Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
63,542
30,850



Apple and Samsung are back in court this week for a damages retrial that will determine just how much Samsung has to pay Apple for infringing on Apple design patents. Samsung was found guilty of violating the patents back in 2012, but the two companies have been fighting over the amount of money Samsung should pay as a result for the last six years.

The core issue between the two companies is whether the damages should be based on the total value of the device, or whether Samsung should pay a fee based just on the elements of the phone that it copied.

applevsamsung-800x259.jpg

Apple is of the opinion that its payment should be based on the full value of the iPhone, while Samsung is arguing that it should pay a lesser amount based only on a portion of the iPhone's value. "They're seeking profits on the entire phone," argued Samsung lawyer John Quinn. "Apple's design patents do not cover the entire phone. They are entitled to profits only on [infringing] components, not the entire phone."

Yesterday was spent picking jurors, while opening arguments and testimony started today. Key Apple executives like Tim Cook and Jony Ive will not be testifying during the trial, but Richard Howarth, senior director of the Apple Design Team will discuss the design process, and Susan Kare will also take the stand to talk about user interface graphics design.

Apple vice president of product marketing Greg Joswiak was first up to testify this afternoon, where he said that the design of the iPhone is central to Apple's products and that Apple took a huge risk with its development.

Joswiak: With the #iPhone, "we were really risking everything that was making Apple successful at the time...We really were betting the company." #appsung - Mike Swift (@Swiftstories) May 15, 2018

Back when the verdict of the lawsuit was originally decided in 2012, Samsung was ordered to pay $1 billion, but that was eventually reduced to $548 million.

apple-v-samsung-2011.jpg

Of that $548 million, which Samsung paid to Apple in 2015, $399 million was earmarked for the design patent infringements. Samsung at the time argued that it had been ordered to pay a "disproportionate" sum for the design violation, and appealed to the Supreme Court for reduced damages.

Samsung's appeal was somewhat successful, and the Supreme Court ordered the U.S. Court of Appeals to redetermine the amount Samsung owes Apple for the design patent infringement, which leads us to the trial that's taking place this week.

Apple is asking for a $1 billion award from Samsung during the damages retrial this week, and has argued that while it's a lot of money, "Samsung infringed millions and millions and millions of times." Samsung, meanwhile, has asked the jury to limit damages to $28 million.

Article Link: Apple Demands $1 Billion From Samsung for Design Patent Violations as New Damages Trial Kicks Off
 

macduke

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,141
19,677
Since this trial first started I've graduated from college, worked three different jobs, moved three times, bought my starter home, sold my starter home and bought another home, my wife started her own business, and we've had two children—the first of which will be starting school next year. I hardly recognize my life, much less the world we live in today compared to 2011. And Apple is still suing Samsung for the same $1,000,000,000. WAT.
 

apolloa

Suspended
Oct 21, 2008
12,318
7,802
Time, because it rules EVERYTHING!
Since this trial first started I've graduated from college, worked three different jobs, moved three times, bought my starter home, sold my starter home and bought another home, my wife started her own business, and we've had two children—the first of which will be starting school next year. I hardly recognize my life, much less the world we live in today compared to 2011. And Apple is still suing Samsung for the same $1,000,000,000. WAT.

Yeap, and now you can kick yourself for not being a Samsung or Apple lawyer......

Kinda sad it’s still going on but not surprising either. It was a joke of a case because how far Apple went with its silly evidence and claims and damages amount it wants. Then again Samsung did copy some parts of Apple and could find a billion down the back of the sofa!
All based around a phone that was out before your kids were born!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Naraxus

ArtOfWarfare

macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
9,560
6,059
we were really risking everything that was making Apple successful at the time...We really were betting the company.

Uh... how? If the iPhone had only been as successful as the Apple TV or the Apple Watch, then it's not like Apple would have tanked. They wouldn't have grown the way they have, but they could have kept humming along with the iPod (which wouldn't have died as suddenly had it not been for the iPhone) and the Mac. They had plenty of cash in the bank.

They could have been like Nintendo, which has been around for over 100 years. Sometimes Nintendo puts out a hit product, like the GameBoy, DS, Wii, or Switch. Sometimes they put out a dud, like the GameCube or Wii U. They haven't seen the meteoric success that Apple has, but they keep chugging whenever they hit a rough patch, just like I'm sure Apple with a failure of an iPhone would have.

Heck, maybe Apple would benefit from the iPhone failing. They couldn't rest on it and they'd be forced to put out some new products instead of continuing to iterate on existing ones.
 

justiny

Contributor
Jul 28, 2008
741
2,354
Bubbletucky
Just drop it.

This is beyond asinine. Apple give it up ffs.

Did you guys miss the first paragraph, second sentence of the article? Samsung was found GUILTY of violating Apple’s patents.

I’m pretty confident if any company was found guilty in court of violating patents you owned, you’d want your damn money ASAP.
 

apolloa

Suspended
Oct 21, 2008
12,318
7,802
Time, because it rules EVERYTHING!
Did you guys miss the first paragraph, second sentence of the article? Samsung was found GUILTY of violating Apple’s patents.

I’m pretty confident if any company was found guilty in court of violating patents you owned, you’d want your damn money ASAP.

Yes and the Supreme Court agreed with Samsung that the 300 odd million the billion was reduced to was still too much hence this new case, so the high court has declared the amount they should pay has not been properly set.
Samsung copied ‘some’ of the original iPhone design elements, not an oblong with round corners or the colours black and white!
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG88

rhoydotp

macrumors 6502
Sep 28, 2006
467
75
Did you guys miss the first paragraph, second sentence of the article? Samsung was found GUILTY of violating Apple’s patents.

I’m pretty confident if any company was found guilty in court of violating patents you owned, you’d want your damn money ASAP.

Exactly! Essentially Samsung is saying that they are guilty but does not want to pay the full price for knowingly doing something completely illegal.

EDIT: to be fair, Apple have pulled similar stunts in the past too
 

Tramtrist

macrumors newbie
Sep 30, 2015
7
25
Samsung's entire smartphone business is predicted on ripping off Apple's designs. There was nothing like a keyboard-less, touch full-screen pocket computer/phone with apps before Apple made the iPhone. Apple spent years and a huge amount of their money coming up with a revolutionary design, figuring out how it would work and how to make it. They bet the company on it. It was a huge gamble that everyone said was doomed to failure. Less than a year later Samsung's got their own b-grade phone so closely copied on Apple's designs that they look and behave almost the same. That's what this lawsuit is about. Samsung should design their own damned phone, or else pay Apple for having designed it.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.