Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Apple Technology

Apple Bringing Second Lawsuit To Samsung, Won't Wait For Appeal 239

Posted by samzenpus
from the history-repeating dept.
sl4shd0rk writes "Hot on the heels of last year's Apple win over Samsung, Apple is geared up for its second attempt at knocking Samsung's alleged copy-cat products off the store shelves. District Judge Lucy Koh asked both parties if they could stay the new case while the first one goes up on Appeal. Apple denied citing a delay would "seriously and irreparably prejudice Apple." The company "will likely suffer a long-term loss of market share and of downstream sales". Samsung replied with a statement saying "Apple will be unable to meet its burden of proving infringement without resorting to the same improper 'representative product' strategy," [that shouldn't have been allowed in the first case.] Although some may think this is a good move for business on Apple's part, some claim the litigation is responsible for Apple's dipping sales and stock prices as well as Increased visibility of Samsung. In the end however, all this litigation is most likely going to be shouldered on the pocketbook of the consumer'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Bringing Second Lawsuit To Samsung, Won't Wait For Appeal

Comments Filter:
  • Apple is over (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:05PM (#43141933)

    They just don't know it yet.

    • Re:Apple is over (Score:4, Insightful)

      by homey of my owney (975234) on Monday March 11, 2013 @04:06PM (#43142557)
      Right. In the same way that Exxon is over, though they too just don't know it yet.

      Unless either of them come up with another way to make money after their huge cash cows are done.
      • Re:Apple is over (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @05:39PM (#43143565)

        Right. In the same way that Exxon is over, though they too just don't know it yet.

        Exxon owns resources. Exxon produces a *commodity*. Exxon sells the said commodity to wholesalers, and other places on long term future contracts.

        To end consumers, Exxon is *not* a brand any more than Microchip.

        On the other hand, Apple is a brand. Apple does not sell commodities - they sell end products. Apple does not own resources (or round corners, despite what they claim). Apple makes *gadgets* and it is all about brand.

        Comparing Exxon to Apple is like comparing a farm to a corner store.

        Apple can go under much quicker than Exxon.

        Unless either of them come up with another way to make money after their huge cash cows are done.

        Exxon does not have a huge cash pile. Exxon invests the cash pile and returns dividends to shareholders - the real owners of the said cash pile.

        Apple, continues to make a larger cash pile for no reason. If they think they can just sit on that cash pile, then they are a real bad investment. No business, except for financials, should have large, unneeded cash piles, ever. Cash piles should be returned to their shareholders*

        * - I personally favour end-of-year lump sum based on profitability (or lack there of) instead of a steady dividend. Business should keep around funds (and assets) to fund any downturns and investments, but they should not be hoarding cash without a purpose.

  • by ganjadude (952775) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:07PM (#43141953) Homepage
    I thought the sitting CEO said he never wanted to sue to begin with, that the case was already in play when jobs died. If that were true, why a new lawsuit??
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:12PM (#43141997)

      Because they're all psychopaths who lie constantly even without themselves noticing?

      • by Nyder (754090)

        Because they're all psychopaths who lie constantly even without themselves noticing?

        Just like politicians.

    • by i kan reed (749298) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:13PM (#43142015) Homepage Journal

      Point of fact: you believed a press release. Don't ever do that. Doesn't matter who said it, when, where, or how. If they said it in a press release, their intent is to trick you somehow.

      • by ganjadude (952775)
        I never believed it, I was simply pointing out that publicly, cook said this, and now he is going in the opposite direction. But I do agree with your point.
      • by Nyder (754090)

        Point of fact: you believed a press release. Don't ever do that. Doesn't matter who said it, when, where, or how. If they said it in a press release, their intent is to trick you somehow.

        Just like politicians.

    • by knarf (34928) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:30PM (#43142197) Homepage

      Because truth is something malleable. The higher up you look, the more malleable it becomes. Go all the way to the top and the concept of truth becomes so malleable as to lose all meaning.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Not wanting to sue to begin with was probably due to the PR involved and bad inter-company relations (Samsung used to supply... screens?). Having won the last lawsuit to the tune of $1B, means that while he didn't really support the orignal lawsuit he's perfectly ok with other money making courthouse shinanegans.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Runaway1956 (1322357)

        Apple and SCO should join forces. Or, Apple should hire all of SCO's legal representatives. They need experience!

      • by vux984 (928602)

        Having won the last lawsuit to the tune of $1B

        The award has already been chopped almost in half, and the case hasn't even gotten to appeals yet.

        http://www.macgasm.net/2013/03/01/judge-koh-cuts-400-million-from-apple-samsung-suit/ [macgasm.net]

        I personally doubt there will be much of anything left of that award in the end.

        • Having won the last lawsuit to the tune of $1B

          The award has already been chopped almost in half, and the case hasn't even gotten to appeals yet.

          Errm, nope. The judgement is that parts of the award have been calculated wrong - and the end result may go down or even go up.

          • by vux984 (928602) on Monday March 11, 2013 @11:48PM (#43145997)

            The award was reduced based on the fact that the jury used an impermissible legal theory to calculate them. That is a straight up reduction.

            An additional trial was also ordered to calculate damages in cases where the judge couldn't simply strike them. The portion that falls under that may yet go up or down, but smart money would be on down; since the judge believes the same impermissible legal theory was used to calculate those damages too, but she doesn't have the information needed to break the total down into what parts were permissible and what wasn't.

            All that doesn't even consider the various underlying patents that are under pressure and a number of which have already been preliminarily ruled invalid. If / when they fall the damages will fall even further.

    • I thought the sitting CEO said he never wanted to sue to begin with, that the case was already in play when jobs died. If that were true, why a new lawsuit??

      Could be related to the fact that this "new" lawsuit was filed long before he said it.

    • by csumpi (2258986)
      AAPL share prices are going down the toilet. The iDevice gravy train is running out of steam. What else is there to do? Sue.
  • Unappealing (Score:4, Funny)

    by Laxori666 (748529) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:11PM (#43141981) Homepage
    These lawsuits are really affecting my decision to but a new iPhone. I just don't want to support such business practices. On the other hand the iPhone 5 is super shiny... decisions, decisions.
    • Re:Unappealing (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SternisheFan (2529412) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:27PM (#43142167)

      These lawsuits are really affecting my decision to but a new iPhone. I just don't want to support such business practices. On the other hand the iPhone 5 is super shiny... decisions, decisions.

      Confused about which smartphone OS to buy? Why not get both??

      http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/03/goophone-iphone5s-knockoff/ [wired.com]

    • Re:Unappealing (Score:4, Interesting)

      by fredprado (2569351) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:30PM (#43142195)
      The iPhone 5 is not that good. The Galaxy S3 is far superior, and chances are we will have GS4 before we have any other iPhone.
      • Re:Unappealing (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:42PM (#43142317)

        The funny thing is that the Nexus 4 is even better than the S3, and even without LTE it's way better than my old iPhone 5 that I upgraded from. Unless the iPhone 5s/6 break some seriously new ground to catch up in all the areas where Android is better (and the list increases every day) Apple is fucked.

        • I wanted to by a Nexus 4 when I was upgrading from my Nexus S - I always liked the Nexus line. But the "glass sandwich" design idea was dumb for the iPhone, and it's dumb for the Nexus. I went for a Galaxy Note iI instead.

      • by dimeglio (456244)

        The iPhone 5 is in fact quite good. Zero lag and extremely stable. However, if you like to tinker and install ROMs and rice-up your phone, don't get one.

        • Re:Unappealing (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:50PM (#43142409)

          Or if you like being able to get your music and pictures and notes off your phone. Also a good reason to get an Android phone.

        • Re:Unappealing (Score:4, Insightful)

          by LodCrappo (705968) on Monday March 11, 2013 @04:15PM (#43142647) Homepage

          there are plenty of reasons besides tinkering that Android is vastly more popular than iOS. In fact such activity is relatively rare on the Android platform, after all it is the most widely used smartphone platform in the world so it has certainly found favor far beyond some group of techies.

          Some examples of reasons that people are choosing Android:

          some people like to have a variety of choices in what their phone looks like
          some people prefer a more powerful environment
          some people like to stand out in a crowd rather than blending in
          some people prefer not to allow a massive corporation to censor the content and applications they are allowed to use
          etc...

          • some people like to stand out in a crowd rather than blending in

            By getting the most widely used smartphone platform?

            • by LodCrappo (705968)

              some people like to stand out in a crowd rather than blending in

              By getting the most widely used smartphone platform?

              With hundreds of different devices in all shapes and sizes, yes. Much easier than "thinking different" on a platform that allows one manufacturer who releases one model.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by BasilBrush (643681)

            Most of those people buying Androids do so because there are cheap models available. Apple doesn't serve that market.

            • Still in the market Apple serves, the high end smartphone market, Samsung alone has surpassed its market share.
      • by iamhassi (659463)
        Ya but how much longer is Samsung going to run android? [cnet.com] What will all the android users buy when Samsung no longer make android phones?
        • Don't be fooled by stupid FUDs. They would have to be insane to abandon a market where they are the top brand and extremely popular. A market they are taking from Apple and where they gain more and more ground as time passes. Samsung is stuck with Android for good. They may make phones with other OS, but their top flags with most likely run Android for a long long time.
    • by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:50PM (#43142407)

      On the other hand the iPhone 5 is super shiny...

      So are many fishing lures.

    • If Apple's business practices are affecting your decision, you may want to educate yourself on some of Samsung's business practices. Make sure you read through it all, rather than assuming that the first part is indicative of the rest, since the shady stuff doesn't really start until about halfway through the article.

  • by Chrono11901 (901948) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:12PM (#43141993)

    The standard procedure of a large company in decline.

    Samsung should make a commercial out of this.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:13PM (#43142007)

    I really wish I had a time machine. So I could show this to the Apple fanboys in the 90s - back when if you pointed out ANY criticism of Apple you'd get mod'ed down to oblivion and a shitload of comments like - "bu..bu..but Microsoft!"

    Listen folks, attaching yourself (identity) to anything, let alone some corporation's products, will lead to heartbreak.

    *expecting some smug comments from FOSS people now.*

  • by blind biker (1066130) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:16PM (#43142035) Journal

    Just in time for the release of the Samsung Galaxy S IV! I think the product launch can use any extra visibility that Apple is willing to give.

    In other news, Apple has decided to upgrade their own-foot-shooting shotgun to fully automatic. [wikipedia.org]

  • by Intropy (2009018) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:23PM (#43142119)

    The Judge asked Apple's lawyers, "Can stay the new case while the first one goes up on Appeal?" The only question they heard was "Do you want more or fewer billable hours?"

  • Samsung's visibility (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anubis IV (1279820) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:29PM (#43142183)

    ...as well as Increased visibility of Samsung.

    Samsung's visibility has a lot more to do with the fact that they spend gajillions of dollars on advertising [asymco.com] than with any of the lawsuits they're involved in. Hell, they're spending more than Apple, HP, Dell, and Microsoft combined when it comes to advertising. And then, on top of that they're spending about the same amount again on sales promotions. Billions upon billions of dollars.

    If you're a company that wants visibility, that's one way you can do it. That's how they did it. It's working for them. You'd have to willfully choose to ignore the obvious if you're seriously suggesting that these lawsuits that only niche communities are even aware of and concerned with are in any way responsible for a significant increase in the visibility of Samsung.

    • by thedarknite (1031380) on Monday March 11, 2013 @11:42PM (#43145957) Homepage
      I looked at the numbers that were used for those graphs and it's incredibly misleading. It cherry picks data to make it look like Samsung has a vastly higher marketing expenditure than other companies. The comparisons are also against companies that are really only in a few markets vs the nine that Samsung Electronics are involved in.
      Based on the 2011 annual reports.
      - Samsung lists $2.9 billion for advertising expenses and $4.5 billion on Sales promotion expenses. (total $7.4 billion)
      - Coca Cola lists $3.2 billion for advertising expenses and $5.8 billion for Promotions and Marketing programs (total $9 billion)
      - While Apple list $0.93 billion for advertising expenses, that is the only expense they give a value for in their SG&A of $7.6 billion which includes retail costs, marketing, professional services, advertising and "other".

      All that data shows is that everyone else hides their actual marketing expenditure better.
  • How can (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert42@gmail.com> on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:31PM (#43142227) Homepage Journal

    How can a product be a copy cat when it is *better* and *more innovative* than the original?

    • Re:How can (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:38PM (#43142283)

      How can a product be a copy cat when it is *better* and *more innovative* than the original?

      Sssh, hush, dearie, that logic only works when Apple was improving on the smartphones of the Days of Old. Not now when Apple's infallible Design(tm) is what's on the line.

    • by gordo3000 (785698)

      what is more innovative about a sIII than an iphone 5? Sitting down comparing a 4s to the sIII I didn't get blown away by anything on the sIII (or 4s). Both offer such incredibly similar abilities I can't find a single thing samsung has added (mind you, samsung, not google with android) that I would call innovative.

      *Better* is a choice, and most likely based on android vs iOS though could come down to the screen size and NFC (granted, outside of Japan, I can't think of anywhere NFC is very useful).

    • How can a product be a copy cat when it is *better* and *more innovative* than the original?

      Is it just me, or does this sound like the beginning of one of those "how many lawyers" jokes?

    • Clearly Samsung is traveling 50 years into the future, and stealing ideas from the then-state-of-the-art Apple phones and tablets.

  • Duh... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rabenja (919226) on Monday March 11, 2013 @03:34PM (#43142253) Journal

    In the end however, all this litigation is most likely going to be shouldered on the pocketbook of the consumer'"

    How in the world would this ever *not* be the case?

  • I don't think so.

    • Re:dipping sales? (Score:4, Informative)

      by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Monday March 11, 2013 @08:19PM (#43144849)

      Here's what the picture is:

      1. Sales are below forecasts.
      2. Margins are decreasing.
      3. Profits from operations are slightly down.
      4. Apple has missed revenue and profit forecasts its last 3 quarters.
      5. Apple (as usual) issues a lot of stock as part of its compensation program.
      6. Earnings per share declines.
      7. Apple is churning its product line with minor tweaks rather than real innovation.
      8. Apple is suing like crazy.
      9. People are wondering where the profit growth is going to come from.
      10. The stock has lost 40% of its market value.

  • by TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) on Monday March 11, 2013 @04:01PM (#43142499)

    Screw both Swatch and Apple in the same go.

    Anyways, its obvious Apples is just pissing money away on something they seem to be losing out on. Even if Samsung blatantly stole their original design cue's directly from Apple, the fact is Samsung is now the largest alternative to Apple, and nothing Apple is going to do to stop that. Even if Apple win's billions in compensation the fact is Samsung has created an empire suitable to dethrone Apple, which was Steve Jobs greatest fear, for Apple to become a runner up again.

    Of course its ridiculous to think that Apple could be dethroned on something like rounded corners on a rectangle, but the reality is Apple knows they did nothing innovative with iOS other then present a grid of rounded rectangles. Hell Steve Jobs even pissed on using a stylus with a Smartphone and Samsung has captured a huge market of people buying phones and tablets with a stylus now.

    These lawsuits are just working against Apple now their stock has tanked; while everyone was on board to support Apple when their stock was $700 a share those same people are just as easily out looking for blood.

    Apple isn't a darling anymore in anybody's eyes and their continued behavior will just cause more investors to lose faith that they can no longer remain an innovative company, just a has been trying to protect their old patents.

    • Samsung doesn't control Android. It could be their undoing.

  • ... then Apple would have never designed the iPhone the way it did, or probably would never have designed it at all. In fact, Apple might no longer even exist because no one would be investing in business because there would be no money to make.

    Not!

    Obviously Samsung is doing well without these certain patents. Other companies are doing well, too. What's special about Apple that would make it fail in this kind of competitive market? Oh wait ... it's all overpriced.

    The patent system SHOULD be there to enc

    • I don't blame Apple, though.

      I do blame Apple, for losing the plot on innovation and descending to the level of sleazy thugs.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Skapare (16644)

        The patent system defines the playing field. Apple is just playing in it like everyone else. They would not need these patents, and not even have a desire for them, other than this is how business is done with the bad patent system we do have. It's been long time to get rid of it.

        • The patent system defines the playing field. Apple is just playing in it like everyone else.

          No, Apple is playing it like a thuggish bully. And paying the price in terms of alienating its former fanatic supporters.

  • some claim the litigation is responsible for Apple's dipping sales and stock prices

    Apple gave me plenty of reasons not to buy their products with proprietary connectors and the "because we say so" attitude, but suing everyone who crosses their path was most certainly a nail in the coffin. I've owned a couple of iPhones and was even using Macs for a while, it wasn't the existence of better/cheaper products that chased me away, it was the companies overall attitude.

All the simple programs have been written.

Working...