1. You want that $100.00 in your pocket or an Amazon Fire TV don't you? Well here's the deal. With our new updated look we are in desperate need of an updated logo. The 'old' one has certainly served us well, but it's time. Find all the details here: bit.ly/1q0k6Wa
  2. DroidForums.net is currently undergoing a major software upgrade. If you are experiencing any problems logging in please: Contact Us

Apple v Samsung Epilogue; Real Impact of Case $12B ; Verdict Likely to be Overturned

Discussion in 'Android News' started by dgstorm, Aug 28, 2012.

  1. dgstorm
    Offline

    dgstorm Editor in Chief Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Messages:
    6,824
    Likes Received:
    1,165
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    [​IMG]

    We have an Epilogue to the Apple versus Samsung case. This culling of info includes some very interesting "side-plot" details, one of which may just segue into a sequel in which Samsung could still turn things around. Here's the skinny, with our usual breakdown summary style,

    First, the real impact of this case for Samsung was not the $1 Billion dollar judgement, nor the possibility of "Trebled Damages" jumping that verdict up to $3 Billion (because of willful infringement). You might initially think that the real impact of this case is that 8 Samsung devices are likely to be banned by the U.S. court. This includes devices like the Galaxy S II, which is still a hot seller in the U.S. However, those won't really be a big deal to Samsung either. In fact, Samsung has already made a statement that they are committed to their consumers in the U.S. and they will develop workaround solutions to all the devices they still sell here. (Source: BGR)

    The real impact of this case has already been felt by Samsung, and it was simply a ripple effect caused by investors getting spooked by the results of the case. After the verdict, a pretty sizable chunk of investors dumped 7.5% off of Samsung's stock price. This amounted to shaving off $12 Billion dollars of Samsung's market worth. Ouch! And, this was all while Apple's stocks soared on the news, adding $15 Billion in value to the Cupertino clan. Yes, my friends, this may have been Apple's real goal all along. Now, in the long run, this will correct itself and Samsung will be back to a more reasonable valuation. Lest you forget, Samsung does make other things besides mobile devices, and they are quite successful at it too. Regardless, it's amazing to see how companies make war on one another and what the real aftermath is all about.

    The second interesting footnote to this case is that there is a high probability the verdict in this case will be overturned on appeal. One of our members, armeddroid, found a great story over on Gizmodo that sheds new light on the case. The story points out that Samsung's next move in the appeals process will likely be to have the case completely overturned because the jury didn't perform its duties properly. The article is very lengthy, but is definitely worth a read when you get the chance. I will try to summarize briefly to give you the gist of it. Basically, the jury likely rushed their verdict, they had a ton of inconsistencies in their damages award as well as their general findings, and they didn't really follow the jury instructions properly. (Obviously the article, linked above, shares much greater detail and is very eye opening.)

    The bottom line is that if the jury had really done their job properly, it would have been impossible for them to decide the case in three days. In the Gizmodo article cited above, several patent law experts indicate that it would have taken them three days just to go over the jury instructions properly. There were 700 questions!

    Additionally, Bloomberg scored an interview with the Jury foreman in the case, and many of his statements were not very encouraging of the way the jury handled the case. (You can find the video here, Bloomberg.) It looks like the jury had already decided the case before deliberations, and intended to punish Samsung with their verdict. It's important to note this, because this is completely contradictory to the jury instructions they were given:

    This will be the main point that will likely get the jury's verdict overturned. Although it seems like a big victory for Apple now, this story is far from over. I wonder what the next chapter in the saga will bring?
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2012
  2. Xander Crews
    Offline

    Xander Crews New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Louis
    Nice. Hope that happens.
    When I first heard the verdict, I thought to myself..."How long before that ridiculous verdict gets overturned?"
  3. armeddroid
    Offline

    armeddroid New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Traffic Capital
    The inconsistencies on the case that the jurors deliberated on is ridiculous.
    Then fined Samsung for devices that didnt even infringe on any of the properties e.g. Galaxy 10.1.
    The GIZMODO articles breaks it down where you wonder what exactly were they jurors doing?

    (Quote) The jury appears to have awarded damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 LTE infringing—$219,694 worth—but didn't find that it had actually infringed anything....A similar inconsistency exists for the Intercept, for which they'd awarded Apple over $2 million

    Intercept: "The jury found no direct infringement but did find inducement" for the '915 and '163 utility patents. If a device didn't infringe, it would be rather hard for a company to induce said non-existant infringement
    (Unquote)

    :icon_eek:
  4. BJPalmer85
    Offline

    BJPalmer85 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    I hope it gets overturned as well. I also hope that Apple goes away forever. I like their stuff but this **** is nuts!!

    Im surprised they havent tried to patent matter yet!!

    B
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2012
  5. ilikemoneygreen
    Offline

    ilikemoneygreen New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,579
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AZ, Superstition MTNs!
    lol, im not sure if it will be overturned. I am always rooting for samsung but its an uphill climb now. But to be honest, when i heard verdict, i wasnt wooried. Its never really over in these cases. I remember a year or two ago when a company was fined milliuons of dollars by a jury but then afterwords the judge altered the amount becuase it seemed to be to excessive. This case is long from over, i dont feel like its doomsday or anything for samsung but from now on they really have to get lucky and not mess up. Doing those two things will help out the case.
  6. armeddroid
    Offline

    armeddroid New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Traffic Capital
    The fact is that due to the ruling, Samsung lost 7.5% in investors equaling up to $12 billion? And that is likely to go up until the next hearing.
    That is some serious damage.
    Samsung stated that they were upset even tho they are confident about the next case.
    But until then, what happens?
    They lose money.
    I am glad to see that they didnt get rid of Apple as a customer on the parts they sell to them. 26% of the Iphone is running on Samsung hardware.
    This research about the inconsistencies, i am hoping holds major ground on the next hearing.
  7. ilikemoneygreen
    Offline

    ilikemoneygreen New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,579
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AZ, Superstition MTNs!
    Gizmoto though, i cant say i appreciate their articles much. They are on the lower end of my news reading todempole. (probably completly at the bottom)

    *while reading this though, they do link groklaw which i find very competent. good stuff.
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2012
  8. npro1464
    Offline

    npro1464 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    NJ
    With Samsung stock tumbling, it might be a good time to buy. You'd be betting on a successful appeal, but I have to think they would at least get that ridiculous penalty reduced.
  9. riko540
    Offline

    riko540 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NJ
    I think its funny that they had "a guy that knew about patents". They already knew the verdict they were going to give from day 1. I say that's not fair at all.
  10. MissionImprobable
    Offline

    MissionImprobable New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,889
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    0
  11. frankiez
    Offline

    frankiez New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    venice, florida
    I didnt like the way that the case was going from the start. Judge Koh has been pro-Apple from the start. Didnt seem to me that Samsung stood a chance.

    Just makes me hate APPLE even more!
  12. Rindaen
    Offline

    Rindaen New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    GA
    Samsung Lost so Apple must be paying the Judge and Jury?
    The Verdict isnt Fair?

    Samsung didnt put up much of a defense from what I have seen online.

    Maybe if Sammy didnt copy so much from Apple IOS and OSX in the Win 8
    Things would look better for them.

    Like it or Not its the patent holders responsibility to protect there Patents.
    If Apple Holds the Patent they will protect themselves, Just like Google, Motorola, HTC, LG and all the others will.
    Realise that if you patent something and you dont protect it , You are giving it away for Free.
  13. guitarskoota
    Offline

    guitarskoota New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Theres nothing wrong with protecting your a patent for something you invented. There is something wrong with exploiting the broken patent system, to patent rediculous things like a square with rounded corners. It would be like Ford sueing Chevy because they use round wheels made of rubber. Or Coke sueing Pepsi, because they use pop cans also, that are both rounded with bevelled edges and a pop top. It's rediculous, and more a problem of our broken patent system.....

    BUT what makes it extremely shady on Apples part, is that apple wasn't the first one to invent these things anyways. Other companies were doing this long before Apple. Rectangle devices with rounded corners existed long before the Iphone. Apple ripped off Xerox's GUI, and stole multitouch, pinch/tap to zoom, etc, that were developed by others, years before iphone even existed. Iphone stole these open source ideas, because they arent something that should be patentable, but they stole the ideas and dumped the money to patent them. I'm sorry but Apple did not invent these things. They just copied it from someone else, and then patent trolled it. Yet if someone else uses ideas from Xerox or one of those devices that were around long before iphone, Apple sues them. You may be blinded by the fanboism, but Apple is a monopolistic predator company who steals others ideas and tries to act all cutting edge as if they invented everything, when they are nothing but thiefs who play holier than thou. I would never give Apple a dime for any of their locked down idiotproof garbage.
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2012
  14. pc747
    Offline

    pc747 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2009
    Messages:
    17,049
    Likes Received:
    859
    Trophy Points:
    113
  15. kodiak799
    Offline

    kodiak799 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,752
    Likes Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    63
    1) You might be right about their defense. They REALLY dropped the ball not getting their exhibit in time that showed an evolution of their phones that would have considerably strengthened their case they didn't copy the design.

    2) Case was in Apples backyard and it looks like Samsung got "homered" by the judge, at times, and a few jurors. While I'm certainly no expert, I was surprised at some of the people on the jury. Doesn't seem like Sammie did a good job of vetting, or maybe they thought the guy with patents would help them and it backfired. A number of jurors worked in the Silicon Valley, and maybe Sammie was hoping they'd find some Apple haters but reality is Sammie is a foreign company and Apple DOES have plenty of support even if not fanboys.
  16. armeddroid
    Offline

    armeddroid New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Traffic Capital
    My boy works at the USPTO and I asked him about his thoughts. He said the patents were given, how he is not clear. But he sent me a link on just a visual history of what Apple actually invented. It seems to be floating amongst his peers. They all have their own issues and thoughts about the verdict. Some of you may have already seen it. Just for entertainment purposes.
    http://m.9gag.com/gag/5195630
  17. Rindaen
    Offline

    Rindaen New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    GA
    Pinch to Zoom, Or the Rubber band effect , Apple invented or not,
    it appears Apple owns the patent.
    If there is previous art , i would think Samsung lawyers aren't doing a very good job.

    I find it funny you mention Apple taking the GUI from Xerox, But don't mention the fact that Microsoft stole from Apple
    which in the end helped lead to the Monopoly that is MS.

    I am not blinded by "Fanboism" , Apple, Google, MS , None of them can say they didn't steal someone else's idea.
  18. MissionImprobable
    Offline

    MissionImprobable New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,889
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're right: all of them have borrowed or stolen from each other. The difference is that Apple is the only one trying to patent general designs, trying to patent ideas that they did not invent--knowing fully that prior art exists in every instance-- and the only one trying to use those more than dubious patents to block competition in the marketplace.
  19. AndroidSensei
    Offline

    AndroidSensei New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This lawsuit was the silliest thing ever.

    The basis of the lawsuit was ridiculous as the technology that Apple uses was out years before the iPhone ever emerged. And the design patents "Rectangular object with four slightly curved corners"? Sounds like my old Garmin. Give me a break: goo.gl/Zn7ZE
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2012
  20. jaybogg
    Offline

    jaybogg Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Houston, Tx
    Waking up an old thread on something I was told today. My best friend works at a Sulfuric Acid Refinery in the Houston area and one of their products is "Ultra Pure Acid" which is used in the semiconductor manufacturing industry. All he has talked about for the past few months is the installation of another ultra pure unit that would double their capacity of ultra pure, which is one of their product offerings. Today he said the plans were cancelled. He told me that evidently, Apple had sued Samsung, and the Samsung fab in Central Texas had scaled down production, so the ultra pure distributor they were partnering with for the installation had cancelled the plans. He said their refinery saw a loss of 4 new jobs. A "unit" in refinery terms could be as small as a house to as large as a small city block.

    Add to that the manufacturing jobs of the company supplying the unit, the fabrication/construction jobs for the installation of the unit, the distributor's new jobs to handle/distribute the product, and finally, the new and/or existing operator/tech/engineer jobs at the Samsung fab.

    This is just one supply chain of thousands used by a semiconductor fab. For those who think Apple's actions have no impact on American jobs, you might want to rethink that assumption.