08-30-2012, 09:58 AM | #31 |
The Dank Side of the Moon
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
|
|
08-30-2012, 09:59 AM | #32 |
Groupie
Posts: 182
Karma: 1316076
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Device: iPad
|
LOL, what a great metric! Next time I go to the grocery, I'm going to whine that a good filet costs more than the average meat value.
Also, gotta love how some people think comments made out of court by a juror after the trial can be grounds for an appeal. |
08-30-2012, 10:14 AM | #33 | |
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
I wouldn't be surprised by that number. Think of all the patents for the different components, and the fact that each action that the software is capable of has been patented by someone. |
|
08-30-2012, 10:17 AM | #34 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
|
08-30-2012, 10:28 AM | #35 | ||
Wizard
Posts: 2,742
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Quote:
See http://www.cultofmac.com/187427/jury...-over-samsung/, for example. Here's the jury foreman, Hogan, speaking in his televised interview: Quote:
Graham |
||
08-30-2012, 10:30 AM | #36 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,342
Karma: 35112572
Join Date: Jan 2008
Device: Pocketbook
|
In the US jurisprudence, the court is the determinator of law, the jury is the determinator of the facts.
Appeals can only be based on error of law, or suppression of facts (whether deliberate or unintentional. An unintentional suppression example is DNA evidence used to overturn wrongful convictions. The technology didn't exist at the time of conviction.). This may or may not require a retrial. Jury findings are not appealable (unless deliberate malfeasance is proven). Jury finding in opposition of law are know to occur often. It's nicknamed (in Texas) as Jury Nullification... |
08-30-2012, 10:31 AM | #37 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,041
Karma: 4694121
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Virginia
Device: Pocket Edge X 2 , Edge, gTab, Kindle Fire, Nextbook 7S
|
Quote:
The comments by the jury themselves are obviously not grounds for appeal. However, since there are questions regarding how the jury conducted deliberations you better believe this will be taken into consideration during appeal. The LOL part of this whole trial is when Apple's Phil Schiller said in court "Customers can get confused on whose product is whose." Seriously? This is how Apple views the the intelligence of the average Apple consumer? No one bought a Samsung phone because they were confused and thought that they had purchased an Apple iphone. They bought the Apple phone because they wanted it, and they bought the Samsung phone because they wanted that one. Last edited by obsessed2; 08-30-2012 at 10:39 AM. |
|
08-30-2012, 10:40 AM | #38 | |
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
No, if Apple wouldn't have been able to make the extra smartphones, then they didn't lose as much revenue, so the value should have been less than the percentage that is accepted. For example if Apple would have been able to make only half of the devices, than the compensation should be 50% of 12% (if they take Samsung's figure), so only 6% of the revenues. |
|
08-30-2012, 10:58 AM | #39 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,742
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Quote:
You're right that given the jury's statement that's what they should have done. But it seems clear to me from Hogan's interview that whether or not Apple had sufficient stock didn't figure in their final calculation. Graham |
|
08-30-2012, 11:51 AM | #40 | ||
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
08-30-2012, 11:54 AM | #41 | |
Is that a sandwich?
Posts: 8,217
Karma: 101696762
Join Date: Jun 2010
Device: Nook Glowlight Plus
|
Quote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19377383 |
|
08-30-2012, 12:12 PM | #42 | |
Captain Penguin
Posts: 2,948
Karma: 2077653593
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Device: Kobo Libra 2, Nook Glowlight
|
Quote:
|
|
08-30-2012, 12:19 PM | #43 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,742
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Quote:
And again, that image is the one supplied by Apple. There are plenty of references around to previous designs not quite so cherry-picked and of prototypes much closer to the iPhone look. It's clear that Samsung filtered their designs based on the iPhone's success, but the crux of the case was whether there was sufficient prior art to invalidate Apple's design patent for that look. I went through the actual patents earlier today. Interestingly, although the button and speaker grill are marked on the front panel patent they are in dotted lines with a note 'not part of the claim'. This does give credence to Samsung's argument that Apple have been allowed to patent a rectangle with rounded corners in black with a silver trim. And if the button is included (as it appears to be in a later patent) how is that relevant when the accused Samsung devices have either three or four buttons along the bottom, not one? Graham Last edited by Graham; 08-30-2012 at 12:22 PM. Reason: 'grill', not 'grilled'... |
|
08-30-2012, 12:55 PM | #44 | |
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
Last edited by WT Sharpe; 09-14-2012 at 04:02 PM. Reason: Changed oversized graphic to a thumbnail attachment. |
|
08-30-2012, 01:00 PM | #45 |
Banned
Posts: 1,118
Karma: 3111746
Join Date: Oct 2011
Device: Kindle & little green monster
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Samsung v. Apple | carpetmojo | News | 625 | 11-18-2012 11:07 AM |
Samsung didn't copy Apple, Apple says | afv011 | Android Devices | 5 | 07-19-2012 05:50 PM |
Apple must apologise to Samsung | BeccaPrice | News | 1 | 07-19-2012 10:47 AM |
Apple vs Samsung US Ruling | JD Gumby | News | 14 | 06-30-2012 03:49 PM |