decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Not a fishing expedition | 112 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Not a fishing expedition
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 17 2012 @ 06:41 AM EST
It might be both. On the one hand, they might want to dot-the-proverbial-eye by providing evidence not just that Apple offered to license, but that they actually did license to someone.
That's true, we'll see where they go with this.
In addition, I'm sure they would love to know for how much, if that might get the jury damages reduced-- remember, the jury's award is supposed to be compensatory, not punitive. If the portion of the jury's award for the infringed patents is substantially higher than the license amount, they might argue that the jury's award be reduced.
I'm sure Samsung would like to argue that but I don't know how valid it is given how different HTC and Samsung are. Samsung is currently the worldwide #1 smartphone manufacturer and is growing at some ridiculous rate - they're beating Apple. HTC is fairly small now and seems dead in the water. Assuming the patents are valid, surely it's reasonable to think that Samsung infringing would cause significantly more damage to Apple than HTC?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )