Samsung loses patent suit to Apple

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Massive loss: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500159-37/jury-awards-apple-more-than-$1b-finds-samsung-infringed/

After 21 hours of deliberation, a nine-person jury has sided with Apple on a majority of its patent infringement claims against Samsung Electronics. The jury also awarded Apple more than $1 billion in damages.

Apple had originally sought $2.75 billion in damages, and though it wasn't unanimous on all counts, the verdict was overwhelmingly in Apple's favor. Samsung, which asked for $421 million in its countersuit, did not receive a nickel. (Refer to jury document at the end of this story.)

The scorecard highlights:
  • Jury found Samsung infringement of Apple utility, design patents for some (though not all) products.
  • Jury found willful infringement on five of six patents.
  • Jury upheld Apple utility, design patents.
  • Jury upheld Apple trade dress '983.
  • Jury found Samsung "diluted" Apple's registered iPhone, iPhone 3, and "Combination iPhone" trade dress on some products, not on others.
  • Jury found no Apple infringement of Samsung utility patents.
  • Jury found Samsung did not violate antitrust law by monopolizing markets related to the UMTS standard.
  • Damages owed by Samsung: $1.05 billion.
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Interesting to see that this jury wanted to make a corporate defendant actually pay a cost that wouldn't be just another slap on the wrist. ( although these days who knows how much that is:confused:...to Samsung maybe a $1B is a drop in the bucket:eek: )
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Ouch

Amir, will Apple collect 100% or will there be some structured settlement
The lawyers on the forum need to speak up to that but my sense is that they can put the verdict aside pending appeal. With patent cases, there is a good chance of getting a different verdict from Appellate Judges who may be less swayed emotionally. I have to think that giving a verdict in such a complicated case as quickly as they did has to have some element of that (e.g. punishing a foreign company, or one that looks more guilty than they are).

That said, when one side gets such a strong verdict, you lose all of your leverage. It is very surprising to me that Samsung did not get any wins on their wireless patents. While other companies such as Nokia and Motorola are much stronger there, it is still surprising that they came back empty handed. So if there is a settlement, it will be pretty expensive (likely 5% of the product cost plus a big check up front).

I noticed that for now, Samsung Galaxy SIII is not part of the case. Wonder how long it will be before Apple adds that in.
 

rblnr

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 3, 2010
2,151
292
1,670
NYC/NJ
If this holds up thru appeals (if that's where it goes), it will be interesting to see its effect on innovation. On the one hand, it will force manufacturers to innovate and differentiate away from Apple, on the other, if this becomes precedent for the existing and future patient disputes of this sort, it could be stifling with the thousands of patents issued on things big and small in this space. I've read some differing views on this.


Maybe it will all lead back to the fundamental question of what you can patent and what you can't.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
If this holds up thru appeals (if that's where it goes), it will be interesting to see its effect on innovation. On the one hand, it will force manufacturers to innovate and differentiate away from Apple, on the other, if this becomes precedent for the existing and future patient disputes of this sort, it could be stifling with the thousands of patents issued on things big and small in this space. I've read some differing views on this.


Maybe it will all lead back to the fundamental question of what you can patent and what you can't.

Pretty soon it will be like Monster Cable suing anyone who uses Monster in their name.
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
The SIII was the first non-blatantly copied Samsung phone in a while. They actively avoided copying Apple's icons, system behaviours, so much that the reviews called it a "lawyer-designed phone". But everything prior to that was a blatant iPhone/iPad rip-off, and before that, Nokia copies.
Samsung got what they deserved. Actually, no, they deserved to pay 3x as much. Nokia should join in on the fun and sue them as well.
 

RBFC

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
5,158
46
1,225
Albuquerque, NM
www.fightingconcepts.com
The price of Samsung TVs will be going up....

Actually, it will be a while before any resolution to this case is reached. Appeals will tie it up for a much longer time than the initial round.

Lee
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Analysis: Sweeping Apple win, but Samsung set for bounce-back

By Miyoung Kim | Reuters



SEOUL (Reuters) - Defeat in a bitter patent wrangle with Apple Inc, its smartphone rival and biggest customer, will dent Samsung Electronics Co's $21 billion cash-pile, but could actually help cement its leadership in the global smartphone market.
A U.S. court has ordered Samsung - which sold around 50 million phones in April-June, almost twice the number of iPhones - to pay $1.05 billion damages, after ruling that the South Korean firm infringed on some Apple patents.
While the verdict was a big win for Apple, the damages are less than half the $2.5 billion compensation it sought - although that could yet be increased by the judge - and are just 1.5 percent of annual revenues from Samsung's telecoms business.
That phone and tablet business is the powerhouse behind Samsung's growth, earning around 70 percent of total profit. The group had net profit of $4.5 billion in April-June.
Samsung could also see its popular Galaxy smartphone banned from sale in the United States. But its skill as a "fast executioner" - quick to match others' innovations - would likely mean tweaked, non-patent infringing devices would be on the market soon after any ban came into place.
"Samsung has already made some design changes to new products since the litigation first started more than a year ago," said Seo Won-seok, an analyst at Korea Investment & Securities. "With the ruling, they are now more likely to make further changes or they could simply decide to raise product prices to cover patent-related payments."
Also, Apple's demands for Samsung to pay it a royalty on its phone sales could hit rival phones using Google's Android operating system more than it hits Samsung. If anything, the blaze of publicity from the high-profile, high-stakes U.S. litigation has made Samsung's brand more recognizable.
CONTRADICTING VERDICTS
The California jury had only begun deliberating on Wednesday after a complex weeks-long trial. Friday's verdict on seven Apple patent claims and five Samsung patent claims suggests the nine-person panel had little difficulty in concluding that Samsung had copied some features of Apple's iPhone and iPad.
It could lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products, with Apple saying it planned to file for a sales injunction within seven days and the judge in the case setting a hearing on September 20.
Because the jury found "wilful" infringement, Apple could seek triple damages.
The U.S. ruling, read out to a packed federal courtroom in San Jose, just miles from Apple's headquarters, came less than 24 hours after a Seoul court found that while the iPhone and Galaxy look very similar Samsung hadn't violated Apple's design.
Samsung issued a defiant response to the U.S. decision, which it called "a loss for the American consumer", indicating the legal tussle is far from over. "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 said in a statement.
Nomura analyst CW Chung, speaking before the verdict, predicted it could take "many years" for Apple and Samsung to settle the case whatever the result of this round, leaving the two firmly in control of the $200 billion-plus global smartphone market.
"The litigation may end up with both parties entering a cross-licensing agreement, which should enable them to build a higher patent wall in the smartphone market," said Chung. "This would have a positive impact on the share prices of Samsung and Apple, while posing a substantial threat to other competitors."
Based on the damages ruling, Samsung is asked to pay Apple around $10 royalty per phone, a move seen aimed at slowing rival phones that run on Android - which account for more than two-thirds of the global market.
If Apple were to pursue similar legal challenges against other Android manufacturers that could squeeze profit margins as smartphone prices decline in a growing market - reinforcing the dominance of Samsung, one of the few with big enough margins to absorb the extra cost.
Handset competitors using Android include Taiwan's HTC Corp, LG Electronics, Google's Motorola, Sony Corp and some Chinese brands.
WIN SOME, LOSE SOME?
Although Samsung had been viewed as the underdog in the U.S. case, the sweeping nature of Apple's victory was something of a surprise, with many analysts having expected a mixed ruling.
Concerns over potential reputational damage, the short-term cash hit and the impact on billions of dollars of business with Apple had knocked as much as 5 percent off Samsung's shares this week in the run-up to the verdict. But the stock is still up nearly 50 percent since Apple filed its accusations.
Samsung has previously been able to move nimbly to release model upgrades by the time courts have ruled certain products infringed Apple patents and retire patent-infringing models from its line-up. It has skirted around those rulings with a few engineering tweaks and has also made some bold design changes to differentiate its devices from Apple's.
"The impact on Samsung will be quite limited, as affected models are mostly legacy products and its new products did make some design changes to avoid potential litigation," said D.J. Jung, representative patent attorney for SU Intellectual Property.
"Still ... it's a sweeping loss in the most important market. It's inevitable that Samsung's brand will be negatively affected - Samsung could be perceived as a copycat."
Even though Samsung's flagship Galaxy S III phone was not involved in the trial, the jury validated Apple's patents on features and design elements that Apple could then try to wield against that product.
It is possible Apple would not have to seek an entirely new trial against the S III, but rather include it in a "contempt proceeding" which moves much faster, said Nick Rodelli, a lawyer and adviser to institutional investors for CFRA Research in Maryland.
Seoul-based Jung predicted further appeals and fresh suits against newer products as the rivals continue to clash in court.
"It's going to be a very drawn-out battle," he said. "They will keep suing each other, appeal against unfavorable verdicts and bring in new products ... because the stakes are too high. They don't want to lose their initiative in the fast-moving smartphone market."
OUTSIDE THE BOX
In a research note before the verdict, UBS analysts said an Apple win could, in the long-run, hurt the U.S. firm "as the real threat is not a competitor beating Apple at its own game, but instead changing the game.
"The likelihood of Apple being leapfrogged or a rival creating a new category (of device) is greater if they have to think out of the box. If they just copy Apple, like Coke, Apple can claim to be 'the real thing'."
Samsung also looks to be staying ahead of the curve - by reviving the stylus function, derided by Apple's Steve Jobs, in its latest tablets and by creating the hybrid phone-cum-tablet, or phablet, category, with its 5.3-inch Note.
Apple, which has largely stood by its original form and design, is taking note, with speculation that the next iPhone will have a bigger screen and new iPads may be smaller.
In China, set to become the world's biggest smartphone market this year, Samsung has almost twice Apple's market share, and the iPhone slipped to fourth in the market in April-June, overtaken by both Lenovo Group Ltd and ZTE Corp, according to latest data from industry research firm
Despite, or because of, the publicity from the U.S. case, and more than a dozen pending cases elsewhere around the globe, the Samsung brand has gained recognition - as an equal to Apple rather than merely a supplier.
In a recent Campaign Asia-Pacific brand ranking, Samsung came top ... ahead of second-placed Apple.
($1 = 1135.9500 Korean won)
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,319
1,429
1,820
Manila, Philippines
In Korean courts both companies were found guilty of patent infringements. Apple was found guilty on wireless infringements, Samsung on pretty much the same stuff in the US case I think.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
In Korean courts both companies were found guilty of patent infringements. Apple was found guilty on wireless infringements, Samsung on pretty much the same stuff in the US case I think.
I thought I read that Apple's design patents did not hold though with respect to Samsung copying them. Indeed the judge said that it was not wise to grant them such protection. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875

"However, the court ruled against Apple's claims that Samsung had copied the designs of its products.

"There are lots of external design similarities between the iPhone and Galaxy S, such as rounded corners and large screens... but these similarities had been documented in previous products," a judge at the Seoul Central District Court was quoted as saying by the Reuters news agency.

"Given that it's very limited to make big design changes in touchscreen based mobile products in general... and the defendant [Samsung] differentiated its products with three buttons in the front and adopted different designs in camera and [on the] side, the two products have a different look," the judge said."

It is ironic but if you read that decision, it is exactly how the US one should have gone. I am think there is strong likelihood that Apple has violated Samsung wireless patents as that judge ruled. But these being highly technical matters, it was probably very hard for the Jury to understand and follow. In contrast, the shape and style patents were much easier and painted the picture of a company "stealing" things so they threw the book at them.
 

audioguy

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
2,794
73
1,635
Near Atlanta, GA but not too near!
One would have to be blind to not see that Samsung copied the Apple user interface. The legal issues behind doing so are way out of my league.

What I hope comes from this is to put Samsung (and others) back to their own drawing boards so that they can create products that are even more innovative and then we, the consumers, win !!
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Apple stock jumps on $1B Samsung verdict

By PETER SVENSSON, AP

NEW YORK — Apple's $1 billion court win against Samsung is translating into a much bigger jump in its market value.

Apple shares were up $11.98, or 1.8 percent, at $675.26 in morning trading Monday.

That boosts Apple Inc.'s market capitalization, already the highest in the world, by $11 billion to $633 billion.

In opening trading, Apple shares hit $680.87, a new all-time high.

Late Friday, a nine-person federal jury in Silicon Valley found that some of Samsung's products illegally copied features and designs from Apple's iPhone and iPad.

Investors appear to be betting that the verdict will make it harder for Apple rivals to ride on the iPhone's coat-tails. In particular, analysts said it's likely to slow the growth of Android, Google Inc.'s operating system for smartphones. It's used by Samsung, HTC, LG and Motorola, now a division of Google.

Samsung Electronics Co. shares fell 7.5 percent in Korean trading.

Apple could ask the judge to stop sales of infringing Samsung products in the U.S. Samsung, the world's largest maker of smartphones, could still keep selling its products unchanged in the rest of the world. But the U.S. is the world's largest market for smartphones, and Samsung is likely to want to remain there.

"We believe this verdict could lead to Samsung delaying near-term product launches as it attempts to design around Apple's patents," said Canaccord Genuity analyst Michael Walkley.

While Apple has been the driving force in the smartphone market since the iPhone was launched in 2007, it only commands 19 percent of the worldwide market share, accord to research firm IDC. The high price of the iPhone keeps it out of consumer hands, particularly in emerging markets. That's left an opening for Android, which now accounts for 64 percent of smartphones sold.

UBS analyst Amitabh Passi said that it's "very unlikely" that Apple could stamp out Android by repeating the U.S. legal victory in the rest of the world. The cellphone carriers like having several suppliers to choose from, and would not accept dominance by Apple, he wrote Monday.

Shares of HTC fell 1.9 percent on the Taiwanese stock market. Google shares fell $13.80, or 2 percent, to $664.83 in U.S. trading.

Meanwhile, U.S.-listed shares of embattled Finnish phone maker Nokia Corp. jumped 24 cents, or 7.8 percent, to $3.32. That was the highest level for the company since May.

Nokia has gone against the grain and based its new smartphone line not on Android but on Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Phone. That operating system is substantially different from Apple's, and hasn't landed in its legal sights. However, sales of phones using the software have been slow, imperiling Nokia's turnaround efforts.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
Theoretically damges are due upon entry of the judgement. What usualluy happens is there is a flurry of post trial motions. Included in that is a motion for remttitur(sp)(reduction of award. ) If you appeal you can post the award as an appeal bond.There will also be post verdict settlement negotiations.

I would advise Samsung to push for some type of licensing fee.
 
Last edited:

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
Treble damages

The patent laws authorize a court to increase the damages in patent infringement lawsuits up to three times the amount found or assessed. This is known as the “treble damages” award. A decision to increase damages is discretionary with the court, but is usually exercised only in cases of willful and wanton infringement or bad faith litigation. Fortunately, an increase in damages is inappropriate when an infringer mounts a good faith and substantial challenge to the validity of the patent or the existence of infringement.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
Ouch

Amir, will Apple collect 100% or will there be some structured settlement
A structured settlement is unlikely. Indeed a structured settlement usually amounts to a greater payment. Just spread out over time.No doubt Apple had already decided to play hardball. Steve how much of that do you get?
 

Keith_W

Well-Known Member
Mar 31, 2012
1,024
95
970
Melbourne, Australia
www.whatsbestforum.com
Remember, technology has to mature to a point before a product is even possible. Consider a touch screen smartphone - before you can make one, someone has to create the right CPU - it has to be sufficiently powerful, yet efficient, produce little heat, and waste little energy. The same goes for wireless radios of all types (wifi, 3G, bluetooth), memory chips, graphics processors, and so on. Battery technology has to be advanced enough to power the device for a whole day. Someone has to make a touchscreen, and it has to be strong enough to be shatter-proof and scratch resistant. The miniaturized speakers, camera, and microphone have to be efficient yet rugged.

When you consider the total sum of parts that make up a smartphone, you are using a whole lot of devices that have been designed by different companies.

Now, let us consider what Apple did. They designed the phone, choosing off-the shelf parts or asking other companies with the expertise to make parts for them (the Ax series of CPUs for example). They subcontract the manufacturing to Foxconn. They handle the marketing and distribution themselves. And they wrote the OS and the entire ecosystem to support the phone themselves.

Now they are suing Samsung for trade dress because they own the "rectangle with rounded corners" design. Consider for a moment how this compares to designing a low power memory chip compact enough to fit in a smartphone (a patent which Samsung owns), or the wireless chips themselves (patents owned by Motorola). Anybody who thinks that a "rectangle with rounded corners" is more innovative than coming up with a design and manufacturing process for a memory chip needs to have their head examined.

Apple then goes around saying, "I will license you my technology for $40 per phone, and I will license YOUR technology for 5 cents". Before Apple, most other tech companies - Intel, AMD, Microsoft, Compaq, etc knew how to get along and cross-license technology whilst being reasonable about it. Not Apple - they ask for exorbitant amounts because their intention is to monopolize the market. When they sue, they ask for product bans instead of compensation.

Imagine if this were replicated in other industries. Kodak was first off the block with a digital camera. What would the photography world be like today if Kodak had behaved like Apple? No Canon, Nikon, or Sony DSLR's unless they pay Kodak exorbitant fees for coming up with the sensor. Volkswagen came up with the idea of a hot hatch. Did they go around suing everyone else who copied their idea? Ferran Adria came up with the idea of encapsulating food in gels, and now everyone is doing it. Has he gone around suing everybody?

The fact is, Apple's so-called "innovations" were built upon the innovations of others. They are now behaving in an unbelievable manner - unprecedented in any other industry. They are trying to bully and intimidate their competitors into submission. This can only be bad for the consumer.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
Excellent argument.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing