7 ms·

Apple demands $707 million in additional damages from Samsung

49 points by nsns 14y ago

1qaz2wsx3edc 14y ago
And twist the knife.
artursapek 14y ago
Is this really warranted? Hasn't Apple won?
- ww520 14y ago
  Apple won the court case, not yet won the mobile war.
antihero 14y ago
Well this just makes them absolutely nasty cunts then. Surely even the most hardcore Apple fanatic thinks this is completely unnecessary and designed to stifle competition?
- mcantelon 14y ago
  >Surely even the most hardcore Apple fanatic thinks this is completely unnecessary and designed to stifle competition? My guess is they'll laud the decision.
  - AllenKids 14y ago
    Yes, the battle is nasty and Samsung/Google (both are immensely powerful, and not human) is in no danger of being driven out. Why should I feel bad about it? I'd like to see 3X damage preferably as an AAPL shareholder.
    - mcantelon 14y ago
      While that is a somewhat rational viewpoint, I am old-fashioned enough to consider the philosophy that right and wrong don't matter, only profits, to be unhealthy.
      - CamperBob2 14y ago
        It would be rational if Apple could somehow be certain that they have duly licensed all applicable patents for the technology in all of their products. So, no... it's about as rational as stripping naked and running through Times Square with a vuvuzela, daring the cops to come after you.
        AllenKids 14y ago
        It is rational cause Apple can be sure that it does not willfully infringe on others patents and risks regarding those patents mines unavoidable can be managed through ad hoc negotiation and lawyers, lots of lawyers. Given such a high profile case just resulted in a puny $1B amount, with its over $100B war chest, Apple can take a few dozens of these lawsuits easily. Let's see who's willing to go against Apple and comes out ahead.
      - AllenKids 14y ago
        Apple is not a company only focus on profits, far from it, regardless what every other HNer is trying to paint them to be. Philosophically what is right and wrong, and to whom? That's another question. Of course using metaphysics to muddling the water is not my intention, but even using the common sense definition of "right and wrong" I still do not see what Apple does here as "evil" or "unhealthy". It is self serving to be sure, but I'm not convinced that the market is necessarily harmed in the process. There is and will be fierce competition in the mobile arena for many years to come unlike the portable music player market. Anyone is willing to take a bet against my observation? Apple is using the system to its own advantage, just as Google, if wielding patent bat is fundamentally wrong, then Google the white knight in shinning armor is a bigger cunt for its hypocrisy.
        mcantelon 14y ago
    - CamperBob2 14y ago
      No, you wouldn't. If you don't think that Apple has more to lose from America's insane patent system than they could possibly stand to gain, I'd submit that you haven't thought the question through all the way. Do you think even they could afford to pay treble damages on every patent claim they actually infringe?
      - cageface 14y ago
        This is the point I keep trying to make in this argument. In the long run this suit sets a bad precedent for everybody, including Apple. The patent trolls are licking their chops after this judgement.
      - AllenKids 14y ago
        Oh, but Apple has been operating in this insane environment for 30+ years and trolls come out of the woodwork every week trying to get some quick buck off of them. And Apple has had lost a few IP fights in its years. I'm confident to say Apple and its army of lawyers will be doing just fine in America's insane patent system. So the answer is no, I do not think Apple is incompetent enough to have to pay triple damages on every patent claim they actually infringe or do not infringe.
azakai 14y ago
Yes, they are just (ab)using the system that currently exists, but it takes a lot of gall to ask for yet more, when the positive verdict was so precariously and unfairly won (the jury foreman that completely misunderstood what prior art means and invented an "interchangeability" definition for infringement).
recoiledsnake 14y ago
They also asked for a permanent injunction on sales of the infringing devices. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/22/us-apple-samsung-idUSBRE88L04B20120922 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/22/us-apple-samsung-i...
xaa 14y ago
Apple is trying hard to rival Oracle for the "most dickish technology company" slot. To recap, they've so far: 1. Partially reversed the commoditization of PC hardware, driving up prices for consumers 2. Engaged in large-scale App Store censorship 3. Gouged 30% from eBook content owners 4. Exploited Foxconn workers (possibly) 5. Are sitting on an enormous pile of cash and donate nothing to charity And now patent trolling. I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally feel it is unethical to buy Apple products. I think the ethical tone of the company was set when Jobs screwed Woz out of the bonus for Breakout for Atari. But hey, they made computing shinier. Yay?
- philwebster 14y ago
  There are issues with all of your points, but 3, 4, and 5 are especially bad. 3. Amazon and Barnes & Noble charge similar prices. Apple's flat 70% no matter the price is the simplest to understand. 4. Apple has been very upfront about improving worker conditions, more so than other companies in the industry. 5. False, see http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/08/apple-institutes-new-charitable-matching-program-for-employees/ http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/08/apple-institutes-new-cha... I'm not saying that Apple is perfect or that they couldn't improve their policies, but those are some weak arguments.
  - xaa 14y ago
    3. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/04/13/the-apple-e-book-lawsuit-and-amazons-999-problem http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/20... 4. Yes, I qualified this with a "possibly". Their public statements have seemed to indicate that they are willing to change. But progress has been "mixed": http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57516945-37/watchdog-group-once-again-blasts-foxconn-apple-over-labor/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57516945-37/watchdog-group... Then, there is the question of why they only seemed to realize there was a problem after a NPR expose. 5. Yes, "nothing" was hyperbole. But they lag companies of similar size: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/apple-charity-donation_n_1253185.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/apple-charity-donat... When Exxon is giving more than you on a per-market-cap basis, you might have a problem. Overall, I think Tim Cook is moving the company in a better direction. But they have a long way to go.
alphang 14y ago
I believe Nilay Patel at The Verge has previously said that this is an expected maneuver for this type of litigation after the initial verdict, including asking for maximum damages and sales ban. Can a lawyer on HN comment on this?
mrinterweb 14y ago
This is the kind of stuff that makes me feel awkward any time I use my Air in public. Business practices like this make me feel guilty for purchasing Apple products.
- czhiddy 14y ago
  > Business practices like this make me feel guilty for purchasing Apple products. Samsung's history of corporate scandals and widespread corruption would make them even less palatable then, no?
- uvTwitch 14y ago
  I've always felt that way about apple, which is why I've never owned any of their products. If this is how you feel, you'd likely feel better if you did the same.
lines 14y ago
If you take asking for the additional damages the law allows (most of which is based on willfulness, which the jury explicitly upheld), plus an injunction (which everyone always asks for) as anything other than lawyers taking the case to its logical conclusion, you're being silly. Whatever you think about the case, this is nothing new or surprising.
uvTwitch 14y ago
Is anybody really surprised to learn that apple is a scummy business? Their polished exterior hides a rotten core - as anyone who's ever worked with xcode or any of their APIs can cofirm - and their smug, self-satisfied, elitist marketing has always been the biggest indicator of this.
31reasons 14y ago
It feels like Apple's soul is gone and now its a zombie hungry for cash. All of their executives and their top engineers are already awash in cash. They are worlds top company. what are they after now ? Is this how the greed looks like at a global scale ? They should learn from nature, Lions do hunt for food but when they are satisfied they leave other animals to scrape meat off their hunt. They have stopped acting like smart group of people and more like a tumor.

49 points by nsns 14y ago

1qaz2wsx3edc 14y ago

And twist the knife.

artursapek 14y ago

Is this really warranted? Hasn't Apple won?

ww520 14y ago
Apple won the court case, not yet won the mobile war.

antihero 14y ago

Well this just makes them absolutely nasty cunts then. Surely even the most hardcore Apple fanatic thinks this is completely unnecessary and designed to stifle competition?

mcantelon 14y ago
>Surely even the most hardcore Apple fanatic thinks this is completely unnecessary and designed to stifle competition? My guess is they'll laud the decision.
- AllenKids 14y ago
  Yes, the battle is nasty and Samsung/Google (both are immensely powerful, and not human) is in no danger of being driven out. Why should I feel bad about it? I'd like to see 3X damage preferably as an AAPL shareholder.
  - mcantelon 14y ago
    While that is a somewhat rational viewpoint, I am old-fashioned enough to consider the philosophy that right and wrong don't matter, only profits, to be unhealthy.
    - CamperBob2 14y ago
      It would be rational if Apple could somehow be certain that they have duly licensed all applicable patents for the technology in all of their products. So, no... it's about as rational as stripping naked and running through Times Square with a vuvuzela, daring the cops to come after you.
      - AllenKids 14y ago
        It is rational cause Apple can be sure that it does not willfully infringe on others patents and risks regarding those patents mines unavoidable can be managed through ad hoc negotiation and lawyers, lots of lawyers. Given such a high profile case just resulted in a puny $1B amount, with its over $100B war chest, Apple can take a few dozens of these lawsuits easily. Let's see who's willing to go against Apple and comes out ahead.
    - AllenKids 14y ago
      Apple is not a company only focus on profits, far from it, regardless what every other HNer is trying to paint them to be. Philosophically what is right and wrong, and to whom? That's another question. Of course using metaphysics to muddling the water is not my intention, but even using the common sense definition of "right and wrong" I still do not see what Apple does here as "evil" or "unhealthy". It is self serving to be sure, but I'm not convinced that the market is necessarily harmed in the process. There is and will be fierce competition in the mobile arena for many years to come unlike the portable music player market. Anyone is willing to take a bet against my observation? Apple is using the system to its own advantage, just as Google, if wielding patent bat is fundamentally wrong, then Google the white knight in shinning armor is a bigger cunt for its hypocrisy.
      - mcantelon 14y ago
  - CamperBob2 14y ago
    No, you wouldn't. If you don't think that Apple has more to lose from America's insane patent system than they could possibly stand to gain, I'd submit that you haven't thought the question through all the way. Do you think even they could afford to pay treble damages on every patent claim they actually infringe?
    - cageface 14y ago
      This is the point I keep trying to make in this argument. In the long run this suit sets a bad precedent for everybody, including Apple. The patent trolls are licking their chops after this judgement.
    - AllenKids 14y ago
      Oh, but Apple has been operating in this insane environment for 30+ years and trolls come out of the woodwork every week trying to get some quick buck off of them. And Apple has had lost a few IP fights in its years. I'm confident to say Apple and its army of lawyers will be doing just fine in America's insane patent system. So the answer is no, I do not think Apple is incompetent enough to have to pay triple damages on every patent claim they actually infringe or do not infringe.

azakai 14y ago

Yes, they are just (ab)using the system that currently exists, but it takes a lot of gall to ask for yet more, when the positive verdict was so precariously and unfairly won (the jury foreman that completely misunderstood what prior art means and invented an "interchangeability" definition for infringement).

recoiledsnake 14y ago

They also asked for a permanent injunction on sales of the infringing devices. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/22/us-apple-samsung-idUSBRE88L04B20120922 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/22/us-apple-samsung-i...

xaa 14y ago

Apple is trying hard to rival Oracle for the "most dickish technology company" slot. To recap, they've so far: 1. Partially reversed the commoditization of PC hardware, driving up prices for consumers 2. Engaged in large-scale App Store censorship 3. Gouged 30% from eBook content owners 4. Exploited Foxconn workers (possibly) 5. Are sitting on an enormous pile of cash and donate nothing to charity And now patent trolling. I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally feel it is unethical to buy Apple products. I think the ethical tone of the company was set when Jobs screwed Woz out of the bonus for Breakout for Atari. But hey, they made computing shinier. Yay?

philwebster 14y ago
There are issues with all of your points, but 3, 4, and 5 are especially bad. 3. Amazon and Barnes & Noble charge similar prices. Apple's flat 70% no matter the price is the simplest to understand. 4. Apple has been very upfront about improving worker conditions, more so than other companies in the industry. 5. False, see http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/08/apple-institutes-new-charitable-matching-program-for-employees/ http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/08/apple-institutes-new-cha... I'm not saying that Apple is perfect or that they couldn't improve their policies, but those are some weak arguments.
- xaa 14y ago
  3. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/04/13/the-apple-e-book-lawsuit-and-amazons-999-problem http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/20... 4. Yes, I qualified this with a "possibly". Their public statements have seemed to indicate that they are willing to change. But progress has been "mixed": http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57516945-37/watchdog-group-once-again-blasts-foxconn-apple-over-labor/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57516945-37/watchdog-group... Then, there is the question of why they only seemed to realize there was a problem after a NPR expose. 5. Yes, "nothing" was hyperbole. But they lag companies of similar size: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/apple-charity-donation_n_1253185.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/apple-charity-donat... When Exxon is giving more than you on a per-market-cap basis, you might have a problem. Overall, I think Tim Cook is moving the company in a better direction. But they have a long way to go.

alphang 14y ago

I believe Nilay Patel at The Verge has previously said that this is an expected maneuver for this type of litigation after the initial verdict, including asking for maximum damages and sales ban. Can a lawyer on HN comment on this?

mrinterweb 14y ago

This is the kind of stuff that makes me feel awkward any time I use my Air in public. Business practices like this make me feel guilty for purchasing Apple products.

czhiddy 14y ago
> Business practices like this make me feel guilty for purchasing Apple products. Samsung's history of corporate scandals and widespread corruption would make them even less palatable then, no?
uvTwitch 14y ago
I've always felt that way about apple, which is why I've never owned any of their products. If this is how you feel, you'd likely feel better if you did the same.

lines 14y ago

If you take asking for the additional damages the law allows (most of which is based on willfulness, which the jury explicitly upheld), plus an injunction (which everyone always asks for) as anything other than lawyers taking the case to its logical conclusion, you're being silly. Whatever you think about the case, this is nothing new or surprising.

uvTwitch 14y ago

Is anybody really surprised to learn that apple is a scummy business? Their polished exterior hides a rotten core - as anyone who's ever worked with xcode or any of their APIs can cofirm - and their smug, self-satisfied, elitist marketing has always been the biggest indicator of this.

31reasons 14y ago

It feels like Apple's soul is gone and now its a zombie hungry for cash. All of their executives and their top engineers are already awash in cash. They are worlds top company. what are they after now ? Is this how the greed looks like at a global scale ? They should learn from nature, Lions do hunt for food but when they are satisfied they leave other animals to scrape meat off their hunt. They have stopped acting like smart group of people and more like a tumor.