Apple triumphs over Samsung, awarded over $1 billion damages

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

Both of which are based on Sony Centre, which I'm sure in turn can trace its roots back even further.

---

I Have Never seen a Sony centre look like an Apple store.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BleAivano

so you're saying (like apple) that Apple have an exclusive right to use a black rectangular phone with rounded corners?
Persoanlly i am of the opinion that you cannot take a patent or "mönsterskydd" of a basic shape.

well i think Apple have to as well since they hardly have invented anything of what they are using, they merely have taken
patents of existing technology and thus claiming that they have devloped or invented it.

Samsung have not done more rip offs then what apple have done.

---

I think you have to ask, Would Samsung have created a rectangular phone with rounded corners if it wasnt for the Iphone, plus its not only that, its pinch to zoom and the way certain operations work compared to Samsung pre Iphone.

Also, as far as i am aware Apple are not saying they invented anything, just the look of the Samsung phones and the way they imitate various aspects of the IPhone,as mentioned above.

How would you feel if you wrote a song, which didnt sell, and then someone else recorded it and had a huge hit, but didnt share any of the money they earned from it or even aknowledged you are the origianl writer. Different situation but same concept.

Where there a hit theres a writ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

. . . . . .
they will be fine until they will then upgrade to a newer and even better Samsung product for an affordable price.

---

That would be the ideal scenario and one that I am looking forward to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuartf12007

I think you have to ask, Would Samsung have created a rectangular phone with rounded corners if it wasnt for the Iphone, plus its not only that, its pinch to zoom and the way certain operations work compared to Samsung pre Iphone.

---

No way... I'm pretty sure they would have made round or triangular phones if it wasn't for the iPhone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

But there is no doubt whatsoever that the iPhone had a massive influence in the direction smartphones went after 2007. Samsung and HTC produce phones very similar to the iPhone aesthetically and its obvious they have taken an influence from Apple. That's natural and nothing to be ashamed of as its a winning combination. Of course rectangular phones have been around for years, but single button displays, toolbar layouts, and app screens have all appeared thanks to Apple.

---

Thanks God there wasn't this legal non-sense going on when they invented the wheel.

It turns out that the jury foreman was an engineer and several people on the jury had engineering or legal backgrounds. The decision process they went through was pretty impressive. And according to the foreman, one of the key, deciding factors in reaching this verdict was a memo from Google to Samsung. In the memo, Google advised Samsung not to pursue smartphone designs which mimicked or copied iPhone features or design cues. It looked really bad for Samsung's Android partner to put a warning like that in writing. And because the jury determined that Samsung's patent violations were willful, the judge may decide to triple the damages to $3 billion+.

As for talk of any sort of meaningful backlash against Apple, I've not read anything that suggests that is a risk to Apple, its products or the stock. Samsung, on the other hand, does seem to be experiencing a backlash of sorts, as its stock has lost around $12 billion today. Part of that is because investors are factoring in the damage done to Samsung's brand in the wake of a decision that suggests willful dishonesty. Especially for Asian companies, that is particularly damaging - think Olympus.

My guess: Samsung places a call to Apple and tries to work out a cross-licensing deal ASAP. Apple offered them a cross-licensing deal a couple of years ago and that would have cost Samsung about $250 million. Now they could be looking at $3 billion. It goes without saying that Samsung should have taken the first deal (which likely doesn't exist any longer). But a combination of making a licensing deal and redesigning some work-arounds should get Samsung through this.

In another legal dispute, the ITC decided that Apple didn’t violate a Motorola WiFi patent. And there are quite a few more cases and appeals to come over the next 6-12 months.


Good time to be a lawyer (ain't it always?)... :vader:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

It turns out that the jury foreman was an engineer and several people on the jury had engineering or legal backgrounds. The decision process they went through was pretty impressive.

---

Actually it seems that the decision process was anything but, with one juror being quoted as saying he'd made his mind up on the first day (never mind weighing up all that pesky evidence, eh?) and another admitting that they didn't read the instructions for how to arrive at the verdict. If Samsung so wished I'm sure they could move for a mistrial on those two admissions alone, but in all honesty they'll probably move on ($1 billion is almost chicken feed to them) and carry on. I reckon this whole affair has actually been quite good publicity for them, putting their phones and tablets in the mainstream media.

PS have a read of this article if you want examples of flawed and sloppy process:
Groklaw - Jury in Apple v. Samsung Goofed, Damages Reduced -- Uh Oh. What's Wrong With this Picture? ~pj Updated 4Xs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Me neither. The Sony Centre in Cardiff is just floor to ceiling Bravia TV's, a Playstation demo in the middle of the store and laptop displays along the side. Its been like that for years and generally looks like any other electronics retailer to me. The Apple store is laid out with very clean surfaces, plenty of space, and multiple products per section displaying different aspects of each device. The staff (unlike Sony) are friendly and knowledgeable and keen to assist. I tried to buy a Sony TV back in 2006 from the Sony Centre and had a very poor experience where not only would they not price match, but I got the impression I was disturbing the staff from watching a DVD! It hasn't put me off buying Sony products (I'm not that shallow), but I wouldn't deal with them direct again. One thing I like about the Apple store is the use of iPads as product labels and info points. Its a simple touch but very affective and encourages you to use the products for simple applications. Apple certainly know how to market their goods and make the experience of buying them a pleasure. That may or may not be a positive for all of you, but it impressed me.

---

To think I could have had a land phone with a seperate earpiece and a microphone and a key pad arranged in a diamond that I had to twist a knob for each number instead. Who copied the idea for a round steering wheel in an automobile? I'd much prefer to reach over ht top of my windscreen with a towel and clean my glass whilst driving....

Personally, I hate my iphone. I like the andriod OS and included features far more. If my wife hadn't stuck me with a two year contract on the the ipods she insisted on, I'd still have my original andriod phone which I found superior to the iphone in everything but playing music.. which I could have continued to use my ipod for. Now as for the actual hardware, aside from the danged standard ipod connector, which I again prefer the standardized use of micro USB in andriod phones, If I could run Android on a iphone I'd be happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

Actually it seems that the decision process was anything but, with one juror being quoted as saying he'd made his mind up on the first day (never mind weighing up all that pesky evidence, eh?) and another admitting that they didn't read the instructions for how to arrive at the verdict. If Samsung so wished I'm sure they could move for a mistrial on those two admissions alone, but in all honesty they'll probably move on ($1 billion is almost chicken feed to them) and carry on. I reckon this whole affair has actually been quite good publicity for them, putting their phones and tablets in the mainstream media.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

PS have a read of this article if you want examples of flawed and sloppy process:
Groklaw - Jury in Apple v. Samsung Goofed, Damages Reduced -- Uh Oh. What's Wrong With this Picture? ~pj Updated 4Xs

---

Interesting finds, Dave. I based my comments on what the jury foreman (Velvin Hogan) said according in a Reuters interview:

Quote:

---

Hogan worked as an engineer for decades before he retired, and holds a patent of his own. He said jurors were able to complete their deliberations in less than three days - much faster than legal experts had predicted - because a few had engineering and legal experience, which helped with the complex issues in play.


Once they determined Apple's patents were valid, jurors evaluated every single device separately, he said.


"We didn't just go into a room and start pitching cards into a hat," he said.


At one point during the second day of deliberations, jurors turned off the lights in the room to settle a debate about the potential influence screen brightness might have on Apple's graphics interface. Their verdict: Apple's designs were unique.


"All of us feel we were fair, that we can stand by our verdict and that we have a clear conscience in that we were totally not biased one way or another," Hogan said.

---

To be honest, I doubt that Samsung is welcoming the publicity they're getting from this decision. Throwing the CEO off of a roof would also get them some publicity (and the Board of Directors might be considering that about now), but I doubt they'd welcome the publicity from that either.

Samsung has already announced that they will appeal the decision, and one unnamed Samsung executive has claimed that they'll go as far as the U.S. Supreme Court, if need be. This will likely drag on for years unless they make that cross-licensing deal with Apple and/or just roll over and pay the money (which I don't think is likely). This has also caused some very bad blood between Samsung and Google, as the decision may affect other Android device makers, which in turn affects Google. Samsung is not mortally wounded by any stretch. But this was a very painful decision for them, as the equity markets have demonstrated. If anyone really thought Samsung would benefit from this, the stock would have traded up, not gap-down from the open in Asia.