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

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'"

Comments

Editors: "it's" vs. "it is"

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Editors (samzenpus?),

Please consider changing the first line of the submission. It should read, "Apple is geared up for *its* second attempt".

Remember the golden rule: "it's" always expands to "it is". No exceptions.

Love,
A reader

Samsung's visibility

[Anubis IV]

...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 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.

Re:Samsung's visibility

[thedarknite]

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.

Re:Cant compete... litigate

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure (s)he does know what it means:

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=AAPL

Re:Apple is over

[Anne Thwacks]

You probably live in America and cant tell a carrier from a manufacturer. Here in Europe, we get frequent (more than one a month) updates to our Samsung Android phones from good carriers.

Re:Don't ask the lawyers

[DragonWriter]

Apple's legal team doesn't have any billable hours, they are on salary.

No, Apple's legal team for the case (from the firm of Gibson, Dunne & Crutcher, LLP) are not in-house, salaries staff.

Re:I really wish I had a time machine.

[Runaway1956]

I'm smug, thank you.

Back in the day, suggesting that ANY *nix variant might dominate ANY market other than servers would have had the whole world laughing at you.*

*cue the clueless who don't understand that Android is really a hacked Linux - yes, hacked, like it was meant to be. Need Linux to do something new and different? Just take it and make it do what you need!

Re:Apple is over

[shellbeach]

Cyanogenmod 10.1 is your friend - Android 4.2.2 on the Nexus S works better than ever ... in fact I'm posting from a Nexus S running it right now.

(why Google decided they could no longer support it, god only knows ... but the beauty of Android being open source means that it doesn't matter)

Re:dipping sales?

[the eric conspiracy]

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.

Re:what happened to not wanting to sue?

[vux984]

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.