Apple Awarded $1.051 Billion In Damages

[dragonalex]

http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/24/app...ung-infringes/

Hory ****... Greedy apple is greedy.
Anyone else not find this surprising?

[LS Series]

Here come the sheep here come the sheep...

Whatever who cares I sick of hearing patent this patent that home screen button that. Just give me good electronics.

[jmonty]

damn, that sucks

[warm]

sad day for Samsung ;(

[Cinderblock]

they got called out for copying. such is life.

[JaZart]

That sux, but IMO Samsung will be OK.

The venerable SIII continue to sell well along with their plethora of quality mid/low range devices being sold.

Also the Note II is set to be unveiled and that'll sell like mad. Only bad thing is that this will show how apple's patents are a bishto overcome in court of law.

[CiU]

Apple sues Samsung and wins a billion dollars.
Apple pays Samsung billions of dollars for parts for their products.

Strong corporation logic.

[Krispy1]

apple doesnt just get the money like that. here comes the appeals

[cresros]

Apple sues Samsung and wins a billion dollars.
Apple pays Samsung billions of dollars for parts for their products.

Strong corporation logic.

So if you go to a store, buy a car, and then sue them for the value of the car, you gained nothing?

Strong logic

[RusnConcussion]

fuk apple, fuk pattent law

posted from my iPad.

[EternallyMiscd]

I don't understand how most of you actually endorse Samsung's behaviour. Forget about the patents - how do you respect a company that simply copies everything that the company you hate on does? Think logically for a second...then look at this if you need further proof.











I understand that having more phones to choose from increases competition and is beneficial to consumers. However, Apple has the right to defend their IP. They are not trolls - in fact Samsung are the trolls if you look at the patents they asserted (and lost).

Say the world's greatest inventor goes out and murders an innocent family. Does the family have the right to see him put to justice, or is the family being greedy for wanting someone who has contributed so much removed from society? That's basically the argument most of you are making - Samsung increases competition as a result of their infringements; therefore they should be allowed to continue doing so at the expense of Apple and its shareholders (many of who are regular people).

Samsung is free to compete as long as they don't infringe on Apple's (or anyone else's) IP. The rules are the same for everyone, and it's not like any other company doesn't have and assert their patents if they feel they've been infringed. Some common sense here would be nice to see, but I know it's asking too much.

[Bcider]

I don't understand how most of you actually endorse Samsung's behaviour. Forget about the patents - how do you respect a company that simply copies everything that the company you hate on does? Think logically for a second...then look at this if you need further proof.











I understand that having more phones to choose from increases competition and is beneficial to consumers. However, Apple has the right to defend their IP. They are not trolls - in fact Samsung are the trolls if you look at the patents they asserted (and lost).

Say the world's greatest inventor goes out and murders an innocent family. Does the family have the right to see him put to justice, or is the family being greedy for wanting someone who has contributed so much removed from society? That's basically the argument most of you are making - Samsung increases competition as a result of their infringements; therefore they should be allowed to continue doing so at the expense of Apple and its shareholders (many of who are regular people).

Samsung is free to compete as long as they don't infringe on Apple's (or anyone else's) IP. The rules are the same for everyone, and it's not like any other company doesn't have and assert their patents if they feel they've been infringed. Some common sense here would be nice to see, but I know it's asking too much.

Wow I never knew it was that bad of a copy. Those are perfect ripoffs.

[Supadude]

I don't understand how most of you actually endorse Samsung's behaviour. Forget about the patents - how do you respect a company that simply copies everything that the company you hate on does? Think logically for a second...then look at this if you need further proof.











I understand that having more phones to choose from increases competition and is beneficial to consumers. However, Apple has the right to defend their IP. They are not trolls - in fact Samsung are the trolls if you look at the patents they asserted (and lost).

Say the world's greatest inventor goes out and murders an innocent family. Does the family have the right to see him put to justice, or is the family being greedy for wanting someone who has contributed so much removed from society? That's basically the argument most of you are making - Samsung increases competition as a result of their infringements; therefore they should be allowed to continue doing so at the expense of Apple and its shareholders (many of who are regular people).

Samsung is free to compete as long as they don't infringe on Apple's (or anyone else's) IP. The rules are the same for everyone, and it's not like any other company doesn't have and assert their patents if they feel they've been infringed. Some common sense here would be nice to see, but I know it's asking too much.

As much as I agree that Samsung completely ripped off Apple. Everyone loses with this decision. Apple already has plenty of money. Preventing others from competing is only going to make them more obscenely rich and screw consumers over.

[Future24]

Apple is for *******s.

[EternallyMiscd]

As much as I agree that Samsung completely ripped off Apple. Everyone loses with this decision. Apple already has plenty of money. Preventing others from competing is only going to make them more obscenely rich and screw consumers over.

This a flaw in reasoning. Nobody is being prevented from competing. They are being prevented from copying. Apple displayed several phones during the trial that were examples of competing devices that weren't infringing on their IP.

Before Apple entered the phone industry, patents and patent law still existed. Instead of whining about being unable to compete against companies that had been in the industry for decades and had thousands of patents between them, what did they do? They came up with something completely revolutionary, licensed the necessary patents, and came up with their own IP. Apple itself is undeniable proof that there is a way to compete and increase competition without being a copycat and an IP thief. There's no disputing this.

As for the "plenty of money" part - yes, they have a ton of money. However, it's a public company and that money ultimately belongs to the shareholders. You can't make inferences as to whether the shareholders are already wealthy enough, and I bet a good chunk of them bought into Apple because of the strength of their devices and their patents to back it up, concluding that they could maintain the competitive advantage that the deservedly created for some time. Sure, the stock has done well - but it could have done even better, so each and every shareholder, rich or poor, has been effected by this infringement.

[ch00se]

Apple is for *******s.

so wasted it to me 3 attempts to log in

but this^^^^

[Monkey Helmet]

Oh good, I was worried Apple was going to go out of business.

[WalkingLegacy]

This verdict pissed me off so bad, I took some Jack3d, turned into the Hulk and proceeded to smash all my crApple products.








(They were broke anyways)

[EternallyMiscd]

For everyone whining how Apple has enough money, realize that all public companies have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders:

An individual in whom another has placed the utmost trust and confidence to manage and protect property or money. The relationship wherein one person has an obligation to act for another's benefit.

If Apple didn't defend it's IP, they would be in breach of this duty. As a shareholder, I'd be pissed off if they let companies use their patents for free to make billions. Stop acting like Samsung is poor...their revenues are in the hundreds of billions of dollars annually.

Shareholders may be rich, or they may be regular joes with a few shares in their retirement portfolios. Do they deserve to profit to the fullest extent from the companies they invest in? The answer is....yes.

The lack of knowledge about the real world here is saddening. This isn't all about having a million phones to choose from. Laws like this exist for good reason, and if upheld they don't stifle competition - they encourage it by forcing competitors to innovate and acquire their own patents.

[WalkingLegacy]

The lack of knowledge about the real world here is saddening. This isn't all about having a million phones to choose from. Laws like this exist for good reason, and if upheld they don't stifle competition - they encourage it by forcing competitors to innovate and acquire their own patents.

Apple didn't innovate a rectangle. Outside your comparisons of accessory looks and the way apps are square shortcuts (been this way forever) my Galaxy phone looks nothing like an iphone that Apple is trying to insist that it does. What they should have tried to prove is if Samsung did in fact get unaware buyers to purchase their product over Apples.

When I did my research for a new phone, Apple didn't even come into equation.

Should Samsung be punished for making rectangle phones and tablets? No. Should they maybe punished for some other copy cats? Maybe.

How a product is package and how charges look is a pretty stupid thing to say people copy stuff on. (Honestly didn't know Samsung had a 32pin connector, but Apple didn't invent the USB) You never see the packaged product until you purchase the phone.

[Kazann]

Apple is for *******s.

strong this, lol @ even buying apple now days when samsung is coming out with 2x better products with better specs

[westsidelegacy]

Apple have patents on things you people aren't aware. Say you invented something, sell your invention, and samsung just goes a year later and completely copy your product with the technology you have a patent on.

It's not greed, they really had it coming. Good for them.

[westsidelegacy]

Apple didn't innovate a rectangle. Outside your comparisons of accessory looks and the way apps are square shortcuts (been this way forever) my Galaxy phone looks nothing like an iphone that Apple is trying to insist that it does. What they should have tried to prove is if Samsung did in fact get unaware buyers to purchase their product over Apples.

When I did my research for a new phone, Apple didn't even come into equation.

Should Samsung be punished for making rectangle phones and tablets? No. Should they maybe punished for some other copy cats? Maybe.

How a product is package and how charges look is a pretty stupid thing to say people copy stuff on. (Honestly didn't know Samsung had a 32pin connector, but Apple didn't invent the USB) You never see the packaged product until you purchase the phone.

You're denying what's evident. Samsung copied the iphone on so many things- especially the touch screen. All of the functions like pinching to zoom and things like that, apple have patents on. Yes, they have the rights to have patents on technologies THEY BUILT, INVENTED. You CANNOT just go and copy what others have made.

THIS is what is going to create diversity. Samsung will have to build it's OWN phone and find NEW technologies to beat the iphone. Not just copy it, change it a bit and add in functions people want. That's not innovation at all. Open your eyes, even if you hate apple.

[WalkingLegacy]

You're denying what's evident. Samsung copied the iphone on so many things- especially the touch screen. All of the functions like pinching to zoom and things like that, apple have patents on. Yes, they have the rights to have patents on technologies THEY BUILT, INVENTED. You CANNOT just go and copy what others have made.

THIS is what is going to create diversity. Samsung will have to build it's OWN phone and find NEW technologies to beat the iphone. Not just copy it, change it a bit and add in functions people want. That's not innovation at all. Open your eyes, even if you hate apple.

Pinch to zoom was invented 6 years before the first iphone was revealed by, you guessed it, not Apple.


Apple infringes on patents just as much as any company.

[westsidelegacy]

Pinch to zoom was invented 6 years before the first iphone was revealed by, you guessed it, not Apple.


Apple infringes on patents just as much as any company.

The patent is more complicated then that. It's not just pinch to zoom, http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/13/a...pinch-to-zoom/

The thing is, why did samsung have to use the EXACT way apple uses? Tons of other cellphones zoom in other ways...

You can defend samsung all you want, what they did is wrong and the justice that has been served is good for technology and inovation in our future.

[WalkingLegacy]

The patent is more complicated then that. It's not just pinch to zoom,

The thing is, why did samsung have to use the EXACT way apple uses? Tons of other cellphones zoom in other ways...

You can defend samsung all you want, what they did is wrong and the justice that has been served is good for technology and inovation in our future.

What other way is there to pinch and zoom? Our hands are all made the same way. We all pinch the same way....Holding a patent on that is stupid and defending the fact that is was developed long before Apple "innovated" it is wrong. Fact is Apple didn't invent it.

Every cellphone I have used, from motorola, samsung, htc, LG, all pinch zoom the same way.

Innovation is hurt when tech giants can just claim simple things just as a pinching gesture, or a rectangle shape.

[GSimon]

For some extra insight into the court case here's a Power point presentation presented to the Jury:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/102595858/...iPhone-patents

[Plushophile]

holy **** at the pics

[EternallyMiscd]

Apple didn't innovate a rectangle. Outside your comparisons of accessory looks and the way apps are square shortcuts (been this way forever) my Galaxy phone looks nothing like an iphone that Apple is trying to insist that it does. What they should have tried to prove is if Samsung did in fact get unaware buyers to purchase their product over Apples.

When I did my research for a new phone, Apple didn't even come into equation.

Should Samsung be punished for making rectangle phones and tablets? No. Should they maybe punished for some other copy cats? Maybe.

How a product is package and how charges look is a pretty stupid thing to say people copy stuff on. (Honestly didn't know Samsung had a 32pin connector, but Apple didn't invent the USB) You never see the packaged product until you purchase the phone.

If you think this entire lawsuit was about rectangles then you are showing your ignorance/stupidity. Samsung was found to infringe several design and utility patents on dozens of different phones. They are serial copycats that have no regard for IP, and finally the courts have recognized it. Is your Galaxy an SGSIII? Then I agree it looks quite different. But look at the original Galaxy S - that's what Apple was suing about (among others). Samsung became popular to a large extent because they ripped off Apple - those are the facts, deal with it.

They were not punished for making rectangular phones. They were punished for doing this:



You really want to claim this is ok?

[Future24]

Those phones are the same shape. Thats about it.