Those two things are so disparate I'd be interested to hear how you conflated the two.
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.
Samsung to Pay Apple $548 Million Settlement in Five-Year Old Patent Trial
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If they wanted to, Apple has enough capital, in theory, to finance a bank with about $1.5 trillion in assets (slightly smaller than JP Morgan or Bank of America).
Samsung were blatant and should pay compensation. Though everyone is borrowing from someone to a degree, and that includes Apple, which in turn sues and get sued. It's usually those with the best lawyers and most money that get to abuse the system the most.
Well. One company blatantly rips off another, and creates the main android rival, which many on here call crap cheap android phones.
Punishment 500 to go the naughty infringer
BEATS creates cheap crap plastic headphones for a premium price
Apples pays $3 billion.
I'm just having a laugh at Apple getting so little for getting copied and paying so much for so little
I believe Apple got screwed both ways
and think the penalty is a joke....well this whole case, will not be surprised if Samsung pays very little of the $500 million, or given enough time the legal fees will surpass the settlement figure at this rate...I'm in a bar, at and airport having a beer.... Bored ...
Samsung make me sick, as a company. They're despicable and corrupt. I'm sure Apple have 'copied' people in the past, but the lengths Samsung went to to imitate Apple and its products was quite something. I understand they've gotten better of late and actually started doing things themselves.
What's worse is that my local shopping centre is opening a Samsung store. Why should I be subjected to such hooliganism!?
Didn't Apple ask something similar for their ebook case -- Apple refused to pay unless all appeals are exhausted.
This IMO is far from over. But the smartphone war is pretty much over. No company that fails to win in IP war can survive this industry. Now it's between Apple and the Chinese.
$548 million in the bank for 5 more years waiting on a verdict is quite a bit of interest. I think that in business there's never really too much money.
Well. One company blatantly rips off another, and creates the main android rival, which many on here call crap cheap android phones.
Punishment 500 to go the naughty infringer
BEATS creates cheap crap plastic headphones for a premium price
Apples pays $3 billion.
I'm just having a laugh at Apple getting so little for getting copied and paying so much for so little
I believe Apple got screwed both ways
I'm in a bar, at and airport having a beer.... Bored ...
I don't think Apple is getting screwed over. Most of Apple's patents are invalidated all over the world and Apple hometown court judge and jury are the only ones siding with Apple. To make things even more laughable, now Samsung also has to pay for infringements on patents that are invalidated.
In another word, Apple had no chance in neutral juridiction, but their legal strategy worked only because Samsung is a foreign company fighting in Apple's home court.
Last edited:
Not really. Dyson had to drop the lawsuit after Samsung brought prior art to invalidate Dyson's patent. Samsung sued Dyson for reputation damage in South Korea. Also, remember, Apple is the most named defendant in IP lawsuits.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/17/5418616/samsung-sues-dyson-following-intolerable-copycat-claims
sounds like you read the VanityFair's article on Samsung, written by Apple's lawyers at MoFo (Morrison Foerster) -- who also represented Pioneer in the Eastern District of Texas.
Last I checked, there are over 90 pending patent lawsuits against Apple. Considering both companies revenue and range of products and their impact, it's not too difficult to see why they attract so many litigations.
Here we go...this is where it gets ridiculous. Samsung is the absolute worst at this. There are news articles going back 30 years describing how Samsung did this within Korea, to Japan, then eventually in the US. Somewhat not mysteriously, many of these articles have disappeared online over the past 5-10 years...including a scathing article from the LA Times in 1992 that described Samsung as a company culture of copy and deceit. Their CEO's have been indicted for tax evasion, convicted of fraud, and conspiracy to commit the murder of a Korean reporter who was exposing them. Read up on how shortly after the Apple suit, some police showed up at the Samsung HQ for completely unrelated reasons, but the company locked the doors and didn't let them in for 45 minutes. After the cops got in, they watched surveillance video of the employees quickly shredding documents and wiping PC's.
No, all tech companies are not like this.
That was the absolute worst part of this, the trade dress theft. I don't care so much for patents, it's when a company starts copying the shape and function of your charging adapters, your icon art, making the boxes look similar to sell on networks where people think an Omnia 2 is "just as good" as an iPhone 3G. The type of deception you do not see successful tech companies resort to.
Well, at the end of the day, Samsung was found to have infringed just a couple of frivolous patent claims that are now partly invalidated. They fought many battles all over the world, but the only one who sided with Apple was Apple's own home court in SJ. So I think it's time to ask whether Apple's claims were in fact meritorious at all. IMO, Apple's clever lawyering and jury's bias (it seems) worked in Apple's favor, but it would have been ridiculous for Samsung just to sit back and take Apple's abuse.
There is one remaining piece with Apple's design claims and damage award ("entire profit") and that has wide support from many US based companies, industries and the legal community/academia. Should Samsung decide to pursue this to the end, I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS will hear it and reverse the lower courts' ruling.
Of course Apple is the most named defendant. Patent trolls go where the money is.
You're pretty sure that they will reverse the ruling? Are you that arrogant? I'm pretty sure that there's a reason this is going to higher courts and that is because it's a delicate matter...one that you aren't anywhere near qualified to answer.
Ok, do you work for Samsung? Is your job to try and smooth things out and make everything look equal? Either you've had a lot of Kool-Aid or you are really that blind, can't tell yet.
Can I ask your view on the iPad pro? When we are told it's a laptop replacement , and it's borrowed a few ideas from the surface implementation .
Having been in this industry for almost 2 decades, I would say it's fairly business as usual. In most developing/under-developed countries, you really need to pay their local politicians to play there -- and I could totally understand why Pfizer did what they did in China. It's not uncommon to hear companies funneling funds into slush funds, evading tax, etc, to work around the local corrupt political system and South Korea is no exception.
That being said, South Korea prosecutors have relentlessly attacked Samsung and convicted the CEO on many accounts in the past. Now, let's look at how it's normally handled in the US -- remember Apple's option-backdating scandal? Steve Jobs walked away scott free, even when his own CFO testified against him. Anderson got all the blame and had to pay a huge lumpsum to settle. The gov't REFUSED to charge Jobs with any wrongdoing. Nobody in US goes to jail for any wrongdoing -- they just pay up settlement and everything is business as usual again. So, in that sense, the comparison is very flawed; certainly not the one presented by the VanityFair's article, written by Apple's own lawyers at MoFo
Last edited:
Do you work for Apple? Is it your job to try and make everything one sided? if so, you are winning.
Sure, I'm no lawyer, but if you've been following the lawsuit between the two companies, this is no brainer. The issues are actually pretty clear (if you've been reading their filings) and why it needs to be heard and clarified by the SCOTUS. It remains to be seen which legal theory would eventually prevail, and, whether other public interest factors (ie, pseudo "protection of domestic industries") would play a greater role here, in which case, they won't reverse the lower court's ruling.
I'm with the legal community and most US companies who don't want to see this insane ruling stand.
Last edited:
First of all, Microsoft and Apple have a cross-licensing arrangement on many patents. Apple has a patent on the Smart Cover that Microsoft has licensed. The latter added some patents on the keyboard that Apple may have licensed. For all the public bluster the two companies are really allied with each other against Google more than they compete against each other.
Also, unlike the Surface, the iPad deliberately does NOT run a desktop OS, nor has Apple indicated that they will. Apple hasn't copied the form of the Surface Pen, nor does their keyboard attach to the iPad Pro the same way the Surface Keyboard does to the Surface. Samsung went so far as to copy the look and feel of the charging port. Ever since the lawsuit was filed, they have made their designs a bit more distinctive (and its companies like Xiaomi who do more of the blatant copying these days, as China's IP laws in general are weak).