Completely off topic, but it's days like these that I truly miss Groklaw...
Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
41–50 of 69 posts
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#42I seriously can't believe how much money Apple has been able to troll out of those rounded corners and that end-of-list overscroll effect. And now, to top it off, iOS 7 is built on the holo-principles of Android. It's almost like Apple is doing it merely to taunt its foreign competitors, saying very, very clearly: "Sorry guys. I'm untouchable". Utterly disgusting. At least their attempts to outright ban products have…
At this point, for most people watching this from outside of the US, it looks like protectionism racket disguised as a legal verdict. Samsung is eating Apple's lunch and the US is trying to stop that. The US gov keeps pushing for more free market worldwide (which is great), except that when one of its industries or great companies is in danger because of international competition, protectionism is the way. How can th…
It's not protectionism, but rather an attempt to enforce particular rules of the game in the face of changing economic profiles.
In a nutshell, American IP policy is predicated on the understanding that the production of IP is America's competitive advantage. The U.S. can't compete with asian countries for low-cost manufacturing, but still dominates when it comes to software, design, etc. There is a reason phones designed and built in China run software written in California.
Thus, the U.S. wants to enforce rules that treat design as a protectable asset. The reasoning is this: if Apple spends a bunch of money coming up with a really effective design, Samsung shouldn't just be able to get the benefit of that work for free. It's the mirror of the physical property rules which ensure that if Samsung invests a bunch of money in some new manufacturing facility, Apple can't just get the benefit of that work for free.
I think such suits will become more common as developed economies keep transitioning away from manufacturing. The law quite easily protects the output of China's industrial production (physical things). It's not as effective in protecting the output of America's industries (content, designs).
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#43I seriously can't believe how much money Apple has been able to troll out of those rounded corners and that end-of-list overscroll effect. And now, to top it off, iOS 7 is built on the holo-principles of Android. It's almost like Apple is doing it merely to taunt its foreign competitors, saying very, very clearly: "Sorry guys. I'm untouchable". Utterly disgusting. At least their attempts to outright ban products have…
I seriously can't believe that there is an entire sub-culture of people that are still trollololing about 'rounded corners' without understanding the context. Design Patents are Different than Technology Patents.
In sort of the way chemical weapons are different from nuclear weapons?
Indeed, they're quite different, yet the world would still be a better place without them.
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#44It's unbelievable how much money Apple is extorting from other companies for a simple UI technique. Disgusting.
But let's be honest, the value of bouncy scroll - as in the cost for an independent invention to come up with something equally good would have been hundreds of millions, so at least it's reasonable, even if it's unethical.
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#45I can't tell if this was an out of line assessment of the jury selection, or an actual description of what happened during deliberation...
The six-woman, two-man jury deliberated for part of three days before returning its verdict. During that time, the jury requested additional paper and pens and better lunch, as well as a copy of the sketches of them done by a courtroom artist.
As for the lawyers in the class; if a jury starts showing signs that they're overall uninterested in the trial (i.e.: asking for their courtroom portraits), what can litigators do to combat this? Is the only course to appeal for the case to be dismissed? Does it get retried if the jury is found to be negligent?
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#46I feel sorry for Samsung. I don't know how anyone can buy an Apple product without feeling ashamed anymore. Yes, Samsung made products that looked kind of similar to Apple ones. Big whoop. Competition over litigation, I say.
[deleted]
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this point, for most people watching this from outside of the US, it looks like protectionism racket disguised as a legal verdict. Samsung is eating Apple's lunch and the US is trying to stop that. The US gov keeps pushing for more free market worldwide (which is great), except that when one of its industries or great companies is in danger because of international competition, protectionism is the way. How can th…
How can you be taken seriously when you post such illogical dribble ? To imply that US judges have been 'bought off' by Apple or by the US government is a huge claim to make that deserves substantiation.
Doesn't have to be the judge. Did you read interviews from members of the jury? They were like "yeah, apple is awesome and even though there were prior art, it was on different device so yeah, apple is awesome and all their claims are valid, let's make samsung pay a billion dollar".
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#48I seriously can't believe how much money Apple has been able to troll out of those rounded corners and that end-of-list overscroll effect. And now, to top it off, iOS 7 is built on the holo-principles of Android. It's almost like Apple is doing it merely to taunt its foreign competitors, saying very, very clearly: "Sorry guys. I'm untouchable". Utterly disgusting. At least their attempts to outright ban products have…
Yeah, it's not like they went screen by screen through the iPhone and said 'hey, we need to do what they're doing...' http://www.scribd.com/doc/102317767/Samsung-Relative-Evaluat...
Apple got a presidential pardon for its IP transgressions vis-à-vis Samsung. That's what makes this seem unfair.
http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/08032013%20Letter_1....
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the original amount was cut to $600 million so the total would be $890 million. I don't think Apple is too concerned about the size of the judgement either way. EDIT: I stand corrected!
The first judgement was cut to $639mm [1] Q: How much money is this retrial about? A: It's about a replacement amount for a $410 million portion of the August 2012 $1.049 billion verdict. The replacement amount could be more or less than the original one. Apple will be awarded (subject to an appeal) $639 million plus the replacement amount. __ 1: http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/11/the-truth-is-neither-cour...
FOSSpatents is not a legitimate source of news on patent cases. The writer was revealed to be a paid shill available to the highest bidder during the Google v. Oracle trial when the judge forced Oracle to admit supporting his site as a false front.
Re: Jury: Samsung Owes Apple Another $290 Million
#50I miss Groklaw. The site owner used to recruit volunteers from the readers to go to the courtroom and write up accounts of the proceedings every day. It was more up to date and informative than the supposedly professional media outlets.