Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Victory For Apple In "Patent Trial of the Century," To the Tune of $1 Billion

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the still-unfolding-though dept.

Patents 1184

pdabbadabba writes "The jury is in in the epic patent dispute between Apple and Samsung and Apple appears to be coming out on top. The court is still going through the 700+ items on the verdict form, but things seem to be going Apple's way so far. In the case of Apple's various UI patents, the jury is consistently ruling that Samsung not only violated Apple's patent, but did so willfully." Reader bob zee also points to the AP's story, as carried by Breitbart.com, and Charliemopps adds Reuters' take. Reader Samalie contributes a link to a live blog of the (at this writing) ongoing recitation of the verdict. Whether you like it or not, even this verdict won't be the last word.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No matter what the outcome actually is.... (5, Informative)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | about 2 years ago | (#41116837)

In the end the only true winners, are the lawyers.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116849)

Apple gets a billion freaking dollars. Are you trying to say that the lawyer fees will be a billion dollars? Not bloody likely.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (5, Funny)

xevioso (598654) | about 2 years ago | (#41116897)

You don't know the lawyers I know.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (2)

pdabbadabba (720526) | about 2 years ago | (#41117047)

If they have a typical fee arrangement it will be 30-40%.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (5, Funny)

xevioso (598654) | about 2 years ago | (#41117149)

I believe typically the fees include your very soul, the souls of your children and significant others, your very hopes, dreams and aspirations, with an airtight guarantee of a certain % of all future occurrences of personal satisfaction. I believe that is fairly typical; some lawyers charge more. It varies.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (3, Funny)

jesseck (942036) | about 2 years ago | (#41116921)

Are you trying to say that the lawyer fees will be a billion dollars?

You're right- the lawyers will charge 2 billion dollars.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116993)

If a precedent is set here, someone will use it against Apple in the near future... plus this has cost them what remained of their positive image amongst the rest of the tech community.

It's quite obvious that Samsung's claims about prior art have merit. Apple's collective belief that they are wholly responsible for the conceptual development of every product they release is both arrogant and farcical, but i guess that's what you get taking your corporate direction from a CEO who'd rather yell at his family for a year than seek treatment for the illness that was killing him.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117179)

funny..
apple just got paddled for violating 2 samsung patents in south korea..

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117019)

Not really, both companies will spend the next number of years appealing these cases in all jurisdictions. Eventually Apple, Samsung, and Google will settle things up and form a nice little patent license cartel. (Which is the ultimate goal, these lawsuits are just part of the negotiation.)

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117077)

Apple gets a billion freaking dollars. Are you trying to say that the lawyer fees will be a billion dollars? Not bloody likely.

Are you trying to say that lawyers are not well known for charging in, up, and out the ass? Not bloody likely.

That's OK though. I'm certain you will change your mind...when it's your attorney you're paying.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (4, Funny)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#41116887)

Not true. We, the spectators get a free show. That's worth something, isn't it?

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (5, Insightful)

SomePgmr (2021234) | about 2 years ago | (#41117143)

Not if, in the end, I can't use pinch-and-zoom on my phone anymore and all future models have to look and work like crap so Apple won't sue.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | about 2 years ago | (#41116909)

Right. Apple would get a lot of money and its chief competitor would get screwed. I know slashdot hates lawyers but use some common sense.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116971)

You're a fool if you think that lawyers are getting even over a quarter of billion.

It's not really about the money... it's about the next 10 years and 5 billion people who will be buying a smartphone. Samsung and every other competitor will now know there's a huge price to pay if you blatantly rip off Apple.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (1, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 years ago | (#41117073)

In the end the only true winners, are the lawyers.

Except in a case like this, aren't most of the lawyers already on one or the other company's payroll? If so, they're not getting a cut of the award.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (4, Informative)

fortfive (1582005) | about 2 years ago | (#41117113)

Most lawyers litigating in a big trial like this are from a firm. In-house lawyers guide the company's transactions, typically.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (2, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | about 2 years ago | (#41117099)

We could all win if this forces Apple's competitors to stop riding on Apple's coattails and get out there and take changes on doing new and exciting things. Or it could have a chilling effect on the market. Check back in 10 years.

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | about 2 years ago | (#41117109)

s/changes/chances/

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (0)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about 2 years ago | (#41117193)

Can you identify a positive alternative to a "rounded corner"?

Re:No matter what the outcome actually is.... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117163)

>>> In the case of Apple's various UI patents,

Did anyone else mistake (honestly and as it ought to be) he above fragment as

In the case of Apple's vicious UI patents,

Only 22 hours of deliberations (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116863)

I call bullshit, that jury was stacked. You can't sift through such a complex case in 22 hours and come to an informed decision.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (-1, Troll)

endinyal (2700219) | about 2 years ago | (#41116947)

unless the jurors found the evidence against Scamscum was so obvious, they didn't need to deliberate any more. Samsung got what it deserved. Seeing the fandroids kicking-and-screaming right now is such a fun thing to witness!!!

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (2, Insightful)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 2 years ago | (#41117005)

lol Scamscum, seriously? That's even worse than Crapple!

At least Crapple is easy to pronounce...

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (-1, Offtopic)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | about 2 years ago | (#41117075)

That's why it should be "shamsung".... :) Scamscum is too hard. :)

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117221)

How about Steve DEAD Jobs? Didn't like it, did you?

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (5, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#41116957)

22 hours of deliberations, in a courthouse 5 miles from apple HQ, in the heart of silicon valley.

yeah, I wanna see how this stands up to appeal.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (5, Interesting)

aardvarkjoe (156801) | about 2 years ago | (#41116985)

I call bullshit, that jury was stacked. You can't sift through such a complex case in 22 hours and come to an informed decision.

If you've ever been on a jury, you know that it's going to be full of people with very little idea of what's going on and who don't want to be there. Most of them had probably made their decisions well before deliberations even started.

It has nothing to do with the jury being "stacked" in any way; it's just a function of how juries are chosen and how they operate.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (-1, Troll)

whisper_jeff (680366) | about 2 years ago | (#41117017)

Mad your side lost?

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (3, Interesting)

sd4f (1891894) | about 2 years ago | (#41117049)

Well to the juries credit, i believe there was a time limit imposed of 12 hours for each side, so there would have only been 24 hours of actual court evidence they needed to deliberate on. I personally think that the time limit turned it into an unfair trial.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (5, Interesting)

arbiter1 (1204146) | about 2 years ago | (#41117071)

109 pages of jury instructions, 700 question's to answer no way that can be done in 22 hours less they went in to deliberation with mind set up they were gonna side with apple on about everything. a decent jury would reviewed all the devices in question for each patent and that would take a while.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (2)

Mithent (2515236) | about 2 years ago | (#41117079)

I admit that I'm no expert on US trial law, but it seems strange to me that this would be a matter for a jury. Could someone explain to me why this was assessed by a jury rather than by judges, as previous cases have been?

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (1)

ais523 (1172701) | about 2 years ago | (#41117115)

Presumably, just because the sides asked for one.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (5, Informative)

pdabbadabba (720526) | about 2 years ago | (#41117201)

It's a little complicated but, basically, if the suit is for damages the 7th Amendment guarantees a jury trial if the plaintiff wants one. For (a LOT) more, have a look at this: http://iplj.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Article-THE-RIGHT-TO-A-JURY-TRIAL-IN-ACTIONS-FOR-PATENT-INFRINGEMENT-AND-SUITS-FOR-DECLARATORY-JUDGMENT.pdf [iplj.net]

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (3, Informative)

pdabbadabba (720526) | about 2 years ago | (#41117123)

Well, the case was not really that complex once it got to the jury. Simplifying the jury's task is the point of a lot of the legal maneuvering that goes in before and during the trial. It's true that the jury verdict form was really long, but mostly that is because each question had to be asked once for each Samsung product at issue. Here's the form: http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1307288/1890_finalverdictform.pdf [sbnation.com]

But, yeah. You disagree with the verdict (based, I'd wager, on very little information), so the jury must have been stacked.

Re:Only 22 hours of deliberations (2)

fortfive (1582005) | about 2 years ago | (#41117137)

My thought is that Silicon Valley, populated with folks like us here on /., affords probably the best pool of jurors available for a trial like this.

Samsung should just leave the US market (3, Insightful)

darue (2699381) | about 2 years ago | (#41116865)

sorry, but I think this is wild bullshit

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116907)

lol. like any body cares.

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116929)

No, Samsung should just quit copying and replicating everything that Apple does. Their Apple-envy has gotten ridiculous.

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (-1, Troll)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#41116939)

Or take the hint and start innovating instead of just copying Apple.

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116995)

"Black frontface" is not a fucking innovation.

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117125)

"Black frontface" is not a fucking innovation.

No, it's not. But finding idio, er customers that believe it is...is quite innovative when you think about it.

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (2, Interesting)

bbecker23 (1917560) | about 2 years ago | (#41117013)

350+ posts by you and every one is a Pro-Apple/Anti-Samsung shitstorm. So tell me, will we get to enjoy your presence after this is settled or will we have to wait for the appeal before you turn back up?

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (1)

r4wbin (2713249) | about 2 years ago | (#41116949)

It would be stupid for them to do so. They would lose a few billion by leaving, than just losing 1 billion.

Re:Samsung should just leave the US market (1)

devleopard (317515) | about 2 years ago | (#41117187)

Even if they left, they wouldn't leave. Most iOS devices use Samsung displays.

poop. (5, Funny)

xevioso (598654) | about 2 years ago | (#41116875)

I guess I better get ready to pony up to Apple for those brownies with rounded, beveled edges I made last night.

sigh. :-(

Re:poop. (5, Funny)

Farmer Tim (530755) | about 2 years ago | (#41117035)

Only if you make phone calls on them, in which case the legality of the ingredients might be more of a problem...

Sweet! (-1, Troll)

wave9x (2625231) | about 2 years ago | (#41116877)

Apple deserved this win. Good for Apple, glad one of these Asian copycat companies is finally held accountable.

Re:Sweet! (-1, Troll)

endinyal (2700219) | about 2 years ago | (#41116999)

I totally agree. This trial needed to happen. It sent a message that if you're going to compete, you better do it on your own merit and not copy someone else's hard work and try taking a ride from it. Samsung got what it deserved. If I were Apple, I'd be demanding that $1B+ check right now. Sure, appeal it if you want (I'm sure it will) but that just means extra interest payments on that amount!

Re:Sweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117085)

Yes, because Apple /never/ /ever/ copied Xerox.

Re:Sweet! (3, Funny)

atlasdropperofworlds (888683) | about 2 years ago | (#41117081)

Toally agree. It's stupid to think that having competition is good. Clearly, the only smartphone that is allowed to exist is the iPhone. Everything else is a rip-off because it has icons and is rectangular.

Don't call it that, seriously. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116879)

"UI patents", more like patents on basic shapes and positioning.
Apple should be burned for even being granted such a retarded thing, even if it is the patent systems fault.

What the hell do you expect Samsumg to do? Make a damn oval phone? A TRIANGLE?
Fuck Apple and every single person that defends them. Pure scum, both Apple and them.

Re:Don't call it that, seriously. (4, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#41116989)

What the hell do you expect Samsumg to do? Make a damn oval phone? A TRIANGLE?

A triPhone? That sounds close enough, so they'd still get sued.

Re:Don't call it that, seriously. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117133)

They could do like all the other companies that are not getting sued over this, and actually do some work on their own.

Re:Don't call it that, seriously. (2, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | about 2 years ago | (#41117141)

Read about the verdict, not all phones were found to be infringing. You bought the BS about this being about Apple patenting a rectangle, it's not about that but about overt rip off jobs.

As it should be. (-1, Troll)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | about 2 years ago | (#41116881)

Regardless of your opinion of the patents themselves, Samsung did infringe on them and this decision is well deserved for those assclowns

Re:As it should be. (4, Insightful)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#41117023)

That's like saying that a law against walking on cracks in the footpath is clearly retarded, but you did it and so the death penalty is perfectly justified.

Re:As it should be. (-1, Flamebait)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | about 2 years ago | (#41117147)

Careful, your stupid is showing...

Re:As it should be. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117065)

What? For a fucking shape?

Go look at the evidence. The designs were around long, long, long before Apple did anything with them.

And *real* tech patents? Nothing.

This trial shows nothing but what Americans value, and that's shiny fashion accessories.

This marks the nail in the coffin for American economic dominance. Other countries will pull out because the US will become a backwater of markets dominated by fiefdoms propped up by bullshit patents. Patents are killing off real competition and innovation. We're going to be stuck with shiny toys while the rest of the world enjoys advances in standards of living.

Welcome to your new glorified banana republic.

Apple stifling innovation in lawsuit (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116885)

Ya know, as much as I get patent infringement as a patent holder, alot of this is really really trivial. The iPhone isn't really so much different than the Treo I used years before there was an iPhone. Most of this is obvious (in patent terms) and iterative but the bottomline is that I'm not buying another iPhone. Apple owns a large portion of marketshare, it's stock is sky-high and I'm going to vote the dollars of me personally to other vendors. Enough is enough.

Tim Cook, Shame on you....

If Apple were stifling innovation, they'd sue more (2, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41116945)

The fact is that Apple is not suing quite a few Android vendors based on design patents - only Samsung, with blatant copies of products.

They are not suing Amazon for the fire, or Google for the Nexus line....

So I don't think Apple in this case is stifling real innovation, they are just trying to punish companies that are obviously copying.

Re:If Apple were stifling innovation, they'd sue m (5, Insightful)

PCK (4192) | about 2 years ago | (#41117043)

Samsung is their biggest threat and that is why they have gone after them first, should it verdict be held up after appeal I have no doubt they will go after the rest.

Re:Apple stifling innovation in lawsuit (4, Insightful)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#41117175)

Without going and looking stuff up, can you, personally, name one innovation Samsung has brought to the table in the phone industry in the last 5 years? I'm not just talking minor megapixel or processor upgrades, but something game changing. I'm sure they've done something, but I certainly can't think of anything other than a few gimmicky ideas that didn't stick and never went anywhere, so I'm curious what innovation it is that you think Apple is stifling in this case (quick note: I won't deny that they are doing so in cases against other companies, since they are, but I don't see that holding true with Samsung, which is about as shady a company as they can come (see censorship of journalists that they've engaged in, that their CEO was convicted and thrown in jail for maintaining a multi-million dollar slush fund but was let out less than a third of the way through his sentence so he could assist with South Korea's Olympic bid and resume his role as CEO, and the rampant nepotism taking place)).

And this is hardly the first time Samsung has been caught copying. Before they were copying Apple, they were copying Blackberry, Motorola, and others. For instance, go take a look at the Samsung Jack. It was formerly called the Blackjack and looked like one of the premier Blackberries of the day. RIM successfully sued Samsung and managed to force them to change the name of it. Prior to that, they had a phone that looked just like the Motorola RAZR after the RAZR proved to be popular.

Samsung has been the "me too" of the market for the better part of a decade or more. The only thing that's changed anytime recently is that the target of their copying is a more profitable source of ideas for them this time around.

Upcoming Samsung SIV (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116895)

Circular with razor sharp edges!

Appeal in progress (4, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#41116901)

We all know this won't be over for a long time to come, appeal after appeal after appeal.

Re:Appeal in progress (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117131)

Unfortunatley, this was always going to happen, and in this particular trial, the Judge has handed both sides plenty of ammunition to file an appeal. The damaging thing is not the final judgement, but the injunctions and leverage that this is going to give to Apple against other manufacturers, even if it is ultimately decided upon appeal that Apple's patents are invalid or weren't infringed upon. After seeing the case unfold, I can't help but seeing a bias towards Apple from the outset, although very late in the proces the Judge was clearly showing thet they were pusing her too far, she gave them a number of advantages early on.

I feel like crying. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116903)

Honestly. I've never felt this way about a tech legal suit. Apple is a fraud and I hope they burn in hell. If this holds up you can kiss free speech and innovation goodbye, because now shapes are patented.

What makes me sad instead of angry is how fucking ignorant the jury seems to me. It's a mockery of what the legal system is supposed to be.

Re:I feel like crying. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116969)

Oh shut up you fucking Aspie.

Re:I feel like crying. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117105)

You are a retard.

To a normal company, $1 billion is a lot (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116917)

To Apple, it's... a good week.

Justice (-1, Troll)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#41116919)

This is a great day for all of us.

Breitbart (4, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | about 2 years ago | (#41116923)

Why'd you have to link to the AP article via that (dead) troll Breitbart?

Here are some other sources, thanks Google:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19377261 [bbc.com]
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444358404577609810658082898.html [wsj.com]

I'm sure the AP article can be found via a more... reputable site.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to don a biohazard suit and hide from all the Apple fanboys masturbating wildly to the news.

Over $1 billion damages (1, Informative)

TimHunter (174406) | about 2 years ago | (#41116943)

According to the Verge http://live.theverge.com/apple-samsung-verdict-live/ [theverge.com] Apple was awarded $1,051,855,000 in damages. Samsung got nada. Zip. Zero.

Big win for Apple and a legal lesson to the folks who claimed this case was about "a rectangle with rounded corners."

Re:Over $1 billion damages (0)

should_be_linear (779431) | about 2 years ago | (#41117061)

Yeah, it was not about rounded corners so much like about US court and jury _obviously_ protecting US company (evil, but saint in media) against Asian (default evil) company.

R.I.P. Innovation (5, Insightful)

craznar (710808) | about 2 years ago | (#41116953)

When it costs a small developer millions of dollars to patent search and licence obvious designs, we have killed innovation.

Re:R.I.P. Innovation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117177)

If you truly innovate, it's worth spending that amount of money to protect your design. If it's too obvious, worse that can happen is you get sued.

Re:R.I.P. Innovation (1)

DevotedSkeptic (2715017) | about 2 years ago | (#41117181)

I agree completely. The patent system and patent trolls that use it claim to be "ensuring that those whose ideas are being used get compensated" Really this is just a way to extort developers with good ideas. It is unfortunate that people have (by people I mostly mean folks in the legal profession) have twisted things in such a way, however we can complain or try to do something about it. At the very least write your senator / congressman.

Re:R.I.P. Innovation (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | about 2 years ago | (#41117205)

This precedent could also protect a small developer from a corporation like Samsung sweeping in and copying their work and crushing them. There are 2 sides to that coin.

dont buy apple or usa (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41116961)

go buy asian to hell with americans and let me know how that gold standard works out

Why the link to nutbag Breitbart instead of AP? (2, Informative)

rsborg (111459) | about 2 years ago | (#41116963)

Thanks Timothy... not.

In the case of Apple, it's clear that Samsung was directly copying Apple on many fronts - hell, look at their Samsung Stores or their power adapters. This case however, will immediately be appealed and this is nowhere near the last we'll hear of it.

Re:Why the link to nutbag Breitbart instead of AP? (2)

kye4u (2686257) | about 2 years ago | (#41117015)

Thanks Timothy... not.

In the case of Apple, it's clear that Samsung was directly copying Apple on many fronts - hell, look at their Samsung Stores or their power adapters. This case however, will immediately be appealed and this is nowhere near the last we'll hear of it.

Copying happens in every industry (i.e. fashion, auto industry, etc...). It is what smart companies do. The real question is are the patents really valid.

No point in celebrating or complaining... (4, Insightful)

Golgafrinchan (777313) | about 2 years ago | (#41116973)

Based on how the trial went I'm sure Samsung's already preparing an appeal.

The only thing that was resolved today was which company gets to appeal the decision. And I suspect Samsung has a lot of grounds on which to appeal.

Re:No point in celebrating or complaining... (2)

DevotedSkeptic (2715017) | about 2 years ago | (#41117209)

i am sure they have, and as an earlier post mentioned this is how the lawyers tend to win out in these situations.

Why not leave US? (3, Interesting)

should_be_linear (779431) | about 2 years ago | (#41116979)

I wonder why Samsung wouldn't just leave US market, after all, it is only some 20% of worldwide smartphone market and shrinking. Just like Google left China with search engine nad let Chinese eat their own Baidu dogfood, US market is broken, so it is better left to Apple alone.

Re:Why not leave US? (2)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 2 years ago | (#41117117)

I wonder why Samsung wouldn't just leave US market

Did you see the recent stories about Apple being valued higher than any other company? That's probably why Samsung wants a piece.

Idiots, I'm sure (1, Interesting)

whisper_jeff (680366) | about 2 years ago | (#41116981)

I'm sure most people on Slashdot are going to think the entire jury was filled with idiots and the outcome is a travesty.

Mind you, that probably would have been true regardless of which side won...

AAPL (3, Funny)

allanw (842185) | about 2 years ago | (#41116983)

Well, I'm glad I have some AAPL stock.

Too early to fully comment.. (5, Insightful)

PCK (4192) | about 2 years ago | (#41116987)

until all the facts are in, but I'm guessing that the $1bn number is the least of Samsungs and other smartphone manufacturers problems. Apple will now go after everyone else and I'm sure they wont be licensing anything to their competitors. Of course however an appeal is 100% guarenteed.

An appeal is a virtual certainty... (5, Insightful)

redaction101 (1309783) | about 2 years ago | (#41117027)

Which is a significant problem with having juries in thorny, complex civil trials. Emotion, procedural rules and the voire dire triumph over expertise and reason. It can work in your favour or against you, but it is impossible to verify that the thinking processes of the jury are rigorous. At least judges sitting on their own have to explain the process by which they reached their decisions. Here the reasoning process appears to be a badly filled in sudoku...

Condenced truth for the haters. (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117045)

Samsung makes good devices, but they really did go out of their way to copy the look and feel of apple devices. Samsung even goes as far as to put customizations on top of Andriod to make it more apple-like. If you deny this, you are a moron that lacks basic rational facilities or in complete denial. A few seconds of cursory observation is all it takes to confirm this beyond any doubt.

Weather or not the above is legal is what is being settled in the courts right now. It looks like our legal system is coming out in favor of apple's position.

Thank you San Jose (5, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 years ago | (#41117053)

I see the trial was in San Jose. I am curious whether Koreans will be suspicious of the verdict. Maybe such trials should be on neutral ground. For what it's worth, halfway from San Jose to Korea from West to East appears to be, roughly, France.

There's only to say... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117103)

f*ck Samsung, f*ck Google, f*ck the King.

Gut reaction. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117135)

My gut reaction now is that I don't want to have anything to do with Apple products, nor be any part in their software ecosystem.

your move (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117151)

your move Google.

OH my EYES! (0, Flamebait)

RandyLobster (1150459) | about 2 years ago | (#41117165)

Breitbart.com? What has the world come to? Or slashdot for that matter? I'd need to deslime my eyeballs if I followed that link. I'd need to clear my browser history so I could forget. Yuck.

I'm no fanboy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117167)

I'm no fanboy and though I originally figured that Apple was whining, when I saw some of the side-by-side comparison images of some products, I definitely saw form factor similarity, so I can see that there may be some infringement. To form a more solid opinion regarding other aspects I'd have to look into things further, and I would rather spend my time on other things. Since going to CES 2011 and being astonished and turned off by the extreme and desperate tablet "me, too" offerings which offered little better or more innovative, I've really wanted to see some other company actually come up with something striking and different. I see this as very possible and don't understand what the difficulty is. I'm sure that Apple can be topped but apparently no one creative enough is getting the capital to take the lead.

Breitbart.com, really? (0)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 2 years ago | (#41117191)

Wow, welcome to drudgedot. All conservative, all the time. I'm so glad you guys could find me a "news" source that could tell me how this is all the personal fault of Bill Clinton and can only be solved with massive tax cuts for the rich.

FUCK APPLE (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117199)

FUCK APPLE.

Off to buy 5 new Samsung phones and 3 tablets.

Did I say, FUCK APPLE???

Patent system broken (5, Insightful)

kye4u (2686257) | about 2 years ago | (#41117211)

The patent system is broken. The real question is should the patents that Apple claims Samsung infringed upon been granted. Imagine if this happened in the car industry. Only the first car company to put anti-lock brakes on their cars would ever be allowed to use the technology. Good ideas get copied. That is what is called progress. Only the specific implementation of that idea should be patented.

Thermonuclear War II: The Wrath of Jobs (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 2 years ago | (#41117219)

Samsung: Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnn!

What I want to know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41117223)

Is why Samsung hasn't just had some large hiccups with the chips they supply for the IPhone and IPad?

Oops.. the Iphone5 will be late.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?