Samsung Pays Apple $1 Billion Sending 30 Trucks Full of 5 Cents Coins

[rambaugh]

This morning more than 30 trucks filled with 5-cent coins arrived at Apple’s headquarters in California. Initially, the security company that protects the facility said the trucks were in the wrong place, but minutes later, Tim Cook (Apple CEO) received a call from Samsung CEO explaining that they will pay $1 billion dollars for the fine recently ruled against the South Korean company in this way.

Linky

Its a great idea but it turned out to be a hoax but even so the thought of such a thing is so satisfying.

[bobspud]

Why?

How is it that there are people in the world that cant see the fact that Apple totally redesigned smartphones from the ground up and turned them round from the freaky tulipe like the Nokia communicator to something that nearly everyone wanted? Have you never got pissed off because you caught other people taking the credit for your work in an attempt to get up the ladder?

Samsung and Google stole the intellectual property of Apple. They used that theft to speed up their path to market without even attempting to licence or remunerate the company that had put all the effort into the market.
They got busted for it and now have a fairly low cost to pay Apple for that technology. Why would being a dick about the way they pay help Samsung at all? They need to pay the fine and wind their neck in and start thinking hard about the way they build their products. I have several Samsung products in my home and nearly all of them have been replaced at least once due to design failures or reliability problems. These are big ticket items like fridge freezers and 50+ inch flat screens.

For the record, the amount of interest Samsung would lose on 1 billion dollars in the time that it was cashed out of their account traveling to apple would be startling compared to the cost of the stunt...

[NotAllThere]

Funny. I had a Sony Ericsson p910i a few years ago. The only difference I could see between it and the iPhone was that a) it was a lot more robust and b) it didn't have wifi connectivity.

What was that great Apple innovation that needed to be protected, because I can't work it out.

[Bunk]

What was that great Apple innovation that needed to be protected, because I can't work it out.

Style

[SupremeSpod]

Why?

How is it that there are people in the world that cant see the fact that Apple totally redesigned smartphones from the ground up and turned them round from the freaky tulipe like the Nokia communicator to something that nearly everyone wanted? Have you never got pissed off because you caught other people taking the credit for your work in an attempt to get up the ladder?

Samsung and Google stole the intellectual property of Apple. They used that theft to speed up their path to market without even attempting to licence or remunerate the company that had put all the effort into the market.
They got busted for it and now have a fairly low cost to pay Apple for that technology. Why would being a dick about the way they pay help Samsung at all? They need to pay the fine and wind their neck in and start thinking hard about the way they build their products. I have several Samsung products in my home and nearly all of them have been replaced at least once due to design failures or reliability problems. These are big ticket items like fridge freezers and 50+ inch flat screens.

For the record, the amount of interest Samsung would lose on 1 billion dollars in the time that it was cashed out of their account traveling to apple would be startling compared to the cost of the stunt...

What you say does have merit.

However when we get to the stage where a patent is granted for "The ability to play music in the background while using other features." It all starts to get a bit bogus imo.

[Pondlife]

Steve Jobs 1996
Ultimately it comes down to taste. It comes down to trying to expose yourself to the best things that humans have done and then try to bring those things in to what you're doing. I mean Picasso had a saying he said good artists copy great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas ehm and I think part of what made the Macintosh great was that the people working on it were musicians and poets and artists and zoologists and historians who also happened to be the best computer scientists in the world.

[The Spartan]

There are those that like iPhones and those that don't, it doesn't do much to tip the balance unless the only phone you can purchase is in fact an iPhone. These patent lawsuits have become a bit of a debacle with everyone purchasing/acquiring patents and then suing someone else.

[Bunk]

I agree that all these patent lawsuits are more harmful than helpful but anyone who thinks the iPhone didn't change smartphones is dreaming.

[SimonMac]

But as playing devils advocate, what differs the blind obsession of an anti-apple person from an apple fanboi?

Logic would dictate then Apple managed to do something right with its tablet's and smartphones that others failed to do, make them desirable. Prior to the iPhone there was not one smartphone pitched at the consumer, as mentioned they were all business devices like the Communicator and although Microsoft tried to launch a tablet as far back as 2002 it wasn't until the iPad was launched that tablets really took off, and since then the proliferation of "similar" devices in such a short time was not as a result of other manufactures doing their own R&D into what people wanted, it was a case of seeing Apple's product and saying I want a piece of that.

Patents have always been used, but in the past most companies have played nicely, we will let you incorporate our designs in your products if you do the same. However it got nasty and I agree there is now way too much litigation, but everyone is at it, Samsung as just as bad as Apple, and their products are priced very similarly but yet they don't get the same objections?! People have free will to buy what ever product they like, is it Apples fault that someone chooses to upgrade to the latest iPhone rather than switch to another product? Apple does what it does very well, it knows it won't appeal to the whole market so it focuses on its primary demographic and caters to their needs. It doesn't have a large product range, so doesn't have cheaper low end versions as it knows it can't compete, if a iPad mini comes out it will not be priced against the Nexus 7, or Kindle Fire at <$200 because the margins are not there to be profitably to the standard they expect.

[written on my new iPad, shiney makes things all better]

[The Spartan]

Thing is they're very expensive so not everyone can afford them and also they appeal to a select group, so potentially it may not make a vast difference other than money from licensing deals but then who want's to pay a licensing fee