Apple v. Samsung judge Koh weighs damages and – more importantly – running royalties

“On Monday, Judge Koh denied Apple a permanent injunction against Samsung over the patents the jury had found infringed, but that does not mean that Samsung is free to infringe,” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents. “Apart from the fact that I believe Apple will ultimately win some injunction on appeal (because patents are exclusionary rights under the Constitution and if Apple doesn’t win one in this case, no patent holder in this industry ever will), there’s an important consequence of the denial that I haven’t seen addressed elsewhere, so I want to talk about it now.”

“Contrary to popular misbelief, the strategically most important issue now is not the one of whatever adjustments Judge Koh may make to the jury’s billion-dollar damages award,” Mueller writes. “Whether it goes up to $1.5 billion (Apple would love that) or down to $800 million is not going to change the situation between these two companies.”

Mueller writes, “The key issue remaining in Judge Koh’s court now is about damages, but not about past damages. It’s about future damages, more commonly referred to in legal documents and write-ups as ‘post-judgment royalties.'”

Much more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]


  1. The US Patent Litigation machine – now known as the “Koh System” – will nix Apple’s future royalties too, complaining all the while how the litigants should kiss and make up, lest she be forced – eventually – to do something judicial in line with the actual verdict.

  2. Apple doesn’t need any more money. At this point they have lost the case on principle even if the appeals court grants a permanent injunction those products will be ancient history.

    If Apple wants to go nuclear the court system is not the arena.

  3. How does this work?

    Patents grant a limited legal monopoly to an inventor on their inventions (as per the law). But in many cases there is no injunction or ban on an infringing product, and instead we see a “post-judgement royalty” stiputated by the judge. Haven’t we then thrown away the core ida of a patent? That it provides a limited monopoly on the invention.

    Doesn’t that say to people: go ahead and infringe on someone’s protected IP and build a business with it, the worst that will happen is you’ll have to pay a royalty one day — even if you end up significantly damaging the inventor’s market for their products”.

  4. Article 1 Section 8 of the the US Constitution gives congress the authority tax to establish our patent system:

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    Judge ….its not your place to decide who Apple can exclude or not!

  5. I think Apple should fight back by turning on their photo copiers… make the best damn cheap copies of every android phone and price them BOGO. Make them compatible with the android market AND app store. Put everyone else out of business. LOL, on a serious note.. It’s sad that others can just copy and get away with it and patents basically mean nothing. How is this going to promote innovation if there is no protection for the innovator’s work?? Why can’t others just come up with their own ideas to compete? Now Google is offering a service just like iTunes Match… wow how innovative! Good job Google. The patent system is garbage, along with our judicial system to enforce it.

    1. Mueller’s Reporting has been less biased then others and with his track record has proven that his “Observations of Court hearings” have been in line and most times then not correct.

      Dismissing his take and throwing out the Biased label has been all to common and unwarranted as it has been used by allot of posters to dismiss something they don’t like to hear and most of all as a escape.

      But the joy of all this is that anyone is free to read and interpret what they will in a write up, but on further encouragement to the reader of skeptical questioning its advisable to read the full article other then a small transcript to get the whole picture.

      As it is noted his is transparent to whom he has ties with and has proven to be more trustworthy and transparent then the likes of other posters/Bloggers that have direct ties to Google,Samsung but yet no one seems to point the finger at those bloggers.

      Get the point tbone…..

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.