Apple beats Samsung: the quotes

Apple beats Samsung: the quotesJimmy Martinez scribbled up a hunk of Apple/Samsung reportage on Saturday morning, detailing Sammo’s guilty verdict (x7) and the resultant bill for $1,049,343,540. Yeah, that’s roughly how much I get paid per paragraph.

Now we gots quotes from Samsung and Google. The Apple team was reportedly too busy doing shots of tequila in the adjacent bar.

Samsung was unsurprisingly quick to comment, taking to the courthouse steps and explaining that the guilty verdict is the end of the world for everyone.

“Today's verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer,” begins Samsung’s statement. “It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices.” Not so good.

“It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products.

“This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.”

Not the final word? Aww man, will this ever end?

Google, meanwhile, took a little longer to articulate its thoughts, and ultimately came up with this brief statement: “The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don't relate to the core Android operating system, and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office.”

The Androidians continue: “The mobile industry is moving fast and all players — including newcomers — are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don't want anything to limit that.”

I wouldn't know where to begin commenting, so I’m off for a lie down instead.

Read more about: Apple iPhoneAndroidiOSSamsung Galaxy SSamsung Galaxy S2

Add a comment
31 comments

CTPAHHIK  Aug. 27, 2012 at 14:38

Can I add one more?
"Considering how many Galaxies I see around London, Apple desperately needs to lay a golden egg with next iPhone or it won't matter how many court cases it wins".

On the other note, Does anyone know how many members of the jury were Apple shareholders?

socialjeebus  Aug. 27, 2012 at 14:51

Can I add one more?
"Considering how many Galaxies I see around London, Apple desperately needs to lay a golden egg with next iPhone or it won't matter how many court cases it wins".

On the other note, Does anyone know how many members of the jury were Apple shareholders?


That's actually a very, very good point. So many pension funds, hedge funds, etc have stakes in Apple (it's regarded as THE golden goose of US shares) so even if they don't own shares themselves they're probably indirectly invested in Apple.

If Apple do ever go **** up..wow!

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 15:00

Is that an actual quote, or are you quoting yourself? I have to agree, though. The number of white SGS2s I see is incredible, they're everywhere, it seems.

The court was less than 10 miles from Apple's HQ, so I guess most of the jury had a far closer affiliation with Apple than they did with Samsung (even if it was just "rooting for the home team"). I mean, you only have to look at American car culture to see how "imports" are viewed among Americans, especially "imports" from Asian countries (such as South Korea, coincidentally where Samsung's from). I'd be willing to bet that the love of American products and dislike of anything foreign (especially Asian, for some reason), doesn't stop at things with four wheels.

I saw somewhere a quote from a member of the jury saying they'd reached their decision within one day of deliberation, if you have no legal training, there's no way you could even review all of the evidence (bearing in mind some of it was shown and discussed weeks ago) in one day, never mind reach a fair and proper decision.

I don't know where the US Supreme Court is located (lets face it, this case will end up there) it's not something I've ever felt the need to look up, but I hope it's a hell of a long way away from Apple's HQ and California in general.

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 15:03

Can I add one more?
"Considering how many Galaxies I see around London, Apple desperately needs to lay a golden egg with next iPhone or it won't matter how many court cases it wins".

On the other note, Does anyone know how many members of the jury were Apple shareholders?


That's actually a very, very good point. So many pension funds, hedge funds, etc have stakes in Apple (it's regarded as THE golden goose of US shares) so even if they don't own shares themselves they're probably indirectly invested in Apple.

If Apple do ever go **** up..wow!

I think CTPAHHIK raised a good point (although I think shareholders may have been noticed :p). I bet most of the people in that area are stakeholders in Apple, whether that's directly or through a family member etc, Apple's influence is too great to find people under 10 miles of their HQ whose lives are in no way affected by Apple's success/failure.

louiselouise  Aug. 27, 2012 at 16:45

This was on Androidforums, and either deleted, or I just can't find it again for some reason:
"I'll guess that maybe someone at Apple quietly went to Diane Feinstein and/or Barbara Boxer and suggested that a loss in court might force Apple to relocate their headquarters to some place more supportive of Apple's needs. A move like that could cost the State of California untold millions of dollars in both lost revenue and jobs...
At that point California's two influential senators went to their buddy Harry Reid and one or more of them discretely had a meeting with certain influential members of the administration. And from there a representative of the administration contacted some influential ranking judges and suggested that a certain type of ruling might help certain judges to retain their seats or achieve higher seats within the court system."

Another comments that jurors should have been checked to see which smartphones they owned...though, being an Android user, I don't HATE or consider myself biased towards Apple. iphones are just too restrictive for me. I don't want a tablet, and I use my phone as my mp3 player. I prefer PCs for the best bang per buck. That's all.
Edit: I should add that the poster of that comment also added "At this point, anything suggested here is purely guesswork and conjecture! ;)"

blizzard7  Aug. 27, 2012 at 16:54

Can I add one more?
"Considering how many Galaxies I see around London, Apple desperately needs to lay a golden egg with next iPhone or it won't matter how many court cases it wins".


Don't really think that's the case. Even if the next iPhone is a modest upgrade, it'll still do as well as the iPhone 4S. The number of core Apple supporters have grown a lot recently and now that they have bought into the iOS ecosystem, it'll take A LOT to remove them from that.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:04

That is quite an inflammatory post - not surprised it got 'deleted'. "maybe someone at Apple quietly went to Diane Feinstein"

Maybe? Wait, I'm not saying these things don't happen. These thing don't NOT happen, but it's a tad, well, unethical, to just throw it out.
Also, as I pointed out elsewhere: Samsung are not exactly choirboys.
But the "USA USA USA" sentiment definitely was at play - Apple shares or not.

Matt has a point, too. I wonder if the jury foreman (who has bragged about his own patents (!!!), and his deep knowledge of patentlaw) should have been allowed on the jury. Or, was indeed on the jury by accident.
Also: as to "reaching a decision after just 1 day of deliberations": experiments have shown again and again that jurors reach their verdicts more often than we like to appreciate within seconds of seeing the defendant. And if said defendant is Samsung vs American Pie - with the promise of a boost to US business and US jobs and a happy afterlife, well...

On the other hand: gimme a break! Some Samsung devices look very much like Apple's.
It's very plain to see. And not just RIM's BBs or Nokia's Lumias don't. Few tablets are as similar to the iPad as Samsung's. And in addition to Nokia and Blackberry other companies have made many many phones that do not look at all like the iPhone. Yes, they are rectangular and have bezels and curves blah blah blah... but they look different.

Lastly: positive warm feelings towards a local player like Apple.... well, same goes for other companies elsewhere. Samsung are known to play hardball in Asia.
So, I guess what Im trying to get to is this: why do WE bother picking sides? They ALL
spend many many many millions to make us want stuff we mostly don't NEED (evolution has proven that). And when push comes to shove, all those CEOs and their muppets stand united against us...

So: yawn yawn yawn

louiselouise  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:11

I can see a "Boycott Apple" page too, but I think, choosing one team or the other, isn't being realistic. Fanboyism always makes me uncomfortable, painting people black and white is too simplistic; there's always greys.
This is stuff we KNOW about. Business is ruthless; it's not a coincidence that "borderline psychopathic" personalities do well in the business realm. So I won't paint Apple or Samsung as good or bad.
What I do know is, Apple are stupid to go down the patent lawsuit road. It's ridiculous.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:16

I can see a "Boycott Apple" page too, but I think, chosing one team or the other, isn't being realistic. Fanboyism always makes me uncomfortable, painting people black and white is too simplistic; there's always greys.
This is stuff we KNOW about. Business is ruthless; it's not a coincidence that "borderline psychopathic" personalities do well in the business realm. So I won't paint Apple or Samsung as good or bad.
What I do know is, Apple are stupid to go down the patent lawsuit road. It's ridiculous.


I agree. Corporate psychopathy is probably THE biggest threat to humanity. No f*cking kidding.

Are Apple "stupid" to go down that road? I honestly won't go that far. I cannot be ar*d to go and contortion my brain to try and think like those vampires. And I am sure they know things WE don't and never will.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:18

PS "boycott Apple"? LOL Hey, how do you do that? Recently there were huge campaigns calling to "boycott Samsung" - the cause were actually a lot more worthy than Apple's greed. But you can hardly boycott Samsung while living an electrical online life. Daft.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:20

PS "boycott Apple"? LOL Hey, how do you do that? Recently there were huge campaigns calling to "boycott Samsung" - the cause were actually a lot more worthy than Apple's greed. But you can hardly boycott Samsung while living an electrical online life. Daft.

Also: blizzard is totally right imho, matt. The next iPhone could be EXACTLY like an iPhone 4S only a tad bigger, and it'll still outsell every other phone, and, more importantly (?) generate MORE profit.

louiselouise  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:22

It seems like playground stuff to me, the "boycott" this or that. Are you friends with Elaine or are you friends with Carol? You can't be friends with both or I won't talk to you :P (though I suspect that's more of a female's take on friendship/loyalty).
I'm long in the tooth enough to remember Commodore 64 V Sinclair Spectrum spats in the playground, usually started by boys (also, handily, encouraged by the Zzzap 64 and Crash! magazines).
Even back then, I liked what I had and didn't feel moved to pointlessly argue about it.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 27, 2012 at 17:32

hahahaha :D

louiselouise  Aug. 27, 2012 at 18:51

Actually, the post I mentioned is still there. I'd make a crap researcher. http://androidforums.com/4868820-post92.html

CTPAHHIK  Aug. 27, 2012 at 19:33

Don't agree with Matt's on import analogy - most popular US cars are Honda and Toyota due to their quality. BMW and Audi are distant second. MB is on par with US cars. Due to cheap gas and big county side trucks are very popular and most reliable trucks are US made.
Apple would not move to new place either, but it does generate massive amount of US jobs and all politicians are crazy about that. No jobs = no votes = no power. It's a valid point why Apple was favored in court and I say favored because it's clear that Apple is not innocent either as Samsung does have valid infringement case.
Apple is quite overpriced and it's known on trading floor. While it can be milked it will be milked as mostly private shareholders will take a hit - big guys will trade out faster. Stock price is all about market expectations and they are pretty high towards Apple, I don't think another 4S will cut it.

blizzard7  Aug. 27, 2012 at 21:21

Actually, the post I mentioned is still there. I'd make a crap researcher. http://androidforums.com/4868820-post92.html

I wouldn't be surprised if something a bit dodgy went on like that. Either way, I think Samsung's best bet for a reprieve would be to attack the validity of the patent rather than a bog standard appeal.

Apple is quite overpriced and it's known on trading floor. While it can be milked it will be milked as mostly private shareholders will take a hit - big guys will trade out faster. Stock price is all about market expectations and they are pretty high towards Apple, I don't think another 4S will cut it.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple's share price bombs when they announce their fiscal Q4 results. Very few will actually buy any iPhones as we wait for the iPhone 5, the iPods will continue their downward trend, the "new iPad" isn't so new any more and the Mac notebooks (which are their most important Macs) have already been updated so there won't be any push there.

Pondlife  Aug. 27, 2012 at 23:54

Matt has a point, too. I wonder if the jury foreman (who has bragged about his own patents (!!!), and his deep knowledge of patentlaw) should have been allowed on the jury. Or, was indeed on the jury by accident.
Also: as to "reaching a decision after just 1 day of deliberations": experiments have shown again and again that jurors reach their verdicts more often than we like to appreciate within seconds of seeing the defendant. And if said defendant is Samsung vs American Pie - with the promise of a boost to US business and US jobs and a happy afterlife, well...

On the other hand: gimme a break! Some Samsung devices look very much like Apple's.
It's very plain to see. And not just RIM's BBs or Nokia's Lumias don't. Few tablets are as similar to the iPad as Samsung's. And in addition to Nokia and Blackberry other companies have made many many phones that do not look at all like the iPhone. Yes, they are rectangular and have bezels and curves blah blah blah... but they look different.


Yep, sounds mad that he was allowed on, especially as the rest seem to have just bent over and taken whatever he said. Also sounds mad that just 9 people get to decide on something that huge.

The tablets were found to not infringe though.. oO
Some look vaguely similar with the lights dim but to find that they all did...
Nokia's Lumias nor BB may not look that much like them but this seems to open the doors to them being in court, though Nokia is safe on the OS side for the Lumias anyway.
Did you see the one quote about Bezels?

All in all though I bet even if Apple bought the Jury they couldn't have expected as good an outcome.

louiselouise  Aug. 28, 2012 at 01:59

Against: (The "Boycott Apple" movement): http://www.cultofmac.com/177786/why-the-boycott-apple-movement-is-dumb/
"The horrible truth is that all phones theoretically violate patents. Every smart phone contains literally thousands of patentable ideas, many of which are claimed by multiple companies or individuals."
"When Apple and Motorola were going at it last month, the judge got fed up and told both parties to get out and not come back." Indeed.
For: http://www.muktware.com/3871/why-boycott-apple-movement-matters-why-its-not-dumb

Pondlife  Aug. 28, 2012 at 02:36

Can't work out if horrible truth quote is supposed to be for or against.

Simple reason that it's dumb is a that most of them involved were likely not buying apple anyway. It'd be like Cameron boycotting poundland*. Or me boycotting Brussels Sprouts. Or most people boycotting holidays to Iraq or Afghanistan.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 28, 2012 at 12:33

Matt has a point, too. I wonder if the jury foreman (who has bragged about his own patents (!!!), and his deep knowledge of patentlaw) should have been allowed on the jury. Or, was indeed on the jury by accident.
Also: as to "reaching a decision after just 1 day of deliberations": experiments have shown again and again that jurors reach their verdicts more often than we like to appreciate within seconds of seeing the defendant. And if said defendant is Samsung vs American Pie - with the promise of a boost to US business and US jobs and a happy afterlife, well...

On the other hand: gimme a break! Some Samsung devices look very much like Apple's.
It's very plain to see. And not just RIM's BBs or Nokia's Lumias don't. Few tablets are as similar to the iPad as Samsung's. And in addition to Nokia and Blackberry other companies have made many many phones that do not look at all like the iPhone. Yes, they are rectangular and have bezels and curves blah blah blah... but they look different.


Yep, sounds mad that he was allowed on, especially as the rest seem to have just bent over and taken whatever he said. Also sounds mad that just 9 people get to decide on something that huge.

The tablets were found to not infringe though.. oO
Some look vaguely similar with the lights dim but to find that they all did...
Nokia's Lumias nor BB may not look that much like them but this seems to open the doors to them being in court, though Nokia is safe on the OS side for the Lumias anyway.
Did you see the one quote about Bezels?

All in all though I bet even if Apple bought the Jury they couldn't have expected as good an outcome.

12 people get to murder people in the name of "the people"... that IS huge.

Pondlife  Aug. 28, 2012 at 12:53

Well hardly given the huge appeal process involved in that gameplay, besides I'd guess those are usually somewhat easier to follow than this should have been.

Pondlife  Aug. 28, 2012 at 12:58

The more they say the less it looks like they did any of what they were supposed to do.
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/08/why-the-apple-v-samsung-ruling-may-not-hold-up/

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 28, 2012 at 13:28

Well hardly given the huge appeal process involved in that gameplay, besides I'd guess those are usually somewhat easier to follow than this should have been.

Ah, yes... the easiness of DNA, psychology, statistics, probability and all that... :p

On a sidenote - funny how many of the analyses now were written by folks who never ever believed Apple could win this. Yet, with the same 'certainty' they now spout "how and why and if" scenarios... I'm pretty bored by this now.

Pondlife  Aug. 28, 2012 at 13:43

See pretty basic stuff really.

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 28, 2012 at 13:54

The more they say the less it looks like they did any of what they were supposed to do.
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/08/why-the-apple-v-samsung-ruling-may-not-hold-up/

That jury is was an absolute joke. It's blatantly obvious that 8 members of the jury were led, or should that be misled, by the patent holding jury foreman. The jury even were proud to announce that their damages weren't meant to just be a "slap on the wrist" for Samsung, the problem is, their jury instructions explicitly state that damages awarded aren't meant to be a punishment, but a financial reimbursement to the "victim". Do I, from a purely legal standpoint, think this jury made decisions which "no reasonable jury" could make? Yes, definitely. They awarded damages to devices which, by their own judgement, did not infringe on Apple's patents. $2 million of damages awarded for a device they said didn't infringe...could these idiots even read? Were they paid by Apple not to read? Are they Apple stakeholders (living so close to the HQ of the world's largest company?

Originally, I didn't believe Samsung would have grounds for an appeal based on the jury making unreasonable decisions, due to the time spent picking a jury at the beginning of the trial. It appears that time was wasted. I felt their best (but still slim) chance of a successful appeal was to appeal against the validity of some of Apple's patents. The more I read about this jury and its decisions, the more I feel they were a bunch of incompetent fools who were led like sheep by one man, who happened to be the jury foreman, who held a patent of his own and therefore felt he was some kind of patent law expert.

Email:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

Comment: