|
Post by macglenn on May 4, 2014 14:26:23 GMT -8
For those who commented that Apples award probably isn't even enough to pay for legal fees. Please use that perspective from Samsung's POV. Their legal fees IMO were probably even higher than Apple's (due to law firm EQ's highest reputation, and the fact Samsung defense required the huge addition of patent invalidity pursuits). So Samsung pays $120m and $120m legal fees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2014 16:16:23 GMT -8
I read this when it came out on May 1. The intriguing thing about it suggests iOS features intended for 8.0 are being pushed to 8.1 This opens up speculation that iPhone 6 could be launched earlier, since Apple has a history of timing the launch of new iPhones after the next iOS is finished.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 4, 2014 16:20:24 GMT -8
Er...how exactly?
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on May 4, 2014 16:35:54 GMT -8
For those who commented that Apples award probably isn't even enough to pay for legal fees. Please use that perspective from Samsung's POV. Their legal fees IMO were probably even higher than Apple's (due to law firm EQ's highest reputation, and the fact Samsung defense required the huge addition of patent invalidity pursuits). So Samsung pays $120m and $120m legal fees. Yeah, I've about had it with the concern trolls - most of whom are not AAPL stockholders - wringing their hands about Apple's legal fees. Anyone who knows anything about Apple's financials knows Apple's janitors stock that much toilet paper weekly. Not even a rounding error on a company coming up on $200B in revenue. I'm all for continuing thermonuclear war, and jury award dollars definitely do not tell the whole story. Think of the billions Samsung spends on marketing. Eight or nine figures of legal arrows fired to help pierce that marketing behemoth is a fuckload cheaper than matching it with ads. Besides, that previous $1B award pays for a lot of billable hours.
|
|
|
Post by rickag on May 4, 2014 17:13:39 GMT -8
“We are grateful to the jury and the court for their service, Today’s ruling reinforces what courts around the world have already found: That Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products. We are fighting to defend the hard work that goes into beloved products like the iPhone, which our employees devote their lives to designing and delivering for our customers.”recode.net/2014/05/02/jury-finds-samsung-infringed-on-apple-patents/ Thanks for the link. One thing stood out. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it seems the jury found Samsung didn't infringe on these patents believing that it is actually Google that infringed. If so, will Apple now sue Google? This would have much greater implications involving all Android phones. Will Apple take the gloves off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2014 17:33:52 GMT -8
No? If Apple has iPhone 6 hardware ready earlier but not the full-menu iOS8, it solves that problem by pushing out the other features to iOS8.1. I'm not predicting this. BTW, there is credible cold water being spilled on rumors of iTV and iWatch hardware being announced at WWDC, which is shaping up to be without buzz appeal. iPhone 6??? recode.net/2014/05/02/codered-no-new-apple-tv-at-wwdc/
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 4, 2014 18:57:38 GMT -8
Mercel, no way iPhone 6 is ready by June or July. The rumor machine hasn't even started spinning up.
A "boring" demo of 10.10, iOS 8 and a few new Macs might be underwhelming, but who cares. Well, except if you're trading WWDC, which is always tricky anyway.
|
|
|
Post by pauls on May 4, 2014 19:13:22 GMT -8
WWDC doesn't have to be boring. iPayments? Future of AppleTV? Partnerships? It's supposed to be a big year, WWDC should be big, too.
|
|
|
Post by moltenfire on May 4, 2014 19:17:27 GMT -8
And June 7 is the split, right after WWDC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2014 19:26:33 GMT -8
Mercel, no way iPhone 6 is ready by June or July. The rumor machine hasn't even started spinning up. A "boring" demo of 10.10, iOS 8 and a few new Macs might be underwhelming, but who cares. Well, except if you're trading WWDC, which is always tricky anyway. Are you trolling me? Rumors are hot and heavy with iPhone 6 or are you referring to iPhone 7?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on May 4, 2014 19:58:52 GMT -8
Schematics and iPad mini-looking concepts that retain the same general "phone face" of the 5S, just scaled up? Eh.
If a major rumor/media outlet reports something solid about a release date, I'll start believing the cadence is shifting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2014 21:06:27 GMT -8
Schematics and iPad mini-looking concepts that retain the same general "phone face" of the 5S, just scaled up? Eh. If a major rumor/media outlet reports something solid about a release date, I'll start believing the cadence is shifting. I think we've seen more than that. But as I said, I'm not predicting it at WWDC....just going for clicks and hits here.
|
|
|
Post by yellowhandman on May 5, 2014 0:50:09 GMT -8
For those who commented that Apples award probably isn't even enough to pay for legal fees. Please use that perspective from Samsung's POV. Their legal fees IMO were probably even higher than Apple's (due to law firm EQ's highest reputation, and the fact Samsung defense required the huge addition of patent invalidity pursuits). So Samsung pays $120m and $120m legal fees. Normally orders as to legal costs are separate from the damages awarded. So Apple wouldn't be using the award to pay legal fees. In most cases, the winning party gets its cost paid for by the loser. Please note that I practice law in Singapore, not the US. So I may be totally wrong on this.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on May 5, 2014 4:04:25 GMT -8
For those who commented that Apples award probably isn't even enough to pay for legal fees. Please use that perspective from Samsung's POV. Their legal fees IMO were probably even higher than Apple's (due to law firm EQ's highest reputation, and the fact Samsung defense required the huge addition of patent invalidity pursuits). So Samsung pays $120m and $120m legal fees. Normally orders as to legal costs are separate from the damages awarded. So Apple wouldn't be using the award to pay legal fees. In most cases, the winning party gets its cost paid for by the loser. Please note that I practice law in Singapore, not the US. So I may be totally wrong on this. Almost certain this is not correct in the US.
|
|