Apple's Victory Over Samsung in $930 Million 2012 Court Case Gets Partially Reversed

[dgstorm]

It probably won't be too hard to remember the clash of the titans that was Apple vs. Samsung back in 2012. The story dominated the news throughout most of 2011 and 2012, and culminated in Apple defeating Samsung in court to the tune of a $930 Million court settlement (reduced by Judge Koh from $1.05 Billion). Well, that epic fight is back in the news again...

The appeals court finally ruled in the case and it partially reversed the original court's decision. Basically, the court agreed that Samsung infringed upon Apple's design patents, but the company did not infringe on Apple's trade dress. This means that a sizable portion of the $930 Million settlement will be reduced (possibly by as much as $382 Million, leaving $548 Million).

While the final result is still a hefty number, it's dramatically reduced from the original $1.05 Billion. We can all breathe a sigh of relief as we can finally, finally, finally put this to rest!

 

[mountainbikermark]

Could've been settled 4 years ago had Samsung simply said "Make your own screens or don't follow up on your threat to sue" after the ones made by others for the iPad 2 were epic failures.

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

 

[94lt1]

Yeah.. If I were Samsung.. I would've played real hard ball when they sued and I was making a ton of their components... I would've went as far as 500% mark-up on everything.. Or worse... But... I have an attitude problem.. Baaahahahahahaha

 

[mountainbikermark]

Yeah.. If I were Samsung.. I would've played real hard ball when they sued and I was making a ton of their components... I would've went as far as 500% mark-up on everything.. Or worse... But... I have an attitude problem.. Baaahahahahahaha

Instead Samsung signed a deal for about a gazillion screen parts at a reduced cost and it was a large enough order to basically make it so other manufacturers had to find another source for your screens. The whole thing with the suit, patent grabbing, etc had anti trust written all over it. Wedge shape patented? Seriously? Rectangular device with rounded corners got a patent? C'mon man.
I just didn't get Samsungs perspective on the whole thing and it threw everyone else that wanted to get into the tablet market seriously under the bus.

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

 

[Ollie]

Samsung has to be laughing. They are getting paid by Apple via parts orders which will eclipse this settlement.

 

[mountainbikermark]

Samsung has to be laughing. They are getting paid by Apple via parts orders which will eclipse this settlement.

How do you think they've been able to so easily reverse engineer all the Apple stuff they've been cloning into their line-up?

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

 

[Ollie]

How do you think they've been able to so easily reverse engineer all the Apple stuff they've been cloning into their line-up?

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

Such as?

 

[mountainbikermark]

Such as?

You've never noticed the similarities between cabinet designs? The whole thing started when Samsung out and out cloned Apple on screen icons then it escalated when the Tab 1 was eerily similar to the iPad 2. The iPad 2 had a physical home button and it's charging port was in the usual Apple spot. Other than that you couldn't tell the 2 apart from more than 3' away, thus bringing on Apple's attempt to patent everything under the sun including a threatened lawsuit against a Polish grocery store for their logo being an apple and their web address starting with "ap". They patented Moto designed things, HTC designed things, touch screen technologies, the works.

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

 

[Amagine]

I'm waiting for the day samsung simply says to Apple. "Hey, we're only going to make one chassis. You can stick what ever software you want on yours, we'll put what ever we want on the rest."

Which if you think about it. Probably was the situation with the iPhone 6 and the Galaxy S6. Hold those two together and tell me that it wasn't a case of one phone went down the "Samsung" chute and the next down the "Apple" chute.

 

[Ollie]

You've never noticed the similarities between cabinet designs? The whole thing started when Samsung out and out cloned Apple on screen icons then it escalated when the Tab 1 was eerily similar to the iPad 2. The iPad 2 had a physical home button and it's charging port was in the usual Apple spot. Other than that you couldn't tell the 2 apart from more than 3' away, thus bringing on Apple's attempt to patent everything under the sun including a threatened lawsuit against a Polish grocery store for their logo being an apple and their web address starting with "ap". They patented Moto designed things, HTC designed things, touch screen technologies, the works.

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

I'm not seeing that correlation between the Tab 2 7" or the Tab 2 10".

Edit: ok I misread. I looked at the Tab 1 as well and do not see the resemblance there either.

I totally see it on the bottom side of the S6 though. They should have emulated the bottom of the Note 3 instead.

 

[cybertec69]

Yeah.. If I were Samsung.. I would've played real hard ball when they sued and I was making a ton of their components... I would've went as far as 500% mark-up on everything.. Or worse... But... I have an attitude problem.. Baaahahahahahaha

That's not a way to run a business.

 

[FoxKat]

...Probably was the situation with the iPhone 6 and the Galaxy S6. Hold those two together and tell me that it wasn't a case of one phone went down the "Samsung" chute and the next down the "Apple" chute.

Not that I don't think that happens all the time in the world of electronics, but in the case of the Apple iPhone 6 and the Samsung Galaxy 6S I doubt that to be true. You only have to look at the motherboards to see they are perhaps somewhat similar in their form as "L" shaped configurations, but I believe that is the extent of the similarities.

IPhone 6

Galaxy 6S

 

[mountainbikermark]

Not that I don't think that happens all the time in the world of electronics, but in the case of the Apple iPhone 6 and the Samsung Galaxy 6S I doubt that to be true. You only have to look at the motherboards to see they are perhaps somewhat similar in their form as "L" shaped configurations, but I believe that is the extent of the similarities.

IPhone 6

Galaxy 6S

I think they were referring to the chassis not internals?

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

 

[FoxKat]

I think they were referring to the chassis not internals?

Support Our Troops !!!
<><
Beast Mode 4

OK, so I edited the original post to a concise quote, however here is the full one...

I'm waiting for the day samsung simply says to Apple. "Hey, we're only going to make one chassis. You can stick what ever software you want on yours, we'll put what ever we want on the rest."

Which if you think about it. Probably was the situation with the iPhone 6 and the Galaxy S6. Hold those two together and tell me that it wasn't a case of one phone went down the "Samsung" chute and the next down the "Apple" chute.

I know that "chassis" was the word used, however it was in the context of describing what you put software on - and since you don't put software on a chassis, and yet you DO put software on a Motherboard, I interpreted the OP to be saying that the Motherboards are made for both phones by Samsung, one for Samsung and the other for Apple, and at some point prior to becoming separate devices they are essentially cut from the same mold. I was simply providing clear evidence that wasn't the case.

If I misinterpreted the post, you can surely see why.