Chico Harlan, reporting for The Washington Post:

The pace of problems is accelerating. Sony hasn’t made a profit in four years. Panasonic has lost money in three of the past four. Along with Sharp, the companies’ combined market value, according to Bloomberg, is $32 billion — making them one-fifth the value of Samsung and one-twentieth the value of Apple.

The smartphone angle here is obvious. So is the pricing squeeze angle. Not-so-obvious: the complete and utter failure of each of these companies to understand the importance of software tying in with hardware.

Bryan Bishop of The Verge was sent the following statement from Google:

The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don’t relate to the core Android operating system, and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office. The mobile industry is moving fast and all players — including newcomers — are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don’t want anything to limit that.

As generic as possible. And, of course, some of the patents in question do directly relate to “core” Android, as Seth Weintraub points out.

More importantly, Samsung is the *only* OEM that has actually been making money off of Android. So let’s not pretend that this means nothing for the broader Android ecosystem. It means a lot.

With Samsung, if you look at the new iPad, they had fewer issues reaching the higher resolution requests from Apple. They were the first vendor to get to volume with that panel.

NPD DisplaySearch analyst Richard Shim discussing “Retina” displays.

Let’s all take a moment to recall that while Apple may have dropped the hammer on Samsung with their smartphone patent lawsuit, Samsung remains a vital partner. And you can expect that partnership to continue. It’s not personal, it’s business.

Very, very awkward business.

Marco Arment, reacting to Andy Ihnatko’s thoughts that the consumers lose as a result of Apple’s win over Samsung:

What’s really going to disrupt the iPhone is going to be something completely different, not something that tries so hard to clone the iPhone that it hits Apple’s patents.

Unoriginal manufacturers will need to pay for their unoriginality. The most reasonable course of action, therefore, is to truly innovate and design products that aren’t such close copies.

I fail to see how consumers lose.

I completely agree that what will end the iPhone’s run is something totally different, not a copycat. Maybe Apple will make that product, or maybe someone else will. This case does nothing to stop that. It simply stops people from copying the current iPhone.

What does worry me about this lawsuit is that it’s going to lead to many more. And it makes patents even more important, and as such, more valuable. That could end up hurting many companies, both large and small. And it could distract from innovation because everyone will be so preoccupied with filing patents, looking for ones that they might be infringing upon, or in court.

We’re going to touch this with our fingers. And we have invented a new technology called multi-touch, which is phenomenal. It works like magic. You don’t need a stylus. It’s far more accurate than any touch display that’s ever been shipped. It ignores unintended touches, it’s super-smart. You can do multi-finger gestures on it. And boy, have we patented it.

Steve Jobs, on January 9, 2007 unveiling the iPhone.

The other money quote.

(via @tconrad)