3 ms·

If the court finally determines in the End that they violated the patent, they have no choice but to pay up for all the watches already out there. If they are s

If the court finally determines in the End that they violated the patent, they have no choice but to pay up for all the watches already out there. If they are smart they will now offer a good deal for both sides instead of loosing and pay a huge punitive damage

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Apple has almost a $3T market cap, I'm sure their legal team will be fine coming to a favorable arrangement if nerfing the functionality with software updates isn't sufficient. They can fund any settlement out of ~$380B in annual revenue. Any settlement under ~$1B is a day of revenue. The horror.
- albert180 3y ago
  How should that be sufficient. They have already done the damage and used the technology they didn't pay for. Also customers will sue if they nerve a feature via software that was advertised bigly back then, claiming that this was the reason they bought the watch
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    "Laws are for poor people." Apple will outlast any legal challenges, and any successful will be immaterial to their financials. I have no dog in this fight (no exposure to AAPL besides whatever is in index funds, no standing in claims), just calling it how it is. Any class action is going to be cost of business. At a certain market cap and revenue run rate, it doesn't matter. Some damages will get paid, class action counsel will get paid, consumers will get a few bucks, and everyone will move on until the patent expires. Might have a securities fraud lawsuit to contend with too, everything is securities fraud as Matt Levine @ Bloomberg says. Very similar to Tesla's FSD story. You can outrun the financial liability if your sales and brand are strong enough. Was it wrong what Apple did? The moral position is irrelevant. We might as well argue over the color of the bikeshed.

3 ms·

If the court finally determines in the End that they violated the patent, they have no choice but to pay up for all the watches already out there. If they are s

by albert180 3y ago

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Apple has almost a $3T market cap, I'm sure their legal team will be fine coming to a favorable arrangement if nerfing the functionality with software updates isn't sufficient. They can fund any settlement out of ~$380B in annual revenue. Any settlement under ~$1B is a day of revenue. The horror.
- albert180 3y ago
  How should that be sufficient. They have already done the damage and used the technology they didn't pay for. Also customers will sue if they nerve a feature via software that was advertised bigly back then, claiming that this was the reason they bought the watch
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    "Laws are for poor people." Apple will outlast any legal challenges, and any successful will be immaterial to their financials. I have no dog in this fight (no exposure to AAPL besides whatever is in index funds, no standing in claims), just calling it how it is. Any class action is going to be cost of business. At a certain market cap and revenue run rate, it doesn't matter. Some damages will get paid, class action counsel will get paid, consumers will get a few bucks, and everyone will move on until the patent expires. Might have a securities fraud lawsuit to contend with too, everything is securities fraud as Matt Levine @ Bloomberg says. Very similar to Tesla's FSD story. You can outrun the financial liability if your sales and brand are strong enough. Was it wrong what Apple did? The moral position is irrelevant. We might as well argue over the color of the bikeshed.