moongster SG $100M is spare change to Apple. Apple just pay to move on and concentrate on doing business rather than engage in battling out in the court room, which would cost more in the longer term - other players coming in and chip away their market share. Recall the story of the stork and clam, in the end the fisherman gain. Better for us consumer also, both companies can spend more on creating good products rather than paying those insanely rich lawyers.
kingofbeholder SG it not the money issue. both know they will not settle easily if they continue playing court. to me, in chinese, bu da bu xiang shi. now they become friend.
apoc.feuer SG I see this as Apple's preventive measure (To work with Creative) for the upcoming M$ MP3 player (Zune)...although we don't know how good the respond for M$ MP3 player (Zune), Apple should be prepared for a new guy invading their MP3 market...
Diesel_Dimension SG also hor,how apple gonna fork out that 100m,or the years of ipod sales effort had juz gone to waste ???
ditzy SG $100m is nothing to apple. Like fine Bill gates $3billion for using pirated windows xp in his own home.
moongster SG Reference: http://news.com.com/Apple+settles+with+Creative+for+100+million/2100-1047_3-6108901.html?tag=nefd.top "$100 million is a pittance compared to the $1.5 billion in revenue Apple garnered on iPod sales just in the last quarter" => Apple one quarter revenue already so much "Apple can get back some of the $100 million payment if Creative is able to secure licensing deals with other MP3 player manufacturers" => So, Creative will have to ask other MP3 manufacturer for payment? "As part of the agreement, Creative will also enter Apple's Made for iPod program as an authorized seller of iPod accessories. Creative will be able to affix the "Made for iPod" logo to its speakers, headphones and other related products" => Creative need to pay Apple for every unit sold "Creative reported a $12.7 million loss on slowing sales for its fourth quarter. The company expects the $100 million settlement to add 85 cents to its earnings per share figures for its current quarter." => Can cover up the loss, shows the importance of patent But more importantly, Creative need to profit from Zen-line of mp3 players. Apple still winning the MP3 player war, wait till Zune arrives, more choices for consumers => price goes down?
numby SG tats how businessmen protect their businesses, be it small or big companies... things like patents, trademark uses, copyrights are to protect companies own unique ideas or products
Icemoon SG I took a module on IP before and lecturer told us small companies holding 'killer patents' are very dangerous to big companies. If I'm not wrong, the damages are measured in relation to the infringing company. It doesn't matter if the company holding the patent is very small. If Apple lost her counter-suit, she hon gan liao .. 'cos her Ipods are so successful in the market.
Icemoon SG when did creative apply and granted the patent? wait for 20 years lor .. for the technology to enter public domain .. then dun have to pay a single cent to use it.
