Jury Rejiggers Apple’s Damage Award for Samsung’s Copying

| News

apple v. SamsungThe jury in the Apple v. Samsung patent infringement case returned to the court on Monday to correct a mistake it made when calculating damages owed to Apple. While the jury awarded damages on a product that was found to infringe, but for which no damages were assigned, the overall damage award was rejiggered to leave a $119.6 million figure intact.

On Friday, the jury found that Samsung infringed on two of Apple's patents and awarded the iPhone maker $119.6 million. Monday's action added damages for the above-mentioned product, but it increased and decreased various damage awards on other products to reach roughly the same figure it had reached on Friday.

The jury also found that Apple infringed on a patent that Samsung bought from Hitachi as a defensive move. Damages for that infringement were set at $158,400, a figure that was not changed in Monday's paperwork.

The jury's finding of infringement marks the second straight case in California where Samsung was found to have copied Apple's innovations. In a case in 2012, Samsung was ordered to pay more than a billion dollars, a figure later reduced to $930 million when some of those damages were retried.

Apple and Samsung have a third case in front of a different judge covering other products and other patents.

According to Re/code, Apple issued the following statement:

We are grateful to the jury and the court for their service. Today’s ruling reinforces what courts around the world have already found: That Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products. We are fighting to defend the hard work that goes into beloved products like the iPhone, which our employees devote their lives to designing and delivering for our customers.

For its part, Samsung focused on the reality that the jury ignored Apple's request for damages of $2 billion, saying:

We agree with the jury’s decision to reject Apple’s grossly exaggerated damages claim. Although we are disappointed by the finding of infringement, we are vindicated that for the second time in the U.S., Apple has been found to infringe Samsung’s patents. It is our long history of innovation and commitment to consumer choice, that has driven us to become the leader in the mobile industry today.

Every aspect of the jury's finding is subject to appeal, and both Apple and Samsung are expected to take advantage of the appellate process.

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

Comments

CudaBoy

Seems like the lawyers won.  Apple loses 158 mil, and Samsung loses 120 mil. Both are chump-change.What a waste of resources.

paikinho

Hmmm I read apple loses 158 thousand.
Samsun 120 million.
Am I missing something….?

CudaBoy

Am I missing something….?      Nope, my bad - the typo there of the comma on the end in stead of a period threw me.

RonMacGuy

Here’s the really sad thing (at least to me).  If I invent a widget and patent it, I have full control.  I can manufacture/sell it myself, or I can license it to others to manufacture/sell and earn royalties on it.  If someone makes my widget without my approval, I can sue them and get all the profits that they made on it, and probably some punitive damages as well.  I am not required to allow anyone to make my widget without my permission.  Very simplistic example I know, but acceptable for the basis of my argument..

In this recent court case, it almost seems like Apple is now being required to allow others to use their intellectual property.  Almost like FRAND.  But they don’t want this at all.  People are balking at how high Apple is wanting to charge - but isn’t that their right?  For my widget, if I want to charge $100 royalty and others can’t make any money off it to cover this royalty, then they don’t accept the licensing terms.  If I can’t succeed on my own and I need others to help make and sell it, then obviously I can’t charge that high of a royalty.  So, basic economics kick in and I lower the price of my demands to get others to help make and sell my widget.  Here, Apple wants exclusive use of their IP (like data detectors or slide to unlock) and the moronic jury comes in and says, “No, Apple, Samsung can use those even though you don’t want them to, and by the way you are asking for way too much and you are already the world’s most valuable company so we helped you by deciding on a more reasonable value for your IP for others to pay even though you don’t want them to even use it.  You’re welcome.”  I mean, really?  HELLO!!  APPLE DOES NOT WANT TO SHARE THEIR IP!!  IT IS THEIR RIGHT NOT TO SHARE IT!!  But now they are forced to by the jury, because of Samdung’s willful stealing of it in the first place.  This is rewarding Samdung, not punishing them, which is pathetic and disgusting to me.  Yes, I know there are some here who feel it is Samdung’s right to use it and to pay a reasonable amount to Apple for it, and that Apple sucks if they withhold such awesome smartphone IP and not allow their competition to use it.  But, it should be Apple’s RIGHT to do so if they choose to.  This is exactly what Steve Jobs was referring to when talking about ‘going thermonuclear’.  This is the foundation of all that is wrong with these lawsuits.  Samdung should be made to STOP using Apple’s IP and their products should have been banned from the US years ago for using Apple IP.

I apologize for my yelling outbursts in the above.  Have a great day!!

I am purposefully posting this to two separate articles on TMO that refer to the recent jury decision on Apple vs. Samdung.

Lee Dronick

  In this recent court case, it almost seems like Apple is now being required to allow others to use their intellectual property.  Almost like FRAND.

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Samsung could find a different way to do something that Apple is doing. Sure it would take putting some money into doing their own R&D, but they might find a better way of doing it.

RonMacGuy

Absolutely, Lee.  But, this would require the courts to tell Samsung that they must stop using Apple’s IP, not just pay Apple a ‘fair’ value for it.

Log-in to comment