6 ms·

I believe it has been said many times that the main objective is to undo some of the harm that Apple has caused to Samsung. Hence, the public announcements.

jarcoal 14y ago
"harm" for a company is another way of saying money lost, so why not just fine Apple a ton of money and give it to Samsung?
- chc 14y ago
  Because that still allows Apple to profit from what the court views as severe misbehavior?
- aes256 14y ago
  Because there is no way of calculating the potential cost of the damage to Samsung's reputation. Plus, it makes far more sense to tackle the root of the problem — the harm caused to Samsung's reputation — by ordering Apple to make public announcements that its allegations against them were false.
- jbri 14y ago
  So it should be fine to break the law and commit any sort of crime against a company, and the only penalty should be giving them make-up money after the fact?
  - jarcoal 14y ago
    The lifeblood of a company is money, so yes. Phrasing it as "make-up money" implies it always has to be a slap on the wrist. It doesn't. It can be a devastating amount.
    - jbri 14y ago
      Is this intended to be punitive (as suggested by your "devastating amount" phrase), or is it indented to make-whole the injured party? If industrial espionage sets back a company's R&D by a decade, you can't fix that with money. Throwing money at the problem won't magically get your research back. It won't magically get your market-leading position back after your competitors take advantage of your setback. And we're not even starting on what happens if the party doing the injuring goes bankrupt before paying all that is owed. The idea that money is a magic panacea that fixes everything is completely wrong.
    - jarcoal 14y ago
      @jbri What would you offer as punishment in the example you just stated?
      - jbri 14y ago
        It is an example to show that a monetary payment is not always sufficient to repair any harm caused. For another example, you could consider the case where a company has lost a dominant market position due to libel and slander from a competitor. Being given money wouldn't magically repair that company's market position.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

jarcoal 14y ago

"harm" for a company is another way of saying money lost, so why not just fine Apple a ton of money and give it to Samsung?

chc 14y ago
Because that still allows Apple to profit from what the court views as severe misbehavior?
aes256 14y ago
Because there is no way of calculating the potential cost of the damage to Samsung's reputation. Plus, it makes far more sense to tackle the root of the problem — the harm caused to Samsung's reputation — by ordering Apple to make public announcements that its allegations against them were false.
jbri 14y ago
So it should be fine to break the law and commit any sort of crime against a company, and the only penalty should be giving them make-up money after the fact?
- jarcoal 14y ago
  The lifeblood of a company is money, so yes. Phrasing it as "make-up money" implies it always has to be a slap on the wrist. It doesn't. It can be a devastating amount.
  - jbri 14y ago
    Is this intended to be punitive (as suggested by your "devastating amount" phrase), or is it indented to make-whole the injured party? If industrial espionage sets back a company's R&D by a decade, you can't fix that with money. Throwing money at the problem won't magically get your research back. It won't magically get your market-leading position back after your competitors take advantage of your setback. And we're not even starting on what happens if the party doing the injuring goes bankrupt before paying all that is owed. The idea that money is a magic panacea that fixes everything is completely wrong.
  - jarcoal 14y ago
    @jbri What would you offer as punishment in the example you just stated?
    - jbri 14y ago
      It is an example to show that a monetary payment is not always sufficient to repair any harm caused. For another example, you could consider the case where a company has lost a dominant market position due to libel and slander from a competitor. Being given money wouldn't magically repair that company's market position.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]