Post by
wilander on Dec 01, 2021 9:20am
December is here! Lets bite the Apple!
I know they said they expect early in the New Year for the Apple decision, but it is completely possible within a normal timeline, we get the Apple decision in December. Particularly since it was clear from the oral arguments this wont be a complicated one.
Lets take that bite out of the Apple!
Comment by
wilander on Dec 01, 2021 10:06am
Yes. Which, is my understanding, when decisions can start to be expected. It is true, it is the earliest, but it now finally starts to enter into the "it is possible" to be released phase. Something to at least look forward to on here. And as I said, this one doesnt look to be too complicated for the judges.
Comment by
whaler83 on Dec 01, 2021 10:29am
Depending on if its precedential setting vs not also has an affect on how long the opinion takes.
Comment by
wilander on Dec 01, 2021 11:24am
Didnt we just add $50 million to the coffers to fund ITS? tick tock, tik tock.
Comment by
100mill on Dec 01, 2021 11:27am
Astutein, just so we're talking apples to apples, the original $145 million judgement would be $185 million if you apply the same interest/costs multiplier that the judge used to arrive at $109 million from the $85 million second trial award. Both trial awards exclude post-iPhone 7 phones.
Comment by
cabbieJBJ on Dec 01, 2021 12:22pm
100mill, don't forget that the issue of iPhones 6/7 with Intel chipsets is also on the table. Wilan's lawyer answered a question at oral arguments from one of the judges who asked what was the amount involved. The answer was $10's of millions.
Comment by
cabbieJBJ on Dec 01, 2021 12:18pm
Unlikely to be precedential imo.
Comment by
byloselhir on Dec 03, 2021 10:44am
A judge finds in favor of QTRH and apple just appeals the decision, can they just keep appealing and delay the payment or is this the FINAL decision?
Comment by
Joey67 on Dec 03, 2021 3:22pm
This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy
Comment by
cabbieJBJ on Dec 03, 2021 4:55pm
Hot Air Joey, you're no clairvoyant. But if you were and had you based your clairvoyancy on Apple v. VirnetX, you would have had to say that VirnetX got 100% of what they wanted. NEVER is such an absolute, no-wiggle-room stance. Just wait for the court's ruling.
Comment by
wilander on Dec 03, 2021 10:35pm
Careful maxx. If you're not wearing the purest of rose coloured glasses, now you get put on ignore apprently. lol
Comment by
Justhalffull on Dec 04, 2021 7:29am
Narcissists are like that Maxx
Comment by
byloselhir on Dec 04, 2021 9:32am
Don't be greedy on the pull back leave some for me!!
Comment by
byloselhir on Dec 04, 2021 9:29am
thank you for replying, seems b=llsh=t to me the judges say pay up and they just keep stringing it out but i agree with the CAFC judge.....just settle it
Comment by
byloselhir on Dec 04, 2021 9:41am
Did i not see something here about an Amazon case in November too? I know nowt about this stuff i bought long ago as wilan that paid a good divi, looked at selling then the price dropped so i held, saw all the stuff going on with Apple and decided to stay in as i thought i saw good value and it would settle quickly
Comment by
byloselhir on Dec 05, 2021 6:14pm
Thank you! I was checking here for news on the Amazon case but either no posts or i missed them