either. Afterall there is still a 119 million dollars at stake here.

I personally have gotten out of traffic tickets from appealing. Some people say it's not worth the time and just pay it, but from doing my own number crunching, It makes sense for me to fight it, cause I personally don't make as much as apple and samsung lawyers.

 

[Dmunjal]

This is absurd. Google did not design the Galaxy S to look just like the iPhone; Samsung did The foreman is missing the point.

There were software (Android) features that were part of the case, too.

 

[unplugme71]

And so is Samsung.

Yes, but this is Macrumors. Not Samsungrumors

 

[aperry]

Prison terms need to be established for corporate officers in charge of making these decisions to copy other companies to keep up or to get ahead. They also should forfeit any compensation while in office once they are found guilty of copyright infringements.

A lot of this crap would happen less in the future if they would start locking up these CEO's that are at the helm of these large entities. Board Of Directors included! Imagine how other corporatinos would react if the CEO of Samsung was given a 20 year prison term along with fines in the 10's of millions.

It would be hilarious to see Tim Cook in jail. After all, the jury found that Apple infringed as well. It would be like a big executive party at the jailhouse.

 

[charlituna]

Good I'm glad, because Apple SHOULD be told to stop mucking around and to take on Google. I think they are either too scared to take Google on,

Have you even considered that vanilla android doesn't have the violations in question. That they were added by Samsung and thus why Samsung is getting sued, not Google. It's also,why Samsung's first act wasn't to request the cases be dropped because the issues were in Android as written by Google and Samsung licensed such in good faith.

Just because some jury foreman who claims to be a patent expert says it's all google doesn't make it true. A deep analysis of Android as written by Google and the changes and additions made by each licensee would need to be done.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

After all, the jury found that Apple infringed as well. It would be like a big executive party at the jailhouse.

Apparently, it is group policy to ignore that fact in all of the related threads these last couple of days. We can't spin that particular bit of info in any favorable way- best we can do is try to couch it as "accidental"- so we want to just completely ignore it while continuing to post bash after bash against the other guy. It is THE way. Did you not get the memo?

 

[Oletros]

Have you even considered that vanilla android doesn't have the violations in question. That they were added by Samsung and thus why Samsung is getting sued, not Google. It's also,why Samsung's first act wasn't to request the cases be dropped because the issues were in Android as written by Google and Samsung licensed such in good faith.

Just because some jury foreman who claims to be a patent expert says it's all google doesn't make it true. A deep analysis of Android as written by Google and the changes and additions made by each licensee would need to be done.

Galaxy Nexus, an smartphone totally customized by Samsung

 

[BaldiMac]

Apparently, it is group policy to ignore that fact in all of the related threads these last couple of days. We can't spin that particular bit of info in any favorable way- best we can do is try to couch it as "accidental"- so we want to just completely ignore it while continuing to post bash after bash against the other guy. It is THE way. Did you not get the memo?

I thought the memo said that it is group policy to pretend that infringement is infringement. There is no difference in the specifics of any case of infringement and more infringement is not any different than less infringement. Also, past history must be ignored. Did you get a different memo?

 

[JAT]

You assume wrong again. I did know that. I know how big Samsung is. That doesn't mean they can copy everything successfully. It is also safe to assume that in 5-10 years when apple and hopefully others stop using samsung's chips in their products and Samsung starts losing money as a result we may see them lost a significant amount of their power.

Again? Hmm.

Anyway, that is certainly true of any company, and that exact issue has been seeing Sony dwindle over the last couple decades. However, Samsung's power is not simply in how many units they ship, this would be a far more difficult 'fall' than for a company in a different country.

 

[ghost of jobs]

I have no problem with competition but Samsung is a scum company that does not deserve one bit of its success in any market.

What's your thoughts on control centre and thw lovely pull down notification bar?...or shall we.just ignore the fact that they are shamefully copied from android/Samsung...

 

[BaldiMac]

What's your thoughts on control centre and thw lovely pull down notification bar?...or shall we.just ignore the fact that they are shamefully copied from android/Samsung...

Why ignore it? The concepts were absolutely copied from Android (or others?). Nothing shameful about it. But that's not the same as patent infringement.

 

[aperry]

Apparently, it is group policy to ignore that fact in all of the related threads these last couple of days. We can't spin that particular bit of info in any favorable way- best we can do is try to couch it as "accidental"- so we want to just completely ignore it while continuing to post bash after bash against the other guy. It is THE way. Did you not get the memo?

I wasn't going to be quite so explicit about it but.....yeah.

I don't own any Samsung smartphones or tablets, but there's a piece of me that loves their strategy. Why? Because it keeps a fire under Apple to keep moving forward to stay a step ahead. That's good for everyone IMO. Apple has been a bit stagnant over the last few years IMO.

Also, I believe the whole Apple vs Android war is well beyond these little patent battles. In fact it's reached the point where Apple is now copying Android in order to keep iOS fresh.

 

[ghost of jobs]

Again, I can only pledge that I will never purchase a Samsung branded product for the rest of my life! I can't avoid products with internal samsung parts, but I can avoid all outer branded products.

Have you any idea how juvenile this sounds... Samsung didn't sleep with your sister.. Apple doesn't care one jot for you as an individual, so why take it so personal?..

 

[TWSS37]

I don't think you do. Samsung is one of just a handful of chaebols that run South Korea. Where the USA seems mostly corporate-controlled these days when you analyze politicians' activities, Korea is actually controlled by these conglomerate companies. Samsung makes almost every product you can imagine for Korea, not just "gadgets". Housing, electronics, industrial, etc.

Guess which is the biggest chaebol for many years, now.

I recently caught Chaebol on April Fools Day using Google Maps!

 

[PacificBeach]

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Samsung yesterday confirmed it will challenge the $119.6 million verdict in the second Apple versus Samsung patent infringement trial, claiming the decision was "unsupported by evidence." According to Bloomberg, Samsung will ask Judge Lucy Koh to reduce the damages to zero and will follow with an appeal if this initial request is denied.

Image​

After several days of deliberations and weeks of testimony, the jury found that Samsung willfully infringed on three of the five Apple patents involved in the lawsuit and ordered the company to pay $119.6 million, a figure well below Apple's requested $2 billion. Speaking after the verdict, jury foreman Thomas Dunham said the compensation was "fair and just" based on the evidence presented at the trial (via Re/code). Dunham, who is familiar with the patent system from his work at IBM, hinted that Apple should pursue Google because the Android operating system is the real target in this case, an argument that Samsung's lawyers used during the trial (via The Wall Street Journal). Though Samsung was the defendant, Google played a role in the case as it was part of a larger "holy war" against Android instigated by Steve Jobs following Android's debut Google also sent VP of engineering Hiroshi Lockheimer to testify on behalf of Samsung and agreed to offer partial legal protection to Samsung in case of an Apple win.

While Dunham suggests that Google should be Apple's real target in the ongoing litigation, jurors claim that Google's part in the trial was not a factor when they were deciding on the merit of the infringement claims. It also did not influence the amount of damages ultimately awarded to Apple.

Article Link: Samsung to Appeal $119M Patent Verdict as Foreman Says Apple Should Target Google Instead

Apple don't "want it" with Google. Googles pockets are deep, and google has a better corporate business model . The world could survive without Apple but everyone depends and needs Google
Google could damage apple if they wanted too.
Couple ways:
imagine if google started Restricting youtube, google search, google maps and etc from all ios devices.

 

[ghost of jobs]

Why ignore it? The concepts were absolutely copied from Android (or others?). Nothing shameful about it. But that's not the same as patent infringement.

So your saying its fine to copy Google's I.P. only because it's part of the AOSP... Otherwise it's wrong.. Google could have patented but they give it away for free so its ok.. talk.about double standards..

 

[brendu]

What's your thoughts on control centre and thw lovely pull down notification bar?...or shall we.just ignore the fact that they are shamefully copied from android/Samsung...

Copied from android. Not copied from Samsung. I also like that Apple copied the cards multitasking from webOS. There is a difference between copying unpatented pieces of software (which all companies have the right to do if it is legal and enhances their user experience) versus making your business strategy to "be more like" another company by shamelessly copying as much as you can and then purposefully abusing the court system to prevent anything from happening soon enough to matter.

----------

Apple don't "want it" with Google. Googles pockets are deep, and google has a better corporate business model . The world could survive without Apple but everyone depends and needs Google
Google could damage apple if they wanted too.
Couple ways:
imagine if google started Restricting youtube, google search, google maps and etc from all ios devices.

Then google would lose a whole lot of money. Also, Google's pockets aren't any bigger than samsung's as far as lawsuits are concerned. Google can't pay for better lawyers than Samsung could.

----------

So your saying its fine to copy Google's I.P. only because it's part of the AOSP... Otherwise it's wrong.. Google could have patented but they give it away for free so its ok.. talk.about double standards..

I'm not sure android being open source means it doesn't involve patented technology. I would imaging google has many patents pertaining to android and that any Apple may have copied are being licensed properly otherwise google would have reason to sue Apple. Conversely, if being open source means that nothing in android is patented then google has no reason to be the slightest but upset if others copy their software. Apple and many other companies do care about having their IP used without permission and have every right to sue if they feel it has been unlawfully copied. I don't see how that is a double standard.

 

[aperry]

Copied from android. Not copied from Samsung. I also like that Apple copied the cards multitasking from webOS. There is a difference between copying unpatented pieces of software (which all companies have the right to do if it is legal and enhances their user experience) versus making your business strategy to "be more like" another company by shamelessly copying as much as you can and then purposefully abusing the court system to prevent anything from happening soon enough to matter.

There's definitely a legal difference. But otherwise they're both pretty similar especially from the consumer perspective so who cares? Lazy companies stealing from each other. One breaks the law and essentially ends up paying a licensing penalty. The other doesn't because the technology was donated to the world. Both displaying lack of innovation.

 

[PacificBeach]

Galaxy Nexus, an smartphone totally customized by Samsung

No it was not it was stock android ice cream sandwich. Google it

 

[Oletros]

No it was not it was stock android ice cream sandwich. Google it

I thought that the sarcasm was evident

 

[brendu]

I thought that the sarcasm was evident

It's sad that it wasn't. Someone should invent a sarcasm font...