Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 2, 2014, 08:11 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Jury Finds Both Apple and Samsung Guilty of Patent Infringement, Samsung to Pay $119.6 Million, Apple to Pay $158,400




After three days of deliberations and several weeks of testimony, the jury reached a unanimous verdict in the second Apple vs. Samsung trial (via CNET). The jury found that Samsung willfully infringed on three of the five patents involved in the lawsuit, ordering the South Korean company to pay $119.6 million, far from the $2 billion total Apple was hoping for.

All of Samsung's devices were found to have infringed on the '647 data syncing patent, while some were found to have infringed on '721, slide-to-unlock. Samsung was not found to have infringed on '959, universal search, or on '414, background syncing. Judge Koh had also previously ruled that Samsung had infringed on Apple's '172 autocomplete patent.

As for Samsung's claims against Apple, Apple was found guilty of violating the company's '449 patent related to an "Apparatus for recording and reproducing digital image and speech", and was ordered to pay Samsung $158,400.

In this second lawsuit, which began on March 31, Apple argued that Samsung owed it $2.2 billion in damages for infringing on five separate iPhone patents. Samsung argued that Apple had infringed on two of its own patents, asking for $6.2 million in damages.

Over the course of the trial, Apple called in numerous experts to argue why it was owed $2 billion, chalking the total up to lost profits and reasonable royalty estimates. Samsung argued that Apple's $2 billion request was ludicrous, insisting it should owe only $40 million, or $1.75 per device.

While Samsung focused on proving that Apple was actually targeting Android in its suit, calling multiple Google witnesses like former Android chief Andy Rubin, Apple presented the jury with testimony from its own employees on the design, development, and marketing of the original iPhone.

During the trial, news broke that Google agreed to cover lawyer fees and potential damage awards related to some of the patents in the lawsuit. Four of the five patents Apple has accused Samsung of infringing on are part of the Android operating system, but the two Google had agreed to help with were not the same patents Samsung was found guilty of infringing.

This damages award adds to the recalculated damages from the original Apple vs. Samsung trial, in which Samsung was ordered to pay Apple a total of approximately $890 million. This suit focused on newer devices, including the Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note II, Galaxy Tab 10.1, the iPhone 4/4s/5, the iPad 2/3/4, the iPad mini, and fourth and fifth generation iPod touch.

Update 5:50 PM PT: Apple issued the following statement to Re/code following the verdict:
Quote:
"We are grateful to the jury and the court for their service," Apple told Re/code. "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."
Update 6:05 PM PT: Apple's lawyers claim to have identified an error, suggesting one product (the Galaxy S2) found to infringe on the '172 patent received no damages award. The jury will need to return on Monday to finalize the damages award.

Update 5/4 11:40 AM PT: After calculating damages for the missing Galaxy S2, the jury has awarded Apple an additional $4 million and adjusted the damages for some other products, keeping the overall amount that Samsung owes at the original $119.6 million.

Article Link: Jury Finds Both Apple and Samsung Guilty of Patent Infringement, Samsung to Pay $119.6 Million, Apple to Pay $158,400
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:13 PM   #2
larrylaffer
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Los Angeles
And in the end, $117mm is a slap on the wrist.

The only people that benefit from all this childishness are the IP attorneys.
larrylaffer is offline   45 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:14 PM   #3
spaceballl
macrumors 68030
 
spaceballl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Silicon Valley
$2B seems pretty high, but $120M is a small price to pay, considering their success. I mean when you look at the whole "smartphones before the iPhone" and "smartphones after" it's pretty obvious...

Now that being said, I'm certainly one for a complete restructure of the patent system and potentially getting rid of software patents, but considering the system we have now, this does seem a little easy... $120M is really nothing...
__________________
Travel Blog: Cloud Commuting | Technology Blog: Not Quite Mainstream | Cashback: BigCrumbs
spaceballl is offline   17 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:14 PM   #4
sputnikv
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
is this money apple will use to pay it's attorney's fees? no way this whole legal battle has been profitable for either company
sputnikv is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:15 PM   #5
Amacfa
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2009
With iPhone 6, iTV, and iWatch around the corner, It makes sense why Google would lessen the blow to Samsung; a blow to the company just before these product releases just may knock android down a huge notch.
Amacfa is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:15 PM   #6
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by sputnikv View Post
is this money apple will use to pay it's attorney's fees? no way this whole legal battle has been profitable for either company
Thank Steve Jobs.
__________________
"When we se something huge and powerful we aspire to make it small and meaningful." Jony Ive 
Rogifan is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:16 PM   #7
mejsric
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceballl View Post
$2B seems pretty high, but $120M is a small price to pay, considering their success. I mean when you look at the whole "smartphones before the iPhone" and "smartphones after" it's pretty obvious...

Now that being said, I'm certainly one for a complete restructure of the patent system and potentially getting rid of software patents, but considering the system we have now, this does seem a little easy... $120M is really nothing...
Its not about the money as Tim Cook said.

Knowing Samsung is convicted copycat again is a win.
mejsric is offline   58 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:16 PM   #8
SJism23
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Canada
That's very little. Considering the lawyer fees and lost time for the people involved in the trial, $120 million certainly doesn't seem worth all the trouble. But I guess even $2 billion wouldn't have been "worth" it.
__________________
15" MacBook Pro (early 2011), 2.0 GHz i7, 16GB RAM; iPad 4, 32 GB; iPhone 6 Plus, 128GB
SJism23 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:16 PM   #9
jeffreyropp
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
And Samsung would do it again

Crime is pretty cheap when you consider the resulting revenues from Samsung's strategy. Best $119.6 million they ever spent.
jeffreyropp is offline   24 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:17 PM   #10
Yojimbo007
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
At end jury said .. crime is good way to make money !
Copy, make billions and get a slap on you wrist.

Great message jury.

Someday soon :
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	33
Size:	486.1 KB
ID:	471231  

Last edited by Yojimbo007; May 5, 2014 at 06:08 PM.
Yojimbo007 is offline   37 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:17 PM   #11
BulletToothTony
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
At this point all I want from Apple is to give us a few more screen size options since that seems to be the ONLY reason why so many people buy Samsung devices.

I don't care if some people think that the Note 4 or 5 or whatever number they are is HUGE, I want a few more options..

IMO that would be the biggest blow to Samsung.
__________________
i7 Late 2013 iMac 780MX 24GB Ram
iPad Mini Verizon used as an iPhone
BulletToothTony is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:20 PM   #12
MellowFuzz
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Banksters, politicians, Samsung... the American people just love to reward crooks, cronies and copying.
MellowFuzz is offline   14 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:20 PM   #13
okboy
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Innovation on sale. Buy now pay later.

This is like driving a new car out of the lot, denying you stole it, then haggling down the price by 94%.

This tells software engineers and designers that their work just isn't worth much.
okboy is offline   24 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:20 PM   #14
Amacfa
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by mejsric View Post
Its not about the money as Tim Cook said.

Knowing Samsung is convicted copycat again is a win.
Which could help Apple greatly when it happens again. See: iWatch, iTV, or really any company victim to Samsung's thievery.

You do realize Samsung was selling smartphones prior to the release of the iPhone?

Last edited by Amacfa; May 2, 2014 at 08:55 PM.
Amacfa is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:22 PM   #15
Dmunjal
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amacfa View Post
Which could help Apple greatly when it happens again. See: iWatch, iTV, or really any company victim to Samsung's thievery.
You do realize that Samsung already sells connected TVs and smartwatches and Apple doesn't?
Dmunjal is offline   15 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:23 PM   #16
Kashchei
macrumors 65816
 
Kashchei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Meat Space
Send a message via MSN to Kashchei Send a message via Yahoo to Kashchei Send a message via Skype™ to Kashchei
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreyropp View Post
Crime is pretty cheap when you consider the resulting revenues from Samsung's strategy. Best $119.6 million they ever spent.
Very well put. I wish this would be the headline in newspaper articles and tv stories on the subject
__________________
Hungry enough to touch your frightened face
Kashchei is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:25 PM   #17
Yojimbo007
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
You do realize that Samsung already sells connected TVs and smartwatches and Apple doesn't?
LoL .. Pathetic view!

http://flic.kr/p/ndWNKe

.
.

Last edited by Yojimbo007; May 5, 2014 at 04:22 PM.
Yojimbo007 is offline   14 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:25 PM   #18
IJ Reilly
macrumors P6
 
IJ Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Palookaville
The concept of "owing" is kind of a strange one to introduce into a description of a lawsuit. In lawsuits, parties claim damages. If the courts agree, they award damages in a judgement. Nobody "owes" anybody anything.

And nobody is "guilty" of anything. Guilt or innocence can only be found in a criminal trial. This was a lawsuit, a civil matter.
__________________
*The season starts too early and finishes too late and there are too many games in between.
Bill Veeck

Last edited by IJ Reilly; May 3, 2014 at 01:47 AM.
IJ Reilly is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:27 PM   #19
cdmoore74
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Samsung's CEO has that much cash under his mattress.
cdmoore74 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:28 PM   #20
IJ Reilly
macrumors P6
 
IJ Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Palookaville
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJism23 View Post
That's very little. Considering the lawyer fees and lost time for the people involved in the trial, $120 million certainly doesn't seem worth all the trouble. But I guess even $2 billion wouldn't have been "worth" it.
Presumably, findings of fact made in support of the damage award can also be used to sue other Android OEMs, and possibly at some point, Google.
__________________
*The season starts too early and finishes too late and there are too many games in between.
Bill Veeck
IJ Reilly is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:28 PM   #21
sshambles
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
The only Samsung product I own is a fridge.

Bet they stole the patents to make that also.
sshambles is offline   20 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:28 PM   #22
bearcatrp
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boon Docks USA
About time this is over. Samsung needs to pay it and move on. Apple does the same BS to other companies by stealing too so don't act surprised on this outcome. Time to close this chapter and move on. BTW, haha apple. You got what you deserved for being greedy!
__________________
2010 2.66 Mac Mini(SL), ATV3, iPhone 6P, Dual X5670 2.93 Westmere Win7 PC w/48gb ram & 4930K w/32gb ram Win7.
bearcatrp is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:29 PM   #23
ianKent
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Apple should pay $158k to Samsung in 200 iPhones.
ianKent is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:31 PM   #24
Avalontor
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by mejsric View Post
Its not about the money as Tim Cook said.

Knowing Samsung is convicted copycat again is a win.
According to you Apple is a convicted copycat too. You read the part how Apple infringed on Samsung, right?
Avalontor is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 08:31 PM   #25
Crosscreek
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Margarittaville
3 winners.
Apple for the patent infringement and reputation.
And the lawyers on both sides that get the big checks.
Crosscreek is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple and Samsung Face Off in Court as Second Patent Infringement Trial Begins MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 49 Apr 5, 2014 03:59 PM
Jury Rules Samsung Must Pay Apple $290 Million in Damages Retrial MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 166 Nov 25, 2013 01:52 PM
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 1383 Sep 5, 2012 04:46 PM
Apple Seeking $2.5 Billion from Samsung in U.S. Patent and Design Infringement Trial MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 332 Aug 1, 2012 11:08 PM
Apple to Pay Samsung for Infringing Patent Timzer iPhone 17 Jun 21, 2012 01:07 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:30 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC