Jury Rules Samsung Must Pay Apple $290 Million in Damages Retrial

[MikhailT]

They won't change. Shamsung will continue to make profits from ill-gotten gains and pay the fines and still make money.

There are limits. The problem they're going to face is that once Samsung has been convicted of one crime, Apple can just say this in court: "they have patterns of doing this in the past, they were convicted and this is just another sign of a willful infringement".

The first time, Samsung probably can get away with it with a small fine. Next time, they can face 3x the usual costs if they were found to be doing it willfully.

Not to mention, the more success Samsung have, the more profits they generate, the more of that will be taken away from Samsung.

 

[Picka]

"Apple won some cash. Samsung won the game."

This pretty much sums it up.

Samsung made a profit of nearly $9.5 Billion the previous quarter...

 

[lilo777]

Needs to be WAY more than that considering Samsung got where they are basically by ripping off everything from Apple.

Make it BILLION and then we'll talk.

On the other hand USPTO ruled yesterday that the patent at the center of this trial is invalid - source Now all Apple's multitouch patents have been invalidated which was a predictable outcome for these frivolous lawsuits.

 

[Rogifan]

I guess we can say this is something Steve would have approved of.

----------

Not sure how much Samsung is ripping off since my Note 3 has a TON more features than the iPhone will ever have.

Besides Samsung said people don't buy their devices for multi touch.

 

[AppleMark]

During the retrial, Apple brought Phil Schiller, senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing to the stand where he explained how Apple's marketing strategy worked and how Samsung's infringement caused consumers to "question our design skills in a way they never used to."

LOL, if he ever gets pushed out of Apple, this guy has a promising future in stand-up comedy.

 

[Simmias]

What the heck is Schiller talking about?

I don't understand Schiller's comment that Samsung's infringement caused people to "question our design skills". How so? How would copycat phones make people think less of Apple's design? If anything, wouldn't copying be a form of flattery?

Does he mean that people thought Apple was copying Samsung instead of vice versa? That doesn't make sense. Or that they started questioning the screen size of the iPhone? That's true, but it has nothing to do with Samsung's infringement. I really can't make sense of his remark.

Aside from being confusing, Schiller's comment makes Apple look weak. I know he is trying to establish that Samsung harmed their business in order to run up the damages, but saying that Samsung made people lose faith in Apple's design skills sounds as though Apple themselves lacks confidence. As an Apple fan, the whole comment rubs me the wrong way.

 

[thekev]

This pretty much sums it up.

Samsung made a profit of nearly $9.5 Billion the previous quarter...

You're referring to more than smartphones and tablets.

 

[cableguy619]

Put it this way when my 55 year old employee 3 years ago said hey look at my new iphone he was saddened to find out it wasn't an iPhone. He insisted that it was until i showed him the difference.

He went and returned his phone the next day and got an iphone. He told me the sales man used the wording it's just like the iphone and it was free with new service agreement. The design itself which was very close had him fooled so how many more people were fooled?

 

[Zotaccian]

Well, Samsung rose up to compete and has the biggest market share:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/28/huawei-overtakes-lg-in-smartphone-market-share-during-q3/

Many people have questioned if it is worth spending money on iPhone or buy a Samsung phone.

 

[JoEw]

Regardless of this trial, people who know history, know exactly who copied who, and who decided to steal instead of innovate. The money would not be as important to Steve Jobs as the final verdict of the trial.

 

[BinaryTim]

Forged in nickel

Samsung will probably just copy the Nickel (5¢) and try to pay Apple with a truckload of those.

 

[jonAppleSeed]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

Why do people take this verdict as a personal victory?
How does a competitors product that mimicked your phone model of choice degrade what you have in any way?
I don't get it and I'll probably never will.

 

[kdarling]

I want to see the breakdown award per patent.

Remember, this trial was only over 21 million Samsung phones and a few hundred thousand original tablets.

And the utility patents were about minor software features that Samsung hasn't infringed on in well over a year now.

What a strange world where software fluff... unnecessary to make a phone... is supposedly worth a large award per device, while essential radio patents with real R&D investment behind them are claimed to be worth only pennies.

Judge Posner was right. Untrained judges and juries should not decide technical patent matters, and software patents need to either disappear or be highly time limited.

 

[JackieTreehorn]

This pretty much sums it up.

Samsung made a profit of nearly $9.5 Billion the previous quarter...

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2013/10/28Apple-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-Results.html

CUPERTINO, California—October 28, 2013—Apple® today announced financial results for its fiscal 2013 fourth quarter ended September 28, 2013. The Company posted quarterly revenue of $37.5 billion and quarterly net profit of $7.5 billion.

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24442013


Samsung has 40% Android market share, Apple around 13%. Basically, Apple has about the same profit with 1/3 of Samsung's market share.


People are willing to pay for the quality and originality that Apple offers. And now Samsung can pay Apple as well for stealing their ideas.


As said, Samsung are uninspired copycats.

 

[samcraig]

Regardless of this trial, people who know history, know exactly who copied who, and who decided to steal instead of innovate. The money would not be as important to Steve Jobs as the final verdict of the trial.

Just curious what people you're talking about. Most people don't care about these trials. Nor do they care who copied what as long as they can get a phone they want/like at the price they want/like and use it how they want/like.

If you're talking about forum posters - sure. But then again - Everyone copies. I'm not going to debate who does it more. But everyone copies.

And I think Steve Jobs might be pissed as all hell at the marketshare Samsung has and also that his patents were invalidated. But I don't know Steve Jobs. That's just my guess. Were you friends with him?

 

[AppleMark]

I don't understand Schiller's comment that Samsung's infringement caused people to "question our design skills". How so? How would copycat phones make people think less of Apple's design? If anything, wouldn't copying be a form of flattery?

Does he mean that people thought Apple was copying Samsung instead of vice versa? That doesn't make sense. Or that they started questioning the screen size of the iPhone? That's true, but it has nothing to do with Samsung's infringement. I really can't make sense of his remark.

Aside from being confusing, Schiller's comment makes Apple look weak. I know he is trying to establish that Samsung harmed their business in order to run up the damages, but saying that Samsung made people lose faith in Apple's design skills sounds as though Apple themselves lacks confidence. As an Apple fan, the whole comment rubs me the wrong way.

He was probably upset that the consumer dare think:

1. Hey..., somebody can make a decent touch phone that works with App's cheaper [cheaper and multiple options] than Apple say they can.
2. Hey..., it uses an OS which is not controlled and restricted at times like something out of 1984.
3. Hey ..., it also has other features that Apple does not believe in and so want me to also dismiss, even if I think they are good ideas.
4. Hey..., I get a choice of handset sizes which do the same things, Apple don't do that (yet...)
5. And so on....

Apple appear to fear too much choice and competition.

They have been in control since the iPod and iTunes launched and seem to have forgot what competition looked like.

They are starting to sound like IBM and Microsoft when the pressure was on.

Samsung Troll Disclaimer: I have owned iPhones since 2007 and never owned a Samsung phone. However, I am not so far up Apples backside to know Samsung make good phones for whom who's requirements it meets.

 

[keigo]

Happy for Apple, at least they learnt from their mistake during the Win 92 where MS stole their idea and take over the PC world.

 

[mysticalos]

Not sure how much Samsung is ripping off since my Note 3 has a TON more features than the iPhone will ever have.

Because, when you copy features, you can put your OWN resources into working on other ones. That's how it's most damaging. Apple puts dev time, research, and money into features. The other guy copies those, circumventing that time and allowing them to focus resources in building up SOMEONE ELSES work. It's why copycats come out ahead and why infringement is so damaging in first place. You're really arguing apples point. Imagine how many features that product would have if they had to drawing board, like apple did.

 

[lilo777]

Happy for Apple, at least they learnt from their mistake during the Win 92 where MS stole their idea and take over the PC world.

Once again, the patent at the center of this trial was invalidated by USPTO yesterday which automatically means that Samsung did not copy anything (which can't be copied legally)

 

[FirstNTenderbit]

Put it this way when my 55 year old employee 3 years ago said hey look at my new iphone he was saddened to find out it wasn't an iPhone. He insisted that it was until i showed him the difference.

He went and returned his phone the next day and got an iphone. He told me the sales man used the wording it's just like the iphone and it was free with new service agreement. The design itself which was very close had him fooled so how many more people were fooled?

So are you saying your 55 year old employee was illiterate?
How many more were fooled? I dunno, probably all those illiterates who were tricked by the unscrupulous sales person. Most phones typically have the name and other marketing stuff all over the place.

 

[Naaaaak]

Apple:
- Spend billions buying patents.
- Spend tens of millions suing companies for infringement.
- Make $290 million back.

"For Apple, this case has always been about more than patents and money."

The math confirms the "money" part of that statement. They definitely seem to be all about the patents, though (but what big tech company isn't?).

 

[oneMadRssn]

Samsung will probably just copy the Nickel (5¢) and try to pay Apple with a truckload of those.

If Samsung copied the nickel, it come in three different size (the size of a quarter, the size of a half-dollar, and the size of a silver dollar), cost 4¢ retail, be constantly on sale somewhere for 3¢, made of plastic, require a compainion coin in order to spend fully, and banks would refuse to exchange it for newer samsung nickels a week later.

 

[Casiotone]

$290 million in 5c pieces...make it happen for a laugh Shamesung!

Wonder if this will come in dimes?

Got me thinking about a pretty hilarious move by Apple if they made a spot for a 5cent piece in every new iDevice box. These coins, although there'd be a lot of them would become collectors items... Or maybe stamp the coins into the back of the iWatch (that I hope if it does come, looks like a nice watch, not a sporty device).

Just being dumb...

Jeff

Samsung will probably just copy the Nickel (5¢) and try to pay Apple with a truckload of those.

I know you guys are probably just joking, but I've seen a few people that believed this stupid viral lie.

The thing is, if Samsung was to pay using nickels or dimes, that would more than likely be considered contempt of court which would lead to other hefty penalties.

 

[mrhick01]

You're referring to more than smartphones and tablets.

WAY more.

 

[DaveN]

Not sure how much Samsung is ripping off since my Note 3 has a TON more features than the iPhone will ever have.

Very true if you count poorly implemented tilting movements and crashing as 'features'.