x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Options
    Close




Apple's thermonuclear legal strategy scores a big win

0. phoneArena 24 Aug 2012, 17:00 posted on

The verdict is in, and Apple racked up more than $1 billion in damages against Samsung, although it failed to protect the design of the iPad/iPad 2, and probably won't be able to get injunctions against as many devices as it had hoped...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:37 1

73. mas11 (Posts: 1030; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


Well I guess my next phone will be a WP since Android will soon be banned.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:50 5

92. Scott_H (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Oct 2011)


Not likely. It probably won't even cause Samsung to not be the number one smartphone vendor this year. It'll just hurt their cash on hand a bit.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:55 6

100. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


there is no bans on the SGS2 or SGS3, just some SGS1 variants.. not a big sales hit.

The ruling was against samsung copying the look of the device, and with older versions of touchwiz. Nothing about this case has a real effect on Android in general since some of the big generic patents apple had didnt get a win.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 23:43

206. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5876; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


How is it going to hurt Sammy's cash on hand? They aren't going to write a check to Apple. There may be an appeal bond, but that doesn't go to Apple (it sits in an escrow account that is controlled by the court). I doubt if they have to show the appeal bond on their books.

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 02:30

216. ardent1 (Posts: 1997; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


Samsung has already spent hundreds of millions in the legal sinkhole and will continue to spend hundreds of millions.

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 08:50

235. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


with how much apple just spent to get possible injunctions on the SGS1 I'd say its all a sink hole. Their billion dollar reward will most likely be reduced a good bit on appeal. Want to have a bet on it? :)

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:03 2

111. Non_Sequitur (Posts: 1111; Member since: 16 Mar 2012)


I can see why some people would mistake old versions of Touchwiz with iOS, but not stock Android. Stock Android, new Touchwiz, Blur, LG's skin, Sense, and others will be perfectly fine, don't you worry.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:20 3

129. protozeloz (Posts: 5378; Member since: 16 Sep 2010)


I would get a dollar for every time I heard android will be banned because of this I'd be a millionaire.

1. these phones are out of commission's and replaced with better ones
2. Samsung made a poor defense

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:39 2

76. Jay_F (Posts: 236; Member since: 29 Nov 2011)


And all the butthurting commences. Everyone is going to cry and make dumb statements about people being paid off and this that and the other being unfair. The judgement is plain and simple, no matter what the biased fandroids say, a 12 person "unbiased" jury found Samsung guilty, not the judge, so no matter how much you hate Judge Koh, she didn't find Samsung guilty, the majority of the jury did.

There's going to be a nice lengthy appeals process to go through anyways which is dumb. They could just end it with this judgement and forego more of these endless legal battles and continue making phones but nope, that's the smart way out.

1 billion is chump change for Samsung. They will recover and continue to make great phones and dominate the market alongside Apple. The verdict changes nothing.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:48 4

88. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Samsung had evidence that clearly showed Apple was in the wrong a few times in the case and Judge Koh threw it out the window. Still think it's fair?

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:50 2

93. Jay_F (Posts: 236; Member since: 29 Nov 2011)


That would depend on the evidence and it's validity. Is it referenced/posted somewhere for public view?

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:54 2

98. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


i believe he is talking about the F700 and a few others that the jury was not allowed to see. I'd like to know how they came to the conclusion of Apple's pinch to zoom and others not being invalidated by samsungs counter evidence. I thought that part was a near slam dunk.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:01 3

104. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


LG Prada, Samsung's chart on its phones before/after iPhone, and F700. How the hell did that managed to be thrown out of the court?

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:14 1

120. sithman (banned) (Posts: 299; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


I believe apple won

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:19 1

127. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


just stop replying with your nonsense, troll.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:31 2

142. sithman (banned) (Posts: 299; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Whaaaa whaaaa whaaaaa just stop replying with your nonsense troll

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:28

137. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


I guess you never read comment 88.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 23:45 1

208. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5876; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


Do you also believe the moon is made of cheese? What about Santa? After all, you admitted you are only 1 1/2 years old.

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 00:07 1

210. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


He's trolling hella hard. Hope he gets a paid vacation from PA.

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 00:36 2

211. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5876; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


The harder they troll, the worse it hurts when things don't turn out the way they want. Apple did not win against the GS III. The GS III sales will not be subject to a sales ban. The rest of the Sammy products that were found to be infringing can either be fitted with revised software that does not infringe or they have already been sun-setted, so the only thing that is being fought over is whether Sammy has to write Apple a check with 9 zeros after the 1. And that won't be a-happening for a while.

Net-net, sith is behaving as any 1 1/2 year old does....

Say there sith - do you know the definition of a pyrrhic victory? 'Cause that is what it is going to be for Apple after the appeals process is done with.

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 08:53

236. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


The only phones that were found to be stepping on apple's "design" toes were SGS1 variants. That's not going to hurt sammy a whole lot since the bulk of their sales are now SGS2 and SGS3 variants.

My highest hope for the verdict is that it makes sammy push out an android 4.0/4.1 update while they are changing the infringing software.. i know thats like a 1 in 100000 chance, but hey. lol

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 20:15 1

163. tedkord (Posts: 4981; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


It was a 9 person jury.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:41 1

78. The_Innovation (Posts: 563; Member since: 18 Jul 2012)


It's gonna be the end of the world.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:41 4

79. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 823; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)


Part of me is not at all suprised, the 1st Galaxy S and its variants were clear copies, mix that with Samsung's lawyers poor preparation, it was a home run for Apple, really.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:33 2

147. sithman (banned) (Posts: 299; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Apple was Jordan Samsung was everyone he dunked on.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:43 2

80. techguy22 (Posts: 227; Member since: 09 Aug 2012)


US company VS Korean company who did you think would win ???
im not really surprised here.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:46 4

85. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Not surprised Apple won. They have $600 billion dollars and they want more? Apple is the worst tech company in the world. The mobile industry was fine before the iPhone came out.... Then all of a sudden, they start banning things and taking manufacturers to court for things they stole in the first place.

Samsung better file an appeal soon because this was the most lop sided case I've ever seen in my life.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:51

94. ncv144 (Posts: 126; Member since: 04 May 2012)


rooting my gtab8.9 right now, I think its time for appeals or something (not too familiar with us legal system)

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:53 2

96. ap1989 (Posts: 145; Member since: 12 Oct 2011)


samsung can make this money back in no time just hack up the price on manufacturing apples processors

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:01 5

107. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


One word: contract.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:56 1

101. rob5150 (Posts: 120; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


will head to appeals court. sammy didnt get a fair trial. its very documented. sammys lawyers were not well prepared, but neither was the judge.

it will be interesting to see if samsung can sue lawfirm for malpractice and recoup some of there losses.

interesting how the jury was able to go through the hundreds of points during deliberations.
in such short time.
looks to me that they were prejudiced before the trial was given to them

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 18:58 3

102. ekia007 (Posts: 61; Member since: 27 Feb 2012)


wtf , 1 billion, it is too much. are you smoking crack Judge Koh?

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:01

106. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1619; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


So they win 1 billion or w.e but how much did they SPEND

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:03 2

110. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Wouldn't be surprised if it was over $2 billion. The lawyers really are the ones that really won.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:05

112. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)


Yes in fight between two cats it was the monkey who made /got everything :)

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:03 1

108. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)


Prior art argument held ground in GOOG vs Oracle case i think and surprising it isn't so in this case. So looks like a head on between GOOG and Apple is needed for a even fight.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:11 2

115. Fuego84 (Posts: 284; Member since: 13 May 2012)


Well I'm staying away from IOS devices for life it's my own personal boycott of evil, greedy companies and less advance technological devices.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:13 4

118. sithman (banned) (Posts: 299; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


An apple a day keeps the Samsung away lol

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:14 2

119. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


its not over, there was some issues with the jury's form. They charged samsung for phones they found didnt infringe on anything. jurors are told to go back and fix their mistakes.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:15

123. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


it doesnt change the verdicts but it does slightly change the fine.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 20:09 3

160. sithman (banned) (Posts: 299; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Dude get off PA. It's over dude bottom of the 9th and apple just hit a walk off grand salami.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 23:48

209. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5876; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


The verdict could be easily changed on appeal. There could be a new trial ordered and this whole thing starts all over. Let the Apple fans have their moment of gloating, 'cause they are going have to vomit in their hands over the result in Google/Motorola going after Apple.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:14 1

121. e.wvu (unregistered)


Okay, I will give Apple the first gen of the Galaxy S. But saying that the GSII copied the iPhone? How would the GSII ruin the sales of the iPhone and how does it resemble the iPhone?

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:15 1

124. fwinst (Posts: 63; Member since: 08 May 2010)


Funny how Apple wins a big judgement in a courtroom
30 minutes away from their HQ. Not saying that Samsung hasn't done a bit of copying. Perhaps Samsung should have purchased Palm when they had a chance. I don't think Apple would have been as interested in taking those patents to court. Apple has done their fair share of copying.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:16 3

125. skymitch89 (Posts: 1082; Member since: 05 Nov 2010)


I don't think that double-tap and pich-to-zoom should be something that Apple has rule and a patent over. It's not just a device manufacturer that puts that in, it's part of the mobile OS, and practally all mobile OSs use either/both ways to zoom.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:22 1

130. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


@Scott

Its still not over. Both Apple and Samsung are bickering over the jury's findings and paperwork. Now samsung is going after the jury claiming "patent exhaustion" on one of their patents when one of the prereqs for "patent exhaustion" is that apple had to be found to be infringing.. which they weren't.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:23 1

132. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


looks like Koh might be siding with Samsung on this one.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:27 1

135. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


or... maybe not.. now all of a sudden she seems to like apple's rebuttal after refusing it. hmmm...

the jury came back and asked for directions on the form they messed up on.

They can fly through 700 questions, but yet still need help with a basic "if the company didnt do X, then they cant be held accountable for X" .... Yea.. that is kind of... scary.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:59 1

155. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


the jury is reversing some decisions and changing dollar amounts...

not a big deal, now its down to 1.049 billion instead of 1.05 billion.

However on the patent exhaustion argument, not surprisingly Koh has changed her mind and is now siding with Apple. Apparently, she said because it was apple's idea to have the "the phone must infringe to find the patent exhausted" clause in the paperwork, they just dont need to be held to it. I really dont understand that one. No seriously... what???

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 20:05 1

157. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


injunction hearings wont start till late september at the earliest.

well, that gives samsung plenty of time to do some updates. Maybe we will get official android 4.0/4.1 on the SGS1 now, eh? lol. what a dream.. what a dream.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 20:12 1

162. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


samsung and apple are now arguing over infringement/banning/pay out court date timelines. Apple is continuing to go for the jugular and demanding a quicker date.
They dont care about the money, they want to twist samsung's arm a little further.

Koh just told apple to back off saying shed give as much time as she could to samsung, even though samsung doesnt think 2-3 weeks is enough time to sort through everything. Koh doesnt want to give sammy more time than that.. ooh the drama..

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 20:16 1

164. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


the date for the hearing is Sept 20th. Again Koh has set page limits for both sides to keep them from drowning her in junk.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 20:42 1

169. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


samsung's final statement to Koh before leaving was "This isnt over"

cue ominous music!

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 21:04 1

181. Jay_F (Posts: 236; Member since: 29 Nov 2011)


oooh I'm sure she's shaking in her robes.

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 11:27

247. Tre-Nitty (Posts: 460; Member since: 16 Nov 2010)


You need yourself a girl mate! Your acting as if you are heavily invested in this case! Stop being so loyal and you'd probably not be so hurt about a decision that has affect on you whatsoever!

posted on 25 Aug 2012, 13:02

249. remixfa (Posts: 13942; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


actually, I was just play calling what was going on after PA stopped updating the announcements. The court was not adjourned and there was still plenty going on between both sides and the jury.

Whos being loyal to what? I love how I keep getting accused of all this crap, simply for reposting the play by play of what actually happened from TheVerge's live feed from the court.

Thanks, I'll tell my wife I need another girl. I bet that goes over well. :)

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:28 1

136. rob5150 (Posts: 120; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


so, when apple comes out with their longer thinner iphone5 cant they be sued for copying the s3?

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:32 1

145. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)


Well not if they have the PATENT to "Copy and Steal" :D

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:32 1

146. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8714; Member since: 14 May 2012)


I hope they get sued for that and 4G patents.

posted on 24 Aug 2012, 19:28 1

138. DechyX (Posts: 114; Member since: 16 May 2011)


Apple can sue the whole tech world, eventually their greed and lack of innovation will catch up to them and they'll be overtaken by Android and Windows. Is it so hard to comprehend that without competition there can be no innovation and everything just remains plain and vanilla.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories