Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages

[samcraig]

Everything Samsung builds has been copied from someone else. They have absolutely no engineering ability. A true Apple fan wouldn't have Samsung stuff sitting around the house.

I guess you won't be keeping your iPhone. After all - several components are Samsung's. Hypocrisy?

 

[apolloa]

Show me a single smartphone that looked like an iPhone before the iPhone was launched. There are plenty of ways that you can innovate a smartphone without copying Apple's patents. Samsung just felt it was easier to copy than create, and now they have been rightfully smacked off.

Are we talking about the grid icon layout that existed for YEARS before the iPhone? Or an oblong with round corners and a button?

 

[Gandir]

How do you know that? It appears at least some of the jury were technical, plus things are explained so they would understand it and they are given guidance.

If there was any misunderstanding, it would be Samsung's lawyers to blame for not explaining their case clearly.

Well a jury pool is not chosen for the technical expertise, there is quite a large possibility that most of the jury did not have technical expertise in the area. It's also quite a big possibility that the jury did not have sufficient knowledge about patent laws and prior works clauses.

And a jury of peers works good in a criminal case like murder and such where you just need common sense to make up your mind. But it's not enough in complex questions, but I have said it before and will say it again this ruling will probably not hold up in higher court.

 

[Melab]

I disagree. It's also a few miles from Google's headquarters. Remember, lots of people, particularly in the tech community hate Apple.

I think it was how the initial phones looked like carbon copies of the iPhone that did it. I doubt the jury did a detailed analysis of 700 claims, but note an interesting pattern. The phones, by and large, were ruled to have infringed, but the tablets, by and large, were ruled not to have infringed.

I do wonder if the exclusion of the F700 from evidence will be revisited, though. If Samsung could have shown even one device from 2006 that looked remotely like an iPhone (or at least close enough to some of the phones released in late 2007 and early 2008), this verdict might have been far less one-sided.

Note that there were lots of tablets that looked broadly like the iPad before the iPad came out. It's just that they didn't sell well. Therefore, I think the jury concluded that the tablets were far more "obvious." However, prior to the iPhone, there weren't many devices that looked like it. Hence, the "obvious" argument doesn't hold as much sway.

Agreed, KPOM. Do not take this as me being in support of this decision, but I do see a greater "obviousness" in tablet design.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

WTF???? You realize Apple is a Samsung partner and many of their components are Samsung?

Samsung works with Apple to manufacturer Apple's designs and in return Samsung copied many of Apple's implementations without working to license the tech like Microsoft and others have done.

Samsung will steadily see less and less work orders from Apple moving forward. There are much bigger fab corporations out there that don't include Intel.

 

[CrAkD]

LOL the engadget comments are hysterical. I think their heads might explode. Now that apple won "its bad for technology" "competition is good for business" if apple had lost it would been a victory for tech geeks everywhere. Its very simple competition is well and good but don't blatantly rip off other people's ideas.

 

[Windlasher]

Yeah...

WTF???? You realize Apple is a Samsung partner and many of their components are Samsung?

Thats why Samsung thought they could get away with it.


SS Engineer: "Can we do what apple did"?

SS Exec: "Dude... we are buds, they wont mind"....

 

[Jookbox]

Everything Samsung builds has been copied from someone else. They have absolutely no engineering ability. A true Apple fan wouldn't have Samsung stuff sitting around the house.

WTF are you some kind of cult? You sound like a madman.

 

[irDigital0l]

Honestly, it'd have been cheaper for Apple to just pay a PMC to blow up all of Samsung's facilities.

Why have a pyrrhic victory when you can have a decisive one?

And then Apple could actually manufacture their own processors instead of using Samsung...

 

[nagromme]

Does the mean we’ll get more originality from Samsung? More innovation, choice, and variety in the marketplace, and less lazy copycatting? Sounds like a win for consumers to me!

Let’s see a Samsung that is more like today’s Microsoft: making cool things more driven by their own unique designs and functionality. Not copying Apple on everything from the charger to the packaging! (But also, please, not Android junk like this.)

 

[Melab]

How often do appeals overturn jury verdicts? I could see them maybe reducing damages but I think it's rare for judges to overturn jury verdicts. Perhaps Samsung will go for a mistrial?

Quite possibly the verdict could end up being modified in conformance to procedural errors. I thought the exclusion of the F700 was unjustified.

 

[samcraig]

Are we talking about the grid icon layout that existed for YEARS before the iPhone? Or an oblong with round corners and a button?

For me the issue has become less about what was copied or not. It was Apple seeking 100% of Samsung's profits implying that everything and anything else Samsung put into the phone was worth ZERO. When in fact - there are only a handful of patents Apple was suing over. That's pretty ballsy. In turn, Apple also wanted to dictate how much (or in this case - how little) Samsung's technology patents were worth. Again ballsy. Don't blame them for trying. But ballsy.

 

[TMay]

Doubt it. There's very little Samsung would actually have to do to circumvent the patents. In fact - the GSIII and Ice Cream Sandwich/Jelly Bean already have moved away from some of them already.

Trade dress for the look of the phones can also easily be altered. In other words - Samsung will pay the fine (or win an appeal) and things will be relatively back to normal.

Samsung gets to make the experience a lesser one; that's what Apple wanted all along. Now the review comments for Samsung will be "designed by lawyers".

 

[adder7712]

Well now the Apple fanatics have some huge ammunition to throw at the fandroidz.

That's really about all that came out of this case.

Apart from the lawyers getting huge buckaroos, not at all beneficial to us consumers.

 

[Reach9]

Alright the jury is back, poor Samsung is trying to salvage anything they can.

 

[irDigital0l]

A true Apple fan wouldn't have Samsung stuff sitting around the house.

Good thing Apple makes incredible 55 inch LED hdtvs...wait thats Samsung.



I also have a xbox and a ps3...so am I an apple, samsung, microsoft, sony, panasonic, toshiba, or hp fan because I have products from all of them.

 

[bkushner]

funny how 9 random people were able to reach a verdict over 700 issues in 3 days, while IP and patent experts would take weeks. Wouldn't be surprised if they half-a**ed through their verdict.

You might have but they didn't. Half of them are engineers. Not Chinese fast rail engineers, but good old Merican engineers.

 

[samcraig]

Samsung gets to make the experience a lesser one; that's what Apple wanted all along. Now the review comments for Samsung will be "designed by lawyers".

Why do you assume a lesser one. They just make it different. Stop showing your blatant bias. I use both phones and in some respects - many things are the same if not better on the Samsung. And I'm not alone - a lot of people I know on here and other boards who use multiple devices say the same thing.

 

[Bernard SG]

What I can't fathom for the life of me is how Samsung execs ever thought they could get away with all the knocking off...
Corporate nonsense in all it's splendor.

 

[SpectatorHere]

Do you realize how much the government will make in taxes from this?? The profit generated from the law firms alone will generate several times more in taxes than was spent by the government.
In the future please refrain from making statements that are completely ignorant.

The case itself probably cost almost nothing considering the judge was there anyway...as was the court staff.

But you're taking me too literally. Let me be more precise and remove governmental revenue and outlays from consideration and say that this doesn't help CONSUMERS.

It is extremely inefficient to have transnational mega corporations using a governmental legal/judicial system to negotiate and compete.

Consumers would be far better served to have companies compete in the marketplace.

 

[ImageWrangler]

Probably posted somewhere but this thread is huge. Samsung's comment...

"Today's verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer."

No. No no, no Samsung, it is a win for Apple, you didn't innovate a damn thing, you stole, stole it point blank because you (and Android) are bankrupt of ideas. Microsoft makes a decent OS for mobile and tablet, and you... you just stole, stealing isn't innovation, it's just pathetic, and you're pathetic. After reading this pathetic PR BS you put out there, I've changed my mind, if this is your whiny excuse that boohoo you were caught ripping off someone else's ideas, I hope Apple takes you for everything you got and you become just a footnote in tech history. FU!

 

[nanotlj]

Apple does not care for that **** of $B money. They need a win to stop those copycats and make them think twice before copying in the future.

Do not argue with me if samsung copied or not as everybody can keep his/her perspective. But for this trial, it is a huge win for apple. Personally I think it is a huge brand damage to samsung. Even if some of jury verdict is overruled by the appeal court in the future, many people will link samsung to a copycat.

I so enjoyed so many "experts with +++ professional experience" in this forum now shuffling their ass!

 

[Gandir]

I disagree. It's also a few miles from Google's headquarters. Remember, lots of people, particularly in the tech community hate Apple.

I think it was how the initial phones looked like carbon copies of the iPhone that did it. I doubt the jury did a detailed analysis of 700 claims, but note an interesting pattern. The phones, by and large, were ruled to have infringed, but the tablets, by and large, were ruled not to have infringed.

I do wonder if the exclusion of the F700 from evidence will be revisited, though. If Samsung could have shown even one device from 2006 that looked remotely like an iPhone (or at least close enough to some of the phones released in late 2007 and early 2008), this verdict might have been far less one-sided.

Note that there were lots of tablets that looked broadly like the iPad before the iPad came out. It's just that they didn't sell well. Therefore, I think the jury concluded that the tablets were far more "obvious." However, prior to the iPhone, there weren't many devices that looked like it. Hence, the "obvious" argument doesn't hold as much sway.

Well lets see here you take a screen it have two short sides, it does have two long sides. You build it in to a a box with the same shape, and you don't want your customers to damage them self on the corners so you make them rounded . Then you have particular every phone out there, since the dawn of time of mobile phones. After that there are not very much details that looks the same on a iphone and a samsung phone. And by the way apple was not the first company to put the control keys on the bottom part of the phone either.

 

[samcraig]

Good thing Apple makes incredible 55 inch LED hdtvs...wait thats Samsung.



I also have a xbox and a ps3...so am I an apple, samsung, microsoft, sony, panasonic, toshiba, or hp fan because I have products from all of them.

Well clearly you're an Apple hater... you must leave at once and bring all your Apple products to an Apple store and say 1,000 hail marys

 

[KPOM]

Intercept now no longer infringing. So now it's no longer $1.05 billion, but just 1.049 billion. Glad that's settled. That was worth the $1200/hr x how ever many lawyers Samsung had at the table.

$1,049,343,540, to be exact.