Comments on: Apple expert shines light on Samsung sales in U.S. http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/ Apple and Mac News Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:46:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Derek Currie http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020745 Wed, 15 Aug 2012 10:10:29 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020745 Samsung argued that Apple, which was struggling to keep up with demand for the iPhone 4 from July to October of 2010, did not have the capacity to have delivered on those additional sales.

Samsung’s statement is fascinating. They’re talking as if they have ALREADY lost the lawsuit to Apple and are now haggling over damages due. LOVE IT.

soooo screwed! :lol:

]]> By: twimoon1 http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020330 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:36:21 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020330 Is that sort of like when I break into your safe deposit box and take advantage of the unused jewelry?

]]> By: bobchr http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020271 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 18:33:35 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020271 Apparently Samsung decided to take advantage of and relieve Apple’s pent up demand..

]]> By: Clark W Griswold http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020258 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 18:15:38 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020258 The point of Samsung’s argument is that the damages should be lower because Apple wouldn’t have sold similar volumes as did Samsung’s infringing products due to alleged Apple production problems. In short, they’re claiming that Apple didn’t lose sales as a result of infringement because they didn’t have enough product available in the pipeline for sale during the period in question.

It’s a BS argument from an ethical perspective, but it’s a legal one. Without knowing more about the details of the trial, it sure sounds like Samsung’s now trying to sway the jury into leniency of penalty as opposed to dismissal.

]]> By: NCG598 http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020208 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:08:08 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020208 If the production had been diverted from Samsung’s copy’s of the iPhone to iPhone parts, then more volume could have been realized. But, Samsung was competing with Apple and available resource were used. At least, the way I would see it.

]]> By: Tetrachloride http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020175 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:29:55 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020175 The more sales, the higher chances that a jury/judge will see that Apple lost sales to Samsung, assuming that Samsung is found to have infringed Apple’s intellectual property.

]]> By: peterblood71 http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020170 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:26:13 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020170 Doesn’t give some company permission to copy another just because they may not have been able to deliver on those additional sales! What phony, self-serving and twisted logic! Nathan Thurm must be the lead attorney for Shamdung.

]]> By: auren http://macdailynews.com/2012/08/14/apple-expert-shines-light-on-samsung-sales-in-u-s/comment-page-1/#comment-1020168 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:23:52 +0000 http://macdailynews.com/?p=87746#comment-1020168 “did not have the capacity to have delivered on those additional sales.”

And what exactly does that have to do with the price of tea in Korea?

]]>