After Samsung's stunning $1 billion defeat in court at the hands of Apple (s aapl), calling it a winner might seem awfully far-fetched. But that's the argument some are making about the South Korean conglomerate.
In a blog post, Robert Scoble said while Samsung will take a big PR hit and lose $1 billion, it was worth it to copy Apple because it vaulted the company ahead of other smartphone rivals.
Software patents drive me bonkers, but it's an interesting thought: did Samsung just pay $1B to become the #2 device manufacturer? At the levels that these guys are playing at, that's probably cheaper than authentically growing to that position.
It makes me wonder if Samsung intentionally crossed that line knowing that it's costs, while steep, would ultimately be less expensive in the long run. Or are they just clumsy copycats that lucked out?
