Samsung pays billion dollar Apple settlement - in nickles

I've heard stories of annoyed customers settling $1000 charges in pennies, but sending 30 trucks full of nickles to pay the judgement that Apple got over suing Samsung for patent infringement takes this to a whole new level.

Especially if it actually happened.

It's a joke. Besides, Samsung's not paying diddly till all the appeals are exhausted.

And especially because nickles are worth like 7 cents these days.

Apple patented squares with rounded edges. Scion is next on their list.

Funny looking color for nickels.

I would never buy another apple product over the course of my life (well, technically I havent yet either), and exclusively buy Samsung (which I already have ) for all my electronics needs if this actually happens/happened

So, what they accomplished was reminding everyone that they had to pay for patent infringement

In Canada, loose pennies are not legal tender over a certain quantity. For this exact reason, I suspect.

Dr. Hess wrote: And especially because nickles are worth like 7 cents these days.

On a billion bucks that would be like what about $400,000,000 extra? Not bad.

Nickles are mostly copper.

Pennies are mostly zinc.

I'd tell you about the quarter, but this is enough I think.

4cylndrfury wrote: I would never buy another apple product over the course of my life (well, technically I havent yet either), and exclusively buy Samsung (which I already have ) for all my electronics needs if this actually happens/happened

I've been boycotting Apple my whole life, trust me it doesn't work.

There aren't that many nickles in existence.

PHeller wrote: Nickles are mostly copper. Pennies are mostly zinc. I'd tell you about the quarter, but this is enough I think.

Nice rhyming skillz...

Samsungs first move is to ask the judge to throw out the ruling based on the "rule of law". I know little about how our legal system works, but WTF is that? Why go through a trial by a jury of your peers if the judge can just flush the whole thing? And every expert agrees that it has zero chance of working, so why waste the time doing it? I don't get lawyers.

I reckon Jay Lamm is a consultant for Samsung.

Keith Tanner wrote: So, what they accomplished was reminding everyone that they had to pay for patent infringement

Funnily enough, Apple lost the same lawsuits in the EU and Korea. The US has been their only win so far, and the appeal is looking strong for Samsung with the other verdicts in...

N Sperlo wrote: Apple patented squares with rounded edges. Scion is next on their list.

On a serious note, I have tried to find out a list of what sort of features Apple is claiming they should hold exclusive rights to. I've looked but have not found a list.

I've heard the whole "They look very very similar." So does every berkeleying phone in existence! I mean, if no one has exclusive rights to the flip phone or a phone where you slide the screen to reveal a keyboard. Just doesn't happen.

I've also heard something about being able to recognize more than one finger touching the screen at once and something about the way things are displayed if you try to keep scrolling past the edge of something. Not sure about any of that though.

Wasn't it Xerox that won against Apple?

So there is a point that goes too far. And would you want technology that you spent millions developing being stolen freely by your competitors?

The big deal with this lawsuit is that an internal document from Samsung was leaked, where, point by point, Samsung's people analyzed the iPhone's features and interface, how it was better than their interface, and how they could improve theirs to match Apple's. In many cases the improvements that they suggested, and which were made, were just copying iOS, and in some of them, the document explicitly discusses ways in which they can copy iOS without getting caught.

So in this case, despite the big thing being patent infringement, what really did it was solid proof that Samsung was specifically ripping off Apple.

I've been considering a Samsung phone to replace the iPhone I'm currently using, but I'm not sure if I want to encourage a company that only makes its products good by ripping off the R&D that another company has spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars on. It's like patronizing one of those eBay aftermarket parts companies when you know that their products are cheap because they cloned American, European, or Japanese parts.

Max_Archer wrote: I've been considering a Samsung phone to replace the iPhone I'm currently using, but I'm not sure if I want to encourage a company that only makes its products good by ripping off the R&D that another company has spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars on. It's like patronizing one of those eBay aftermarket parts companies when you know that their products are cheap because they cloned American, European, or Japanese parts.

Then I'd suggest getting a Motorola or HTC phone. Because as for me, I certainly don't want to encourage a company that tries (mostly successfully) to patent every damn thing they can and isn't satisfied with their commercial success. They apparently have to remove all their competitors by using the courts, as well. This is all a continuation of Jobs' "thermonuclear war" against Android. The iPhone is a great device, but I like having a choice in the market, too.

pinchvalve wrote: Samsungs first move is to ask the judge to throw out the ruling based on the "rule of law". I know little about how our legal system works, but WTF is that? Why go through a trial by a jury of your peers if the judge can just flush the whole thing? And every expert agrees that it has zero chance of working, so why waste the time doing it? I don't get lawyers.

they may be among the lowest form of humanity, but lawyers aren't dumb.. they aren't just going to tell Samsung to just give up and not fight this any more... that would put them out of a job..

And, by paying in nickles, Samsung has turned this into a massive advertising campaign that people will talk about for a long time.

Does the settlement only cover technology that is worth less than $500?

I heard Apple is suing God next for making a fruit that looks like their logo and they are for Jobs to come back to life as part of the settlement!

Sultan wrote: I heard Apple is suing God next for making a fruit that looks like their logo and they are for Jobs to come back to life as part of the settlement!

i'm pretty sure Apple would never try to sue a divine being that their divine creator (Steve Jobs) didn't think even existed..

N Sperlo wrote: Apple patented squares with rounded edges. Scion is next on their list.

Nicely played, sir.