Gadgetory

hey and welcome to a very special edition of The Verge cast tonight the jury has come back with their verdict in the apple vs samsung case and we're here to discuss it live and it's actually still unfolding I'm Josh Topolsky of course and with me now is david pierce in the studio and there is right there and we have matt macari on the phone one of our legal experts I'm sorry on skype there you are and also ross miller our senior editor who is currently in georgia right now that's not a picture that's sleepy that's actually live video cross right now he's covering this live from drew we wanted to get the southern what's the southern take on this and have it but I'm et anyhow uh nilay patel will be joining us in a little bit he's actually still covering this as it happens so let me just give you the if you guys don't know and i don't know how you possibly found this broadcast and are listening to it if you don't know what's going on but the jury came back today to deliver their verdict in the apple vs samsung a case they deliberated for just about 22 hours and which is a very short amount of time i think the general perception here is a very short amount of time for this jury to deliberate they came back after about 22 hours of deliberation said that they had a verdict and they found predominantly in favor of apple in this case there are a couple of as I think as of right now there are a couple of issues with the verdict form and and so we're going to hear a little bit more on that Samsung has issued a statement which I'll read in a minute but right now I want to get Matt who is intimately familiar with these with with what this verdict means and sort of can break it down for us Matt can you tell can you tell everybody can you tell me what what does this mean what actually happened here where did they find for Apple where did they not find for Apple and and what and what ultimately is a breakdown and I which is what I had one more thing is that the jury has awarded damages to Apple right now of 1 billion 51 million and change which is short of the two point oh I believe it was 2.25 billion that could have been that's right maximum amount of damages that could've been awarded so Matt can you tell us what is the verdict to break down the verdict for us what is what did we see about an hour ago what does it really mean I don't we don't have audio on Matt Matt hang on one second we don't have audio nightfall sir there we go stop muting yourself okay so what does it mean Brad break it down what do these what-what actually came in today well they what it wasn't it wasn't a clear you know they didn't take every checkbox in mark yes or no for Apple obviously they checked a lot of yes boxes but they went through and on the software patents they pretty much gave him a straightforward win we're talking to Bob bounce back tap to zoom patents of apples and then on the design pads it was kind of a mixed bag but it was obviously you know ninety percent Apple but there were a few you know cases where they actually did their job and looked at the phones and said just you know this doesn't copy the design patents or I think I'll so on the trade dress side for certain models which I think probably should never been included on under site somebody has two models don't really match up very nicely right with with the design patents so what were what were the places where where Apple actually didn't get what it wanted me can you be more specific about those baath yeah there's a little odd a feeling that they're kind of kind of broken up and it for instance on the software patents at a 381 bounce back pad and they had every device infringed right now again these are the devices that came out before they did their design around for the bounce back on the tap to zoom I believe it was the ace intercept and replenished were the only ones that were found not to infringe is that does that seem odd to you those devices were singling out amongst it I wasn't aware that there was really any difference when it came to software i can see this happening on the design side because there were some changes in the designers a little it perhaps yeah I don't know I mean I don't know why if you're talking about the same it's the same touch whoa ass right yeah this is this is odd to me I mean does this make you feel like this jury didn't fully understand some of the what they were looking at because to me it's it's if you're looking at the software and you see the you know the bounce-back infringe infringement happening on the galaxy s2 and it's running the same software as and I by the way I maybe I don't know for certain that this is the case but my impression was it was a is this a particular version of TouchWiz that they are saying it was on all these devices I don't know the actual version that was running on each of the devices they'd seen but if it didn't have the fix basically the workaround wouldn't it wouldn't they have had to find that for all of those devices doesn't that seem the software is the same right and this is a part during the trial that was pretty wonky is that they really did have enough time to go through all these particular devices so a lot of this analysis the jurors did in the deliberation room and i'm not sure why the ace and interceptor replenished wouldn't have the same exact software features right as the rest of the devices i mean i can tell you on the design side why there were some you know some no votes on infringement feel free please do so so if you go through those you could you can see that they I'm pulling it up because it was hard to track during the actual reading of the verdict well I'll tell you what why don't you take a look I know there's a bunch of stuff that you're just getting up to speed on because this just came through we'll get back to this I want to read the statement that that Samsung issued over this if I can just find it in my notes here they issued this statement this is from Samsung today's verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple but as a loss for the American consumer it will lead to fewer choices less innovation and potentially higher prices is it important it is unfortunate the patent law can be manipulated to give one company monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners or technology that is being improved every day 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 so let me get the opinion of everybody here David and Ross feel free to chime in is this is Apple appealing this are they and Matt obviously your opinion is very valuable here it does Apple come back I'm sorry not Apple is Samsung appealing this are they going to come back and say we're not we're sticking around we're not budging well I mean my question to you is why wouldn't they why wouldn't they not appeal this I mean it's clearly a loss in almost every sense for them yeah well I mean there is they could say hey you know what we got beat we're gonna keep doing what we're doing we're already we've already worked around most of this stuff we don't need to keep you know stay in litigation that costs money you know and it takes time she takes a question won't ask Matt um not to derail too much Matt in your sense do any of Samsung's newer products um fall at risk now is the s3 at risk for many of these decisions today well the s3 is in a different case so actually different patents asserted but just taking it kind of looking at what they got infringement on Apple I mean Samsung statements little crazy because for the most part we're talking about damages here for past wrongs you're not talking about injunctions for a lot of these features because their designs are different so you dont rly have a product that's going to be a problem for the design patents and for the software pads at least the bounce back we know they have a design around and I'm sure it's not even an issue anymore with regard to infringement of that software patent so a tap to zoom is still alive and tap to zoom as far as i know is still fully functional in inside of the TouchWiz and Android in general and in this in this in these fine I mean they found for Apple and the in the tap to zoom piece correct yeah that was the three that's the 915 patent so yeah right so so does that set a precedent now I mean does that mean that anywhere tap to zoom exists Apple King can safely go after it and.and win I mean is this is if the president is SAT with this does that mean that all they need to do is say to a jury look they've the courts have already found for us we can they go to HTC can they go to you know any other manufacturer and and just roll out the same the same argument well not really I mean it's obvious it's it's great leverage for Apple going into a courtroom but they still have to align this new claim against a new device whether it's HTC or LG or anybody or motorola so there are maybe I'm sorry not in a robe we have is there's a statement from Apple hear that apparently they gave to I don't know if they've given to a number of this is this is in the times the amount of evidence presented during the trial show that Samsung's copying went far deeper than even we knew said apple spokesman with katie cotton we should make these products we make these products to delight our customers not for our competitors to flagrantly copy we were grateful to the jury for their service and for investing the time to listen to our story and we were thrilled to be able to finally tell it the mountain of evidence sorry uh sorry that's the first part of it than the amount of evidence the lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were much much more about patents than money they were about values at Apple we value originality and innovation and prior lives into making the best products on earth we make these products to delight our customers known for our competitors to flagrantly copy we applaud the court for finding Samsung's behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn't right so that's Apple uh not surprising that they are pleased with the verdict and they see this is kind of a you know this kind of proves their theory that they've been they've been ripped off and you know I will say the trade dress claims and I said we talked about this on the verge cast I think this weekend the week before a Matt I'm sure you guys are discussed this at length I think the trade dress claims were clear particularly in the case of the of the phone OS I mean there was some really flagrant stuff there and it did seem like Samsung went into it saying apples do mean x y&z how do we copy that for our product well in that the evidence to that effect was was brutal there was so much of you know slides of the iphone side by side with samsung phones yet the designated right here's the thing with a 41-page document that's kind of like hey they just did this page after page trying to figure out how to counter my feature the patent stuff seems i don't know i guess the patent stuff seems more surprising to me and it seems especially surprising given the fact that that it was left out of certain products that would have you know presumably had the same feature I mean I guess what I'm more I'm not concerned with the idea that that Apple that that that they found in favor of Apple what I'm concerned with is that this jury didn't know exactly what they were looking at is that seem well that's where the 21 hours of deliberation thing becomes something I'm worried about like Matt do you think it's it's feasible to say that in 21 hours and 37 minutes or whatever was they actually did their true due diligence on every single device to find every single thing because it's like you said Josh these phones presumably have the same OS with the same TouchWiz and yet they're finding you know the bounce-back scrolling on one and not the other right that seems really off to me yeah I don't understand it so I yes I think yeah I think here's what I think I think they did on half their job I think they went into it and I think they took their time initially probably and got through a lot of those charts and I think they there might be something we're missing with regard to whether or not the bounce back is exactly the same and that all the devices i don't know but how can they how can they bring a i know they're going against the specific devices but how can they bring a case about this patent if the versions of software are different across devices i mean i understand that there's a certain i mean you know there's a certain implementation of that in i mean i can they just say well it's a broad sweep of you know four different versions of your software do it is that what this was or was it more about a specific version i mean obviously these might have different versions of the software loaded up i have to assume that they do so they're cutting it off i mean they're not including ICS in the claims i mean and i don't think that i think and i can't remember what the number was but they might have capped it like 2.2 or i don't know if you guys know when the somebody's designer rounds came about but it's only been the design around then cut but the bounce effect was it even in android originally i don't recall I mean maybe they took it out maybe they took it out at two I think 2.3 was where they introduced a little the little bright pop at the end of the list so 2.3 if it was in if it is in stock Android then yeah I don't really recall at this point but if they're only looking at devices that are within you know up to 2.2 then I can understand if those devices were on 2.3 and I think we need to find that out and I'll have Michael do a little research on that do you want to do a little research and find out at the devices they didn't find for the bounce-back patent if those were gingerbread if they were 2.3 or not okay so we'll look into that but it's interesting I mean let me need took their time maybe these on the first part now I think it's pretty clear now we're starting to see some mistakes if they made towards the end of the verdict form I guess there's a couple more just came up since we went on dealing with patent exhaustion whether or not they should have ruled the way they did they're based on a preview dancer what is that what does that mean can you explain that a little bit exhaustion is when you Apple's argument was that samsung sold these broadband ships to enli sins them to intel who then sold them to apple so therefore apple gets a license indirectly through Intel therefore he can't come after Apple for infringement so it's just you can't double dip if you're in your samsung you already got your money your license fees out of those patents my license you can selling a product or allowing until the create a product that Apple then use pneus devices and it apparently there's some inconsistency now that the jury's gonna have to go look look at there so I don't know all this is at the end is it they didn't understand the difference i mean i think they got through i mean this is pretty clear that there was no attention going into this to really reward samsung in any way right well I know something is it's zero dollars rewarded to them right yeah I got I mean they they got I mean I think there's probably arguments that I they didn't even find him to infringe the fran patents I think that's right yeah that's crazy I mean it's a 3g standards but I mean it's it's it's a little weird they would infringe a patent date in theory half implement so to me that my my this this kind of reinforces my feeling that like I think it's an Eli said this a bunch and we talked about this but it seems a little crazy to put nine regular people in a room and say decide something and it's not just you know it's not just like somebody broke into my house and stole something and I want to get my money for the thing they stole or I want to get that thing back this is like a couple of these questions are you're going to set a precedent for what this means like can you like when a future trial happens right they're going to look at that Fran stuff and someone's going to say well look there's a precedent for this these in this trial they didn't find for the friend for samsung and the Fran stuff and so oh so the question is like well I mean I mean the debate i think is it's like is this the best way to decide extremely complex extremely technical i mean i don't think i don't think a team of verge editors could have done a much better job with this and this is something that we do for a living i mean this is really highly technical stuff and you've got to have a real understanding of what this means both from a legal standpoint what it means legally and what it means technically and so I don't I don't fully I I I don't fully I worry that like this is not who I want deciding what will dictate you know some points of innovation in this in this industry I do think that that Samsung had it something coming to them in terms of this verdict you know I do think that that there were clear in there was clear infringement I just worry that this the putting nine random folks in a room and saying decide if you know if this patent is valid or if they've infringed on very technical aspects of a product is quite difficult for them do we have do we have Neal I what does the is he ready to go yeah he's ready okay Neal I is here just get ready things are about to get crazy nilay patel is presumably on the air with us now I believe neil has already written something like 10 million words on this trial asrock approximate numbers as Ross dropped do we lose Ross okay it's Neil I now so we've got Neil I'm Matt who along with with brian bishop who is it was in the courtroom tonight and has been there throughout this trial and will continue to report on it from the scene right here can you guys hear me yeah we can hear you can kneel I not hear us now I can hear you I don't know if you could see me we can see you look like you look like you just witnessed the verdict Oh like hell that was the verdict being turned in the trial so dude um the go ahead what do you make of it uh-uh so here's what I think just having listened to it and as it was coming out um the jury basically I think what they did was they decided that Samsung had copied Apple they decided that Apple was right and then they went through and said this is a patent on bounced back scrolling let's look at all the Samsung devices in the box and see which ones have it okay these most of them do so those all infringe this a patent on tap to zoom which ones have it and they did all that hard work of saying everything here is valid let's see which which to which samsung device is actually infringed but say apples mostly right and then they went and said the only thing that Apple lost the only kind of major piece here that Apple lost was on the iPad design stuff right the jury said the Samsung tablets that the tab 10.1 the older one that looks that looked pretty much exactly at the iPad they said this one doesn't infringe the ipad right people aren't people are confused about it in the marketplace it doesn't violate apples pads that's the only place where Apple really lost is protecting the look of the ipad ipad yeah that's correct which is which is the only one where they had an injunction going into it which is odd though this and this is the thing that strikes me as so bizarre is that the one place where you could have really i think given a good argument you know that you like you said there was an injunction there was a good argument like yeah they did kind of rip this off and they didn't find there which is like where does that where was the financial I don't understand so like here's what I'm saying like I think the jury decided that Apple was right I think Apple want like ultimately apples case was we spent all this time and money creating these revolutionary products and Samsung didn't spend the time and money they didn't take any risk and they just make products like ours we've been saying all along it's a good story and I think the jury bought it and they did a little bit of the work to figure out exactly what devices so you know they didn't say the Droid Charge looked like the iPhone design patents but you know they they understood that other guys I definitely got that yeah but then they got to Samsung's case and it was clear at that point i think they ruled against every single element of Samsung's case but down the line they said none of Samsung's patents are infringed even the patents that are part of the 3g standard which is like dude like the phones connect to the network this you know the patents are part like there's I mean they probably infringement let me really clear you ready be technical about it went a to be relation I want to be clear youyou would say in your estimation and and and mad I'd like to hear you from you they got that wrong like they did like Samsung was infringed upon for those patents is that is that what you're saying I mean I'm saying unless you're an electrical engineer or like a cellular data engineer there's no way for you to know I don't know but I do know that the samsung says that the patents are part of the standard the device is clearly make use of the standard right Intel which puts the chips in the devices has a license to the patents like the it is logically I think this really like others there there's a lot of emotion I think there's a lot of emotion here I mean I think they were like this you're right about the story and i think i said look samsung is the bad guy here they screwed up we're not going to give them something like I think they kind of threw them a bone almost with it with a galaxy tab infringement right there with the galaxy tab stuff saying like yeah you know I think hasn't really looked up over the charge but those are easy i think those are just like you know okay samsung is not going to get hit with every single thing but it did seem like with those with it with the with the standard stuff they were just saying you know what Samsung didn't win any I mean you know and they didn't do the hard work like there's Samsung did win one where they said the the patents that doesn't infringe the standards patents and so Samsung doesn't violate section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and you can like that's the sort of question were like look we already decided most of the case we decided Apple one we gave them a billion dollars to know like who cares no they didn't violate the 2k like I don't even know that means no and you get that feeling towards the end of Samson's case where it's very technical very dry very did they use the doctrine of patent exhaustion they're like no screw it and Samsung's lawyers are in court now saying well they can't say our patent Apple has a valid defense of patent exhaustion because they said they didn't infringe the patent so like there's you know like there's this walkie stuff the jury just didn't do correctly because I think they already decided that Apple one right I don't think there's any way to interpret this you know we I've been saying and you know there's a lot of shades of gray between Apple winning and Apple losing like fit and I think that's least at least if easily there's a lot of sexy shades of gray in this case um but this one is very much closer to Apple I mean I think it's a definitive victory for Apple they didn't win everything I think the ipad I think Samsung's story you can't patent a rectangle I think that came through with the ipad i think they said look this galaxy tab doesn't look like the I unless it's a rectangular icon yeah well yeah they up help but I mean they upheld the grid of patent you know what is padded right okay yeah they upheld it they said that a lot of the devices in French you know to me I think the jury made a decision an apple one and then they went through exactly what winning meant and then they decided that Samsung loss and it was easy for them to go through what losing men cuz i just had to hit know a bunch of time all right so so here's a question this is for everyone David Matt Neal I'd actually really mad I mean do you agree I mean man I've been talking with us i'm curious if he agrees with my take on this yeah i do i think when i when i was looking at and I saw these periodic nose and non-infringement sand you know when they did throw them the bone I felt like when you're taking like you cheat on an exam and you know I gotta miss a couple and I gotta see a couple in there so it's not obvious that's what it felt like commutes it's not really felt like they were going into it knowing exactly where they wanted to what were they wanted to come out you saying they gave it a little realism bite saying that the can't be one hundred percent for an apple than the native selection mugs right so so so obviously apples pleased I mean they says this is a huge win for them what I want to know is that I have two big questions and I think everybody this is the question that tomorrow and Monday and for the rest of our lives until the earth is destroyed in December of 2012 I think everybody's gonna be asking there's two things one what does this mean now you know what happens now like in terms of what Apple does next you know what is the next like in this war between Android and iOS which is really what it is what's the next immediate move for apple or for samsung or for anybody who's making an Android device you know like what are the repercussions of this and then the next question is and we'll take that one then we'll go to the next one the next one I want to know is what does this mean for how will this affect how will these how will this case affect the way people come at designing and innovating in technology and particularly in the mobile space i'm just wondering if you have a sense of that but like i'd like to talk about the first one like what does this mean now does Apple just go is that does this is this license to go completely crazy were they already going and crazy in the sense of like they can just do anybody they want win who's wait who's left to sue I mean I well but you know but they could well I don't know you tell me who's left to sue I know a verge job becoming a Phoenix DUI the rectangles on the site we need to do something about that well immediately if they're already suing everybody doesn't this make their case against everybody else really happy no that's what I'm a fairly obvious chilling so that's it so what are the next steps like are there more people to sue and and how does this affect the cases that they have and you know are there more cases to come with bumpa knees that they already you know I know they've already got some in the works but so here here I always believed that this case would settle I always thought that the jury would take forever leave wrong basically I was wrong yeah the reason I thought it would settle and I think one of the most underreported parts of this case has been the lengthy settlement negotiations that have occurred between Apple and Samsung and this slides we have from Apple that are like we would prefer Samson they take a license here are some license rates that you hey do you make your devices that use all of our patents because you're a partner and our friend and samsung said no right so now Apple can say to Samsung look we can do this again we can do this a few months the Galaxy Nexus we can do it again with the new galaxy tab or you can finally come to the table we won't make you pay two billion dollars its way a bunch is the suggestion that Samsung didn't come to the table you know they didn't they didn't reach a settlement agreement and you know I think part of that was because they both wanted this additional leverage right now as Apple has a lot of leverage right they won but it's no shame Sam so you run around in circles samsung didn't come to the table or didn't you know go for whatever their terms were is it possible that whatever they were proposing was far more damaging than what the outcome of this case was yeah I think it was a huge number I mean that Apple wanted 30 bucks a knife or 30 bucks a samsung phone I mean to me this is like if Samsung has to eat the billion dollars which by the way they can eat I mean it's not nice nobody wants to like lose a billion but Samsung's are very large come yeah that's not a crummy I just got it I just somebody just sent me a tweet that said this this case is actually good value samsung they've paid a billion dollars to become the world's number one phone manufacturer from basically nowhere which is you know they were basically I mean enochians a good it is a good point I mean I'm not saying that they the winner here but I will say that you know if if Apple wanted a 30 bucks a phone or whatever and what they ultimately have to pay is a billion dollars and it's they get a you know hey don't steal our stuff anymore yeah kind of made out okay also they've got to pay the bill the building dollars is to be very clear the billion dollars isn't the end right the billion dollars is that's what the jury decided that Samsung would have paid to Apple if it had properly licensed everything it plus whatever's apples lost sales would have been plus you know a punishment because Samsung did it on purpose right yeah now that's done so that's everything in the past you've been punished and now in the future Samsung has to pay another royalty rate and like matt is saying Apple wants absurd royalty rates right they want a thirty dollars they now dictate those royalty rates I mean because they basis but I think they have much more I think I have much more leverage in negotiations I think you know again II negotiate come out i'm sorry elaborates on what devices yeah I retro actively find yes so we want to refine 30 bucks a device for each no no no not like that and Matt correct me if I'm wrong here but the way this would work is Samsung and Apple pay to settle the outstanding litigation right and then they say in the future just like apples agreement with Microsoft we're going to sign a cross-licensing agreement where Samsung pays apples some amount of money in the future per device and then we'll put in it an anti cloning agreement where you can't make any devices that look just like our devices and that's the agreement Apple has with Microsoft it clearly works well they're not suing each other they're very friendly it's working it's working great for Microsoft right I mean Microsoft has to make the beauty problem but let's be but let's be clear we even with that in place I think if Microsoft was achieved enough success in this space they could find something I think they could find something to have a problem with I don't believe that like Microsoft is just being left alone because they've got these agreements in place to being left alone because they're not a threat they're not in any way a realistic threat it's sure they're years away what just let's just keep in mind that the history of the mobile industry has not been one of lawsuits it's been a a polite of the iphone everybody else making products that look like the iPhone and Apple saying hold on a minute you've got to pay us or hold on a minute you can't do that and that's what happens after every sort of disruptive innovation but usually the industry is really good at cross-licensing so for example nokia still makes a lot of phones they're competitive with Apple they sued apple for violating its patents and they settled an apple paid nokia bunch of money when it gave it some of its path this is and how much as this is how much of this is actually driven by this this I mean what I assume like based on Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs there's clearly you know somebody you know I think Matt Panzer II know from from The Next Web tweeted the quote right after this verdict came down which was you know I'm gonna go thermonuclear I'm gonna destroy and rake is it the stolen product which is ridiculous but I mean yeah well it is I mean we know intellectually it's ridiculous but how much of this is driven by you know what was what was presumably a mandate when jobs you know before his death at Apple to that we got to go after Android I mean like Mara it's true but jobs got it wrong for one big reason is that this case doesn't employ doesn't implicate every android phone coming out I mean this case in particular deals with what ninety percent of phones that don't exist anymore you busy talking about a lot of things that won't even affect the mark you're not talking about injunctions it will matter and you're not talking about Android going away well but if they go but if they go after HTC and if they go after Samsung and they go after every little bit that they think infringes it's like a war of attrition isn't it I mean it's a death by a thousand cuts eventually yeah i mean but HTC doesn't infringe most of these pens no but they have but they've got other claims now well and this is also where I my big questions about trade dress and I think this is where this comes in a lot is that like you can design around some of the you know the bounce-back scrolling and stuff but a lot of what seems to have been set here is that Apple's devices look the way they do and that's you know significant and night they only the way that I would you can be you wouldn't confuse an egg alex e nexus with an iphone no no I didn't either but I wouldn't use confuse a galaxy ace with an iphone either but I mean there is a you wait are you sure David because that you can't mean they look very similar no no I think there is a series of Samsung devices that they specifically and and unabashedly i would say designed to look like an iPhone okay yeah the galaxy is a cat that example couch is the get is the galaxy what's he know going back the original gallop I was on tmobile that was it the Viper yeah was it built just brazenly ripping off the 3gs design it had the silver band the shape was the same I mean you put them next to each other with the screen off I mean it really looks like I think there was a period where Samsung was doing that I think that I feel like there was a brief period where that happened and then everybody was like we got to make something that looks unique and I think most of the phones are on the market now I mean there's no question Apple we're definitely revolutionized the market when it said we're going to do this touch screen phone yeah but you know there has to be a point where you get beyond like it's a touchscreen I mean if they found for the char I think it's a kind of a good sign that even this jury was willing to say all right look there's some obvious points here we you haven't there's not infringement on the design but but so what I'm saying is I guess getting back to this point they've got they're going after HTC for some other stuff they've got some other Samsung stuff lined up I mean who else is there really that who else a motorola role right so yeah but keep in mind to David's point the other cases against Samsung don't have any of this trade dress stuff in it don't really have any of this design patent stuff in it the case against HTC none of the design stuff no trade dress stuff but there's only no here but they're going after the things they can go after so what I'm saying is if they find if Apple's found for it you know in this case and HTC has to worry a Motorola has to worry I mean everybody and by the way everybody online right now is saying like whoa Microsoft really made out nights and this one because everybody's looking at Microsoft going we've got all this protection Microsoft has all this protection and all these agreements in place with Apple as we just discussed this would be a nice safe haven if I want to make a unique phone and sell it at four in a verizon store I don't have to worry about Apple coming after me for infringing on something because I've got the protection of Microsoft so really sound like boy microsoft made out like a bandit I mean isn't the goal here to obliterate Android isn't it like it isn't it isn't it truly a war of attrition where if you make it hard enough for these manufacturers and by the way it's a business strategy I'm not arguing against it I'm just saying that it does seem like they could make it hard enough and and worrisome enough that they drive these guys to to somebody like my pops off to in this sites by the way is like how great is it if you break up what Google is doing in the market and then drive back to your and then drive people to your your you know fourth place competitor in but Emily position they're in right now what a slut hold on for one second i mean you know one of Steve Jobs earlier quotes that is I think probably more important than we're going to go thermonuclear war and Android is when he said for Apple to win Microsoft doesn't have to lose and they I mean these two companies they work more closely together than I think we ever give them didn't say that ever Google though did he hasn't said that about what he's ever said that about Google is my point uh you know but apples not run by the ghost of Steve Jobs or some misplaced no no I suggest we all tita know his anger no but I bet there are there obvious business concerns here but what I'm saying is simply that as a business strategy it would make sense to chip away at your biggest competitor yeah which would drop you know I would so I've heard for a long time that apple and google talk about blanket licenses for android about settling all this stuff that getting back to business and they the big companies are both in the valley i think they talk a lot and you know again like I'm yeah I just wrote this what does it mean post and the last line is well if this is the chip is that how to Apple eat it it's up if this is a chip that Apple needed to get google to sit down and pay the money then maybe it's time you know maybe it's time for Google to just suck it up and say look we built this thing we we built Android we built a really fast we didn't you know we basically created out of nothing obviously you know it has a lot of patent issues because it's built on linux and microsoft's was always said linux US patent issues all of our OEM s are paying microsoft maybe it's time that we have them pay apple or maybe we pay apple and we can all go back to building shit uh if that's the outcome that would be a great outcome that would have made all this worth it if the outcome is apples on the warpath and they're suing everybody and google keeps insisting that android is safe and then the OEMs keep insisting they didn't copy anything I you know I don't think that accomplishes anything and I think the other important thing to keep in mind is that you know for every lawsuit Apple has open they've got to pay for it as well you know that billions back I don't think they're worried about that hey look hundreds is it they spent hundreds of millions of dollars in this case they're spending hundreds of million dollars on cases around the world for other things and you know they might have billions in the bank and they might make billions every quarter but that's still money that they could spend another place I wouldn't I don't think anybody likes paying a lawyer I will say something about this that's why I work for you now I we likewise love yes that's and that's that's true as a man who's paid lawyers I can tell you it is it is highly unenjoyable can I just interject with one quick yeah you see drooly oh yeah so we're done it's over the jury has been its mates finish any what impact what did they change they came back they were two issues were there were two patent issues that they charge damages for but found no infringement for and they've dropped the total number of damages down to 1 point 0 for 9 billion they they they chopped off a little bit dish wow that's gonna have two million yet i'm thinkin about victory for samsu yeah that's right yeah and also changed from yes to no on both devices saying that they didn't infringe alright so that's the jury being lazy again right they're like well we don't want to figure it out doesn't infringe will rearrange the money and although I mean like I that's not a you can say maybe they mesmerize did infringe or whatever the other device was um the intercept the interest the Sampson cover doesn't everything about Lex case was the phone names if a huge list of my shame for samsung yeah um yeah I just don't think like that you know Matt and I have been saying for a long time that the huge complexity of apples case made this a logistical nightmare for them to convince the jury and I think that was born out and i think it was born out in both uh you know as an advantage and is a huge disadvantage i think the advantage was they made it so complicated for the jury to say apple one that they just said that they won right there like screw it we're not figuring this out apple one check a bunch of boxes and we'll go and they may odd as we're seeing they made some mistakes right the disadvantage is now they provided samsung a lot of opportunities to challenge with the jury actually said Matt can you take us through kind of the appeals process here I know and I you pride a better handle on it than I do well the biggest thing coming up right now is everybody's gonna file motions even apples going to filed motions to challenge certain parts of the jury burped because you know if you don't get everything you still try to get everything after the case but what happens now is they file post-trial briefs and apples basically are an apple and samsung mostly samsung setting up their case for appeal they have to raise all these issues and challenge the verdict so that they can appeal to the Federal Circuit but one of the big things is coming up is Apple's affirmative brief they're going to file a motion because the jury found willfulness that they're going to file for a motion to triple the damages so the statutory provision allows for if a jury finds woeful which by the they often do if they find infringement they often find willful because they don't know the difference it's really nuanced right um so they find willful and the judge can make a determination to triple those damages up to three times what they are right now which you know three billion dollars a lot of money I don't see it happening it's it's it's a rare event for the judge to take it and triple it but that might just it that would be a neighborhood of what Apple originally asked for that would mean really crazy with it was just shy of three billion would be it would be more but it would be in the neighborhood I I have trouble I by the way can I just point out that we're now at the point where we're saying five hundred million dollars is in the neighborhood of somebody Wow is actually more like 750 I thought it was 2.25 is it personally point 5 45 2002 1525 okay but I haven't messaged totally in the neighborhood of massive numbers left right center as soon as they announced the dollar amount i typo'd I I did 1.5 to the one point oh five then apparently a bunch of people retweeted including like a Associated Press incisor and so congrats to me for ruining news for every I don't know it just just when you're when you're excited and hurriedly typing just it's a number and it's billions make sure you know but but one thing I'll say about this and and by the way like if they do come back and get triple damages I feel like it's a kind of a nasty move but I also feel like that's going to be difficult to do considering the fact that this jury wasn't exactly I mean yes there is there is a lot of affirmative for Apple but I think it feels like it's not like just they didn't went down the line and said Sam saying I mean I know it does it does seem that way but like I think that a judge would be able to look at this and go well the jury wasn't you know so resolute on every piece of this that like Samsung has got to get hit with the with you know had the book thrown at them right what can I tell you one thing about tripled trip willful damages the judge as a bunch of factors to look at and a two of the key factors are 1 whether you can show evidence of intent to copy which we've seen a lot of that with Samsung and the second one is totally outside of infringement has to do with litigation tactics so if the court feels that Samsung has acted inappropriately during the litigation she can take that into account and whether or not the triple damages or somehow multiply damage above what they are God that that's rough is the samsung to Samsung endanger themselves by going back if they appeal I mean is there there aren't worth repercussions if they appeal right or do they have to go I mean what I'm not really i mean the court the appellate court could say well you know the jury was wrong in some respects and it's even worse for samsung than we thought but mostly it's either gonna you know kind of affirm everything or chop it down oh and when yeah and appeals courts don't run around overturning juries no right and we think it Lansing has a big mountain to climb rights and they feel sorry can also say no I mean that's like you know Samson can say we appeal the entire case the appeals court can say there's only one issue here that's worth appealing or I similarly summarily dismissed the entire and say no we don't want to hear it and so what is it and so what is the danger at this point for what is the danger at this point for samsung if they don't appeal and they just I mean they have to go do they have to go into talks with Apple about how much they will award them per device or can they can they hurt that can they get out of it can they avoid it in some way they would be hugely irresponsible for either apple or Samsung to not immediately start holding additional meetings about further licenses and settlements I mean they've got other outstanding cases out there the Galaxy Nexus case is out there they have to do it you know like they this isn't it like it's not like sports you know it's funny you know the other side of our company is a sports company and they they have wins and losses you know at the end of the year somebody wins a super bowl and then we all start over again next year this isn't like that this is business and it go it'll keep going tomorrow so Samsung yeah so Apple won a huge decisive victory right you stole our stuff now they've got to go back and say well what are we going to do about all this other outstanding conflict we have we have to resolve it so our companies can move forward so I'm sure they're gonna like talk but immediately maybe you know they probably take weekend so apples lawyers can get drunk and Samsung's lawyers can that's turnkey drunk I think they're both get a drug for very different reasons as we could you know it's actually really interesting sins lawyers represent everybody else and there's a lot of talk that google paid Samsung's firm quinn emanuel to represent samsung HTC motorola so they've got a lot you know google has a lot riding on this samsung has a lot riding on this but that law firm has an enormous amount riding on it because they're representing all these companies can sample all these other cases so so here I got a couple of questions do you want to say something I'm gonna veer into a totally different direction so ask okay let me ask a couple questions and then make a statement and then will veer wherever you're veering I'm so so so my first question is and this kind of these two are kind of tied together so the new version of the latest version of Android has things that Weeden two things are happening the latest version of iOS has stuff that's definitely could be you could say you look at and say that's from Android like the notifications for instance now i don't know if google has patents on that or not or any of these other comedies hold patents maybe motorola holds a patent on that i have no idea which is now owned by google Mobility at least and then there's new things are introduced in an ice cream sandwich that are definitely like iOS like the way the icons will auto rearrange on the screen for instance yeah even jelly bean nice yes no and I see us they were introduced you could the icons would rearrange on the screen I thought that wasn't matter no no even like full page info it's in folders it was in folders it was in folders in ICS and now it's a great system wide on the home screen sure these seems like way know what's that it doesn't matter do you seem like places where where Google almost break like kind of out of went out of their way to do it like nobody had asked for it there were other ways you could have dealt with it or you could have just left it as it was which is that it didn't do it at all uh is there do we feel like I'm just curious in our their protections at this point like it's google not going to go after Apple for this notifications thing and it's Apple not going to go after Google for stuff like that for some other reason or do we it is it possible that they go that they actually do go back for things like that I'm just curious like those two in particular stand out to me as like as as notable as a bounce back so I'm wondering if like there are further cases to be had in that situation or if Apple doesn't just apple doesn't want to go to two straight to google and it's harder to pin some bad stuff on I mean who makes an ICS phone right now samsung well right well I mean Matt you all right you want to go out for this one yeah so two things first I haven't seen any evidence that Google has a patent on notifications or anything really thats dammit they have an application on the notification yes this pending and I guarantee you at this point google has a pretty good grasp on Apple's portfolio and knows what they need to do in certain respects to avoid it there's no way they're designing jelly bean or even before that with ICS without not just the pads that Apple's asserted but the patents that they actually have in the pipeline so you think you think the icon rearrangement is not something that Apple can move on I doubt it okay I haven't seen a patent for that and I'm pretty sure if they had one Google would have known about it says I'm I'm pretty sure they're smarter about it now so to my and this action brings me my next statement which is like I think that if you look at what Samsung did in terms of design both hardware design in terms of what Android was doing with infringing on this bounce-back patent which like you know at the time we could I think you know there was a point where we were all like well what's the big deal it's a bounce-back patent but now you see when you when you start to get into when you see a trial like this unfold and when you talked about it enough and when you see the different ways you could do it you start to go okay i get it i mean i don't think that patent is really that important and i don't think people see the bounce i don't think people see the bounce back and identify that isn't being an iphone behavior i think that like things like bounce back and slide to unlock exist in reality and that's why they made sense what do is like fifty dollar value someone yeah i mean i mean some ridiculous i think it's outrageous but but what I will say is you know I look at the the Galaxy Nexus has a product of avoiding copying and there's a bunch of really good stuff in there like a bunch of good ideas new ideas stuff that we didn't see in other phones or variations that are like well it's kind of like that but they tweaked it and they moved it and it's actually better for the end user and so I feel like does this is that I mean is Apple kind of getting what it wants here in the sense that it doesn't want people copying and is that I know we talked about how bad this could be you know with the precedent that it sets but isn't it in some way if they can't go after them you know for hey you put like a color burst at the bottom of your list doesn't it actually improve I mean doesn't actually mean that people have to innovate more well I did I don't I don't know where this tweet was but somebody who was obviously a fan of Samsung tweeted to me good job APPL you for samsung to innovate faster and outpaced the iphone more which is true I mean you know you can argue you can say that the patent system sucks you should have intellectual property but if you're not allowed to do one thing that means you have to do another thing and a lot of times seeing what's been done and thinking I have to come up with a new idea forces you to come up with a better idea and you know I think there's a lot of that in Google's current phones I think particularly jelly bean has a lot of very different ideas but how an operating system should work and I think that's great I think it's for the best for samsung to stop copying other devices yeah you know I've I've forever said you know Samsung is really great at making cheap copies of other devices of other things um and I think it's you know Samsung is a huge company with a lot of money a lot of clout a lot of power a lot of influence and it's for everyone's you know benefit if they say we have to start really competing with Apple we have to make devices that are way better than apples devices and not just take their ideas and improve on them and iterate on them and that's me that's say a pool will never be in this go to position again I mean what they had was Samsung with their early s1 and s2 even some of their s too but most of their s1 devices and variants of it was something they will never have again you'll never see these design patents inserted again in in reality maybe but you know it's it's it's a it's a week claim because you had really a situation like the perfect storm we had trade dress you had all these design patents you had these early software patents on some of the features that were lined up perfectly with all these first-generation kind s1 devices you're not going to have that I mean you don't have that anymore so so I mean Samsung themselves they move past it they're not doing it anymore right well not in this not in this version this iteration of the iphone yeah an Android competition but if Apple if in september-october whenever we see the new iphone they come out and they're like we have a whole new iOS for you you know when taken we've read the whole thing then thinking five years to get those patents right i mean it takes a long time to get a patent so I mean Matt you know Matt's also right in that app you know Apple put up the Steve Jobs stood on stage and said here's the iphone boy have we patented it and he met those applications are all pending like we've applied for them before and nobody knew what apple patent 381 list translation on a touchscreen display meant until the iphone came out they said that's bounce-back scrolling right i don't think they can do that anymore a that the climate is different everybody reads the patent applications on every tuesday and goes nuts over them and be their not leading up to some huge category killing device like the iphone again and you know i think you even saw that a little bit with the ipad right they have the ipad design patents and the jury said no you know that's not you can't say another black rectangle infringes that you can say it about the galaxy s2 or the galaxy s it looked exactly what yeah i fly which is flagrant yeah i mean if a great idea you want a woman of ear so where I where I get confused I just remembered something one one last point oh I have heard from few people that Google believes jelly bean solves all that's patent problems with apple neither of us are you not the unified not the unified search ah this is a perfect segue into what I universal searches I don't think nobody wrong it's parently tried well yeah I'm gonna in actually I lose ICS it was ICS that had the universal search in his band and then they updated with jelly bean i came back in the market wait a second i'm gonna to find out okay because i've got a jelly bean device here yeah I don't mean I don't know but I just already searched I'm gonna search for knee lines he comes out well so while he's looking my question is what what does Google do now because I've seen even as this has been happening a lot of people saying not only is exactly universal search on this there we go I mean no question Lee if i search for ebay in the search window I get ebay.com I like you searched for ebay leave it well I want to find saying that I'd have a nap and that you'd find online yeah cuz that's what you got mean I don't know so I just heard it hasn't it has it link out to search the phone yeah well I mean they you know they changed the latest version of jelly bean to fix it right i mean i don't know i'm just saying I've heard anyway David go ahead well so my i'm not i'm not gonna don't nail me to the wall on the patent thing I'm nailing you to the wall in nilai you just got nailed already out enjoy it just so gradually that nailing um so what does this mean for google that's my primary question like everybody's talking about this as an iOS vs android debate and it seems to me that well you know google makes android right i'm saying i don't i don't get the sense that it is an iOS android debate like the big thing was here big thing here was devices and even the software stuff well they can't think i'm looking at this pad thing and it's like these art where rounded rectangles right this is touchable but this isn't you know this is TouchWiz this is not android those are not the things in android they're concerned about which is why when they go after HTC for whatever the universal searches are the tap to dial a phone number those are specific patents yep and they're the nightmare in there and they're try they don't want to go to Google with a big case of all these things i don't know they didn't they what's that I said they could have been they didnít clearly don't want you well Google doesn't get paid for android right nope so what would the damages be if you didn't make any money off of the devices that samsung sold or I think they'd be more money if they could prove damn just through ads and things like that through Android right it's a much more complicated than saying like hey Samsung you made a phone it looks like ours you yeah you I'll keep in mind or right you made to any work I'll just tried to Oracle just tried to do this right i mean they pay sued samsung for I'm sorry she's the suit Google oracle suit google for copyright infringement patent infringement on android and they had to make up a damaged him out and they struggled right they they they put up a bunch of numbers the jury was like we don't believe you um you know I think this case changes a lot if it's Apple versus Google and I think like matt is saying we're going to have it this good again right there never gonna be will say this copied us this away again they're going to say this technical feature of android copied us or this UI element of Android copied us and Google can design around it and that's fine but at this point now you know there they have to go after the core pieces of Android and they can't go after these little these interface tweaks or these hardware designs because the companies are gonna be too smart to like fall for them yeah LG google HTC Motorola nobody's gonna create those documents that Samsung created ever again well it is i dissect ah harris this was a I'm sorry Ben I you gotta you gotta you gotta admit samsung should have known a little bit better than to you know blatantly I mean Paul Paul to actually really a great point about this in the podcast but on the verge cast a couple weeks ago but it is it is one of those things where they were like they weren't like hey they're doing this like we should do something better than this they were like they're usually doing this that hey designers they're doing this can you do this yeah can you guys yeah but it is and it is like the paper trail is a mile long a 10-mile undred miles long uh yeah if they just had said it out loud maybe all set no I'm on if they didn't have 141 pages of like how to copy the iphone I bet you this jury I have a feeling this jury may have found differently well yeah oh yeah that was a that was a nasty when I saw the thing I mean I wasn't there also till down I was closing argument up until that document I was like Samsung might have a case here you know that they did kind of independently riff on some of this stuff but when you saw that document and there was just like here it is now how do we make it it was like how any human is gonna look at that and go I don't buy it you know I don't I don't buy the Thames like didn't willfully knowingly copy what Apple was doing for personal and personal gain and the you know apples closing argument was he heard a lot of witnesses you've seen a lot of stuff but you should just look at the documents and look at this time line of phones before the iphone and phones after the iphone and like use your head and I they did you know like at so I'm saying I think they decided apple walnut they filled out the form i think the bigger question for google is how do we stop this and i think the bigger question for Apple is how do we stop this like Android isn't gonna go away Apple can't sue androids I mean are you sure I mean if they scare I'm sure I'm just saying if they scaring off the manufacturers and they start looking at Windows Phone and going you know actually we don't have to worry about the stuff we can make really nice devices and basically you know given all the crazy licenses we're now paying it would kind of cost the same here bb10 is great that's good hey let's get ready here people maybe but I don't think you're honestly I mean you know windows phone 8 big improvements I think the you know we just ran a report today Chris ran report is there room for a fourth place and you see windows for uncertainty creep in with market share I mean I think that good I mean Google's got to do they've got to get all their ducks in a row and they have to ensure they have to say to their partners yeah with this is won't this won't happen again we have Polina Josh even saying um well they do you know that's what microsoft says its partners you license our software will indemnify you or at least yeah well we'll pay the vast majority of your bills if you if it's our software that's the problem right Google's never said that to anyone I you know again onto the table everybody thinks are paying for Quinn Emanuel to represent these firms but that's not the same as putting it on paper you know right um but you know I think the bigger I don't think androids going away I don't think it should go away ja I mean Josh even saying this thing over and over again it's like the age of partnerships is kind of over yes and i think that's that's really sad and i'd like to see i agree i just bring us back to Google and Apple working together I mean I I said this I mean above weeks ago when we were talking about the maps thing and I said you know it was so cool that you could get the iphone the Apple product with the slick UI with Google's great maps product on it and uh you know I feel like as every you know we talked about this at length but as every one of these companies tries to create its entire the whole you've got to own the entire ecosystem and end you do lose something of like I think there's some real value in having the variety and having the choice of different you know these people being able to partner on things and I don't know if it's racing google and an apple will end up there i mean because if you look back to microsoft and apple case apple got spanked and it ended up in a license agreement that you know for whatever whatever was worth allowed both companies to operate how they do now so I don't think there's any indications it's early I mean I don't think there's anything that keeps Apple and Google from eventually getting there I said I think yeah I thought well I don't think Google's gonna I don't think apples gonna sue google well I think only way those two are gonna end up in court is if Google makes it happen and and and we don't have any indication that they could not get happening well like well hey I mean Ray Ray are you sure because google owns motorola and motorola suit apple yesterday well they all deal with each other and directly through motorola what was the man I guess you all that google versus at what was the suit it's that it's a case the international trade commission I mean it's like actually there's there's news on this right now now those are old patent so this is like okay it's just kind of like amazing it's like yesterday google sued good you know I motorola can't do what Google doesn't want it to do write their own google owns motorola so google motorola sued apple for two more patents google knew about it and said it was okay and then today Motorola's old case with two other patents got tossed out by the ITC which actually breaking news I'm like Matt and I should go hit it but who cares right I mean excuse like to get away hit the news I I can just say can I just say it is 925 on the East Coast on a Friday night and um you know if you know we've been talking about this legal stuff for a while and by the way when we started the verge Neil I was like I want to have it I want to have killer legal coverage of all the stuff that's going on my off in technology we fell asleep we started snoring I mean he didn't finish the sentence and we were losing no butBut nila is like I wanted me I want to do this you know I want to cover this stuff and we've been covering you know we've had I think incredible coverage from brian bishop and from Matt Neal I and the whole team has pitched in but these guys are really leading it because they know they know what they're doing and we're just pretending but right now our traffic is like off the charts yeah i mean i'm so chad chad is telling me by the way that we have a ton of new viewers because we are posters on the families on the front page of reddit so hello to hello to read it but we also had to shut down the we also to shut down the live chat on this also hello also apparently and apparently 9gag was somehow involved in this but let's just for all the new people let's recap yeah let's let's do make a bouquet I'll give a quick recap so if you're just joining us here's what's happening in the world of tech hello Cincinnati you're alive yeah hello Cincinnati uh so the the verdict has come down in the apple vs samsung trial just a few hours ago the jury deliberated for about 22 hours which is not a long time they had over 30 questions 700 ultimately 700 different answers they had to give in places where you need to answer whether or not a samsung had infringed on Apple and they they predominantly i'd say i'd say overwhelmingly found in favor of apple this is a win for apple they're awarding uh they've they've awarded Apple 1 billion what is it now 49 1 billion 49 1 billion 49 million change and change and and there are only a couple of places where they didn't find for Apple particularly in the whether or not the the galaxy note 10.1 infringed on the iPad does on the tab the notes are sorry but the tab the galaxy tab the note is the new one you know if they just come up with better names that wouldn't be a problem and and you know Samsung and Apple have both issued statements samsung the gist of their statement is this is horrible for American innovation and an apple statement is this is great for American innovation and we're glad that we're glad that the jury saw that we had obviously been been been ripped off and and that's is it have I missed anything in the update no it's about me that's it I mean the question we've been talking about it for the last hour so trying to figure out trying to make sense of it and actually neil has got a great piece on the site if you haven't seen it it's it's the title of the Apple decisively wins Samsung trial what it means where he breaks down kind of you know what well what it means really so I have I have a purely like procedural legal question um how significant in all of this is the willfulness stuff like if they had found that you know you made the galaxy ace which I've now decided is the phone that looks the most like the only one that you cited earlier as the phone that I think didn't look like I don't recall saying you like the Gaussian I don't know what the problem is the first bookstore but so if they had found that that infringe on the patent but couldn't like did that it was somehow completely unintentional and that was just the only way to design a phone how different would this trial have come out like how important was it that sin IVs not willful it was like an accident right and especially going forward so how important is it that these documents existed saying and like look at the iphone let's build that exactly and that's like speculated so well no it's the jury would come up with a number and then the judge wouldn't be able to triple it if she felt that you know the elements of treble damages were met right so I mean it's really important because another judge has discretion and also when the jury was coming up with its initial number they're not supposed to think about willfulness but apples lawyers were like you know if you just slap Samsung on the wrist they won't change they did this on purpose look at the documents they've got to pay the real money so but it's not supposed to factor into that initial decision no it's it's a it's just out there to let the it's a notice to the judge that we decide it's willful now you take it from here and just determine whether or not you're gonna increase the damages it's I guarantee you if the jury was allowed to side willfulness this damage award to be much higher yeah they're not though I mean the judges are very reasonable and triple damages or it's egregious behavior that usually warrants that kind of increase um but I'm not so sure the code doesn't have a little bit of uh just I don't want see justification billet for samsung didn't behave itself now the things he did not behave it but she also but she also asked the Apple lawyer if he was smoking crack so it seemed I mean I don't say Apple Hayes itself I don't know shit about anybody was behaving them behaving themselves look between the two companies they filed over 2,000 objections in this case which is like paperwork at three in the morning that the judge in her style really judge coves judge codes in the robe at the office at three in the morning like writing some I'm saying they're filing the motions at three in the morning and the in the courts like electronic filing system and then the judge and her staff of four shows up and there's new status oh I'm sorry so Matt your suggestion is that the judge may want to be vindictive towards Samsung because they find out on any objection may want to me one yeah I imagine this not her take on it but but I mean that's what i read from what you're saying like giant asteroids weird it you're right though there's this aspect you know you think willfulness is like okay it's the acts of the defendant if they did something wrong they copied with bad intent then they should be punished and maybe that's triple damages what but what's a law allows for is basically the judge is a turn i mean the party's samsung's attorneys if they acted wrongfully tearing the litigation that's a factor which is nuts really i mean yeah you shouldn't impose a sanction on the punitive damages essentially on on the party because their attorneys are you know sure well it's dry it's designed to make them to settle I mean that the whole goal of the structural nature of the legal system is to make people not go to court it's a say you're in a conflict you're adults or sophisticated billion-dollar companies you paying a lot of lawyers you should be able to come to an agreement and if your lawyers are going to parade around saying you're going to win and file two thousand motions will be able to increase the damages against you it's on us for sure but it's each structure here's a little update we just had a post go up that the next step and apple vs samsung preliminary injunction hearing on September 20th so or what's that it's actually a permanent injunction that would literally be the injections they're trying to give based on the verdict it would wait this would be if this would not be preliminary but this would be no there's there's nothing preliminary about a change that had lied obably somebody tell dieter he's messed up bad it's a wait what kind what would the injunction be it you know right now for instance the galaxy tab had the injunction which is that now going to be lifted but there could be injunctions in place for these other products that were found to infringe including s two variants that exist right now I mean you guys know I'm better better than I do but there's s2 models being sold yeah yeah there are models in archit there's s2 all over the world I think cricket or leap or somebody in the United States just put out an s2 I mean they got problems just announced it like last night yeah boost whatever else does one of those 2 4g God make a stop let even be upgraded to ICS probably know I hate Android such was good and um go back to the iphone you say ah please they'll update it damn it oh I'm sorry but that's an important part of this case I mean if you think about if all Samsung came out of this width at the very end of the day worst case scenario was you know paying out between one point oh five million and three million dollars that's really not that big a deal for I mean it's it's real money but it's Samsung and they have a lot of real money so but if they had an injunction on products so the worst case in there on the injunction side is that you get injunction on all these models and it really what percentage of these models exist and if they exist now are they getting exists in six months when the injection would probably be in place because they're going to brief this thing for next two or three months trying to figure out so i really don't i don't see injunctions being an issue i really don't see this case affecting innovation affecting the market that much because all the other products that we're talking about that people care about like the s3 or the nexus or in the other case they're going to trial next year and they guy go through all this again I mean we're going to add that we're gonna be back doing the same thing next year for the Universal Search and the and the let's just say for the universal search yeah that's the that's the one patna got the injunction after the nexus 10 I mean mother 3 will just be when they just be highly encouraged to settle at this point I mean would yes they should settle like I mean without the question but again if Apple wants like ridiculous damages that don't make financial sense if they know they're going to get hit with well it's going to be you know if this was if this was trade dress and all of these patents you know handful of patents and the damages were two point X million earth sorry billion then what's it going to be for the universal search I mean that I mean how high could that especially aren't they aren't they specifically going after the Galaxy Nexus as adding more patents in that case too yeah they are this the reason that case but it wasn't part of the injunction because it didn't come out in time but in that case you have other patents but just like this the pulmonary injunction stage when they got the nexus on the injunction doesn't include all the patents in the case because you know apple kind of picked and choose the strong ones that it felt were strong they had a best chance so when i get to trial in next year on this case on that case they're going to have a whole slew of other pets but I they're not design patents they're not trade dress patents they're wonky software patents and I'm not sure that's going to really you're not going to be sitting in this position they're not gonna lie i think it's i think it's really this is the case that kind of is the peak possible opportunity for apple and i agree that they should use that as leverage to settle my problem is that i just don't know I mean it's really no one's settling this case on either side without a blanket settlement it takes into account every single case around the world no SmartCompany no board of directors is going to sign off on a settlement that doesn't take an account every single case and get rid of everything right yeah it is so that's a lot of money and i can't imagine apples ever gonna accept a settlement that doesn't have a huge amount of money coming their way right but I mean but as Apple just said in a statement this isn't about money yeah I was a PR guy well I know that is actually Katie cotton is that had a basically out of there but I mean go but but that the statement is they're saying it's not about money but apple doesn't need Samsung's money isn't this about competition I mean isn't this really about saying like we want to we want it we want people to if we have to have I mean let's just say if we take them at face value isn't this about them saying we want to compete we want you to compete with us fair and square and if you don't compete with us fair and square and if you heard us we're gonna take you to court and we're gonna be awarded damages because we deserve that but we don't need your money are they saying like we don't want to be stolen from and if and for future companies if you want to create a product that competes with us great go for it but don't steal from us or we'll take you to court except that they went you know they obviously went even Steve Jobs you know and Tim Cook went to Samsung back in 2010 and 2011 and said you know they say these things but in reality there's a dollar amount that will get them away from the courtroom right but but a dollar amount that Samsung didn't think they'd want to pay yeah but they might start to think it looks a little better now well but but didn't we just say but no but didn't we just say I mean what's the impact of Samsung here is that there the vibe is impacted like by the way there may be a samsung phone called the vibe to the summit I mean but the impact is why also there may be one call the impact I'm sure there's there are no were a little over a billion dollars not a little over a billion dollars and fifty million dollar it's a little over no it is I think it's a lot of money five million more is not a big deal um it's a billion dollars that's the impact and Samsung vibing sense of I've it's real fun is a real just silma case you're wondering of course Samson Samson already made also made like the galaxy rant or something I mean they're all know and then there was the smiley face smiley face yeah it was just an emoticon yeah but-but-but so what I'm saying is like apple doesn't need their money no I think they want a stunt samsung presumably needs their money samsung you know any very badly cuz there you got to pay apple no but what I'm saying is Samsung sorry Apple okay there are two things they're saying out loud they're saying one we don't want to be stolen from and no they're just saying one thing we don't want to be solid from and so and so if that's what they're saying I mean I guess they could clean I guess they could they want to clean up on damages seems like a roundabout way to get it I mean they could have does it seem likely they could have struck a settlement that would be more money in their pocket that seems likely to seems like in that case samsung is it Samsung of the guys saying we don't want to do the settlement because we're only going to lose you know a billion bucks here two billion bucks and we can afford that my crazy and that the thing that seems really odd to me belabor the point no but it also seems like from Samsung's standpoint um you know money aside because both these companies have a ton of money and can afford to pay a billion dollars yeah um but from purely just an appearance standpoint you know the vibe as it were on the from the vote for samsung to come out it seems like the best thing to do would have been to come out and say listen we screwed up like here are the documents that proved we tried to copy the iphone but now we have these other great devices we've moved forward you know here's some money we're sorry Apple and we have these great devices we've innovated beyond the iphone I would've been a good vine that's just stolen it from that guy right and now let's just all move forward and be happy about it right and it doesn't seem like it seems like Samsung had nothing to get it what so they're never gonna do that they're never gonna say they were ever wrong about anything what they're gonna do is they're gonna either fight about how there's a miscarriage of justice they're gonna fight about how the patent system is broken and apple owns a rectangle and if they ever settle they'll say we're delighted that we both can continue to make our innovative product right a samsung samsung is knocking samsung's not gonna say samsung is not going to their finish the trial where they've been arguing about how right they are and then Apple wins they go well we were kind of wrong we were on they should have done wrong too costly we were out of line and we shouldn't have ripped off they should have never done it I mean they should have never done it I mean hey look these companies should have settled the judge has been telling them to settle and what the jury has accomplished is it it came up with a business deal for them to to be a part of right and if they had been smart samsung would have been paying slowly this billion dollars to Apple over the past few years iterating its devices and Apple would be funnier because it's still silly to me that the jury returned a verdict it's a slam dunk for Apple in many ways wait huge victory that they returned a verdict that was their entire job well no but it's silly that Apple and Samsung ever let it get this far I mean it's so stupid but no but standing I I think you're I think you're missing something very clear which is Apple presented an emotional case to them with a lot of great evidence that struck an emotional chord I mean I think we felt an emotional response when we saw the document where Samsung said do this take this much more like this and I think they knew at that point I think they felt very strongly and after seeing what Samsung produced whether or not they discredited their witnesses that they had an emotional they had made an emotional point that would resonate with the jury and that yep that that one is the jury winning much stronger for Apple then them settling with Samsung settling with Samsung in the midst of this trial I think apple is saying there's stuff on both sides we get it we want to make things work what they've done now is position themselves to the public and to future and to future combatants in the in the courtroom as the company that one the company that was found to be right the company that a jury of of regular people said these guys were right they got hurt and they should be awarded something and I think that's like a much stronger position to be in for Apple than having settled in the midst of this now they may decide in a week or two weeks or in a month or whatever that there's a settlement out there that makes sense to them but i think the emotional impact of letting these people decide for them sounds a really big message to like the rest look here we are talking about it you know there's a would we be as with the seem as important how they settled settlements happen all the time and these companies make part of their businesses figuring out how to get something from another company keep making their product I mean they do that all day every day but but to hear someone say Samsung you stole from Apple really vindicates them and shows their position in the market now we're like hey average people can see it you know an average gary was able to see we got ripped off and I think that makes a powerful statement moving forward I think it gives them a lot of leverage they wouldn't have had settle was at that point I mean it has to be Google right they're not going to set a sweet you only Google I mean the truth is these are all about I mean you know the design of the ACE and the S whatever the vibrant aside uh this really is and you know that the tab this really is about the software and it is about two big big companies trying to do the same thing which is owned the smartphone market and the smartphone ecosystem in the mobile market and in general I don't see how they can settle I don't I mean I guess they could cut individual deals with all these they don't care but it's either they offered Samsung a deal that was I think unique to Samsung I mean how quickly could Apple by HTC yeah I mean how much is HTC worth I know what's the vow how what would HTC cell ad hello mommy can we consult the chart of HTC's value that I keep with me at all times the kid you just get that out your will wait don't you have an app on your phone that shows the value of all companies but I'm just saying I'm just saying HTC is not apples problem Samsung has been apples problem for real I mean they really are a Monell if in the in the in the mobile industry right now they were the leading they were the leader uh I would button what have you just have you identified HTC's market gap or something hey she sees market cap just lost quote hundreds of millions of dollars according to economy you mean like right this moment from yeah I think it's I think it's somewhere in the 30 billion dollar thirty billion dollars Apple loses that in a seat cushion okay 30 billion is like Tim Cook has a very big cock that's like like when somebody's got a birthday at apple or a regular employee they spend 30 billion on their birthday party so so I mean I'm just saying I don't agree with Matt I don't think HTC is the problem and I don't think it's google if Google's driving Android if Google's decided tomorrow to stop doing Android Apple would have a problem they'd have to worry about Microsoft again or rim but keep in mind that Apple Microsoft's have a deal they worked it out you know they have an anti cloning agreement in their deal so that you know like you're right if Microsoft suddenly turns into a huge player Apple can say you're violating our anti cloning agreement but there's so much at play between the two companies that they would just adjust the terms of the deal right and I think that's really important you know I think the Nokia case you know Apple a nokia nokia suit apple right and then they settled like Apple was a huge threat to nokia they're using a bunch of their patents and I figured it out Apple paid the money and I I think ultimately this comes down to Apple might have been strident they might have been going for this victory but Samsung decided at every opportunity to not pay the money and maybe maybe apples demands are too high but Samsung made a choice they they're they're also went to the jury they said we're gonna win and they did not win they lost like they this is absolutely categorically a loss for samsung yeah I exactly why that Samsung's not ask or apples not asking for thirty bucks a phone anymore that was two years ago I bet it's significantly lower I mean it's still high you mean for these phones are for funds going forward for just general a license agreement under any sort of agreement with because they're doing it they're doing across license for the whole portfolio I mean what are they but what are they licensing at this point in an ICS device it doesn't matter as far as Samsung's concerned they're just get an entire free ride on Apple's portfolio and put in Applegate's Samsung's portfolio so no matter what happens from issued patents or current patents that are pending they there they don't have to worry about being at all so you're saying you're saying that the agreement the settlement here is you pay us money we but you know we both agree to not see each other yeah no one's got to settle otherwise I mean that's that you got to have some sort of assurances that you're not going to get nailed again so when they were so dizzy your is it your perception that if they were in settlement talks that they what they were talking about is we've got a zero this out like we've got to make it so that we're not going after each other or when they were in settlement talks was it was it Apple is saying hey we want you to pay as XY and Z and we'll evaluate and there's a slide we have from two years ago that said Apple presenting to Samsung and it says Samson chose to embrace and imitate the iphone we worked hard on it we would have preferred you got a license in advance cool you know like these talks have been happening and that's I'm saying this is underreported in this entire case is that they've been having constant talks about settlement I mean what's what's funny about it is that if there had been any inclination that Samsung was going to copy let's say really blatantly copy apples product or if Samsung had come to them and said like hey we're about to release this an applet seen and said you're ripping us off you're gonna have to pay a license on that or you're using our you're using our IP or patents or whatever they would have just changed it wouldn't they I mean they would have just said yeah you know it's not worth the trouble why don't we just tweak this they wouldn't have paid it would that who knows man I mean maybe they would have designed her out but right way you wanna really what exactly which is what they should really didn't immediately because they had these phones I mean when they went to Samsung it was just the galaxy s really and you know really I don't think much these I neurons came until I mean it started peeping I guess I started creeping up after that but I mean oh so you're saying you're so I'm sorry you're saying earlier I don't know the timeline exactly but earlier in this process that when the s original ass was out Apple came just like immediately after they said they said you're infringing here's what you needed we need to settle this right yep and I said no and then they went on to make well I mean the ass was pretty egregious yeah I think they did start making changes after that physical design changes i don't i don't think i started making software changes right they kept they can work on that died a big document I don't get it they're like have you seen the latest update the iOS update we got a 10 more pages they change the icons a little bit we gotta we gotta fix this all right I should happen top I think I know I agree to wrap up I think we've talked this thing to death so here's so just so if you have joined us or are not brought up to speed I'm just gonna recap this and then we'll talk about what happens next you know very briefly jury found for Apple predominantly for Apple in the apple vs samsung trial they've been awarded at this point the jury has awarded them 1 billion 49 million dollars in damages it it is possible that that could be increased by the judge or that apple would well it's about if possible that can be increased by the judge and I'll leave it at that they deliberated the jury deliberated for about 22 hours and it was I mean I think a very speedy and no one was expecting this to come in tonight as far as I know certainly I don't think Matt Matt Neal I our legal experts here we're definitely not like no sitting around waiting if waiting for it to happen and and there's going to be an injunction hearing on September 20th in the case samsung is going to fight this though I mean they're appealing is the point right yeah yeah so I mean there's more to come but this is this is the Stata that the world for a long time yet the next big question is whether Apple can get injunctions we'll find out the next two or so weeks with appliquéd injunctions against the galaxy s2 which I believe is the only product that's still on sale from this case and then from there it's Samsung as to decide what to appeal and the court has to decide what appeals take right that's right well I think it goes without saying that we will be covering this intently I mean what else we do is look at my living nightmare will contain if you like the towels a waking nightmare will go on for really light and indefinite in a period of time I would say here he loved for years but but but I will say that this wave this swell has it will greatly diminish mean we've been covering this like crazy there been so many developments in this we've been live blogging it this well has now dissipated and the surface going out I don't know what this water I mean unless unless something crazy happens like here we go water analogy it's like ten o'clock on friday it's been a long week just want some water I just want someone thirsty okay but uh but you know we'll keep tracking this obviously just keep keep your eyes on the verge calm for more action and I you know you know I want to thank David Pierce Ross Miller who was on for like five minutes and said one thing and they're like I'm at meharry and an Eli of Patel audience Ryan on the ground yes let's just say we could not overstate how clutch brian has been in this reporting he's been in the courtroom every day live blogging this thing putting together story is just incredible incredible reporting from him very happy to have on the team and when I see him soon I'm going to kiss him on the mouth full on the mouth open mouth tongue no big deal we're all were all grown-ups here and he's earned it really when you think it's very possible that he is chasing a juror to their house right now yeah well they suck up they snuck out the back uh yeah the jurors so really in case you're running the jurors knock out the back we were not gotten any statement from the jurors or the attorneys right now we'll be working on that and and will obviously have a post up when you see it thanks everybody here for who's been who's tuned in especially all the new redditors we love you and you can come anytime you want come back anytime you want and we will be back on the verge casta this coming thursday as always so that's a show thanks so much and and now go have a drink for the love of god have a good weekend yeah you