“A Samsung expert on Friday made his case for why the Korean giant should pay Apple only $52 million in damages, saying there’s no evidence that anyone has bought Samsung devices because of a particular patented Apple technology,” Shara Tibken reports for CNET.
MacDailyNews Take: A “Samsung expert.” In other words, an extreme couponer.
“An expert hired by Apple had determined the company was due $114 million in lost profits because of Samsung’s use of technology under Apple’s patent No. 7,844,915, also known as ‘pinch to zoom.’ The ‘915 patent covers technology that can distinguish whether a user is scrolling with one finger versus using several touch points at once for a pinch-to-zoom action,” Tibken reports. “However, Michael Wagner, an accountant and lawyer hired by Samsung, said there’s no evidence from either company that shows consumers bought Samsung devices because they liked that particular touch-screen feature. As a result, he believes Apple should receive no money for lost profits.”
“The comments come on the fourth day of a retrial for damages that Samsung owes Apple for infringing on five of its patents. A judge in March vacated about $450 million of an original award. Samsung is still on the hook for $600 million, no matter what happens in the retrial,” Tibken reports. “Wagner spent his time on the stand Friday disputing calculations made by Apple’s expert accountant, Julie Davis… Apple — using Davis’ calculations — says Samsung owes it $380 million. Samsung says it should pay $52 million… One expert, MIT professor John Hauser, estimated three Apple patents, including the ‘915 patent, adds about $100 in value to a $199 smartphone or $90 in value to a $499 tablet. Davis said Apple lost out on $114 million in profits because of the Samsung copycat devices. She also calculated Samsung’s profits to be $231 million, and said reasonable royalties owed to Apple total $35 million. Apple estimates it would have sold 360,000 devices if Samsung hadn’t released infringing rivals.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related article:
Lost profits ineligible as damages theory for several Apple patents in Samsung retrial – November 16, 2013
Really, no one? Then why don’t you just stop implementing it In your phones? Let’s see how many will still buy them…
So true, try and point that out to the CNUT Apple Hating, Patent Stealing Lovers at CNUT comments. Amazes me how these people have no class and no respect for laws and Intellectual Properties.
Awww, they’re just a noisy but harmless bunch of Windoze-loving, Samsung-abetting critters. They’re still a bit touchy over that Adrian Kingsley-Hughes story the other day 😉
No one buys it just for the multi touch
BUT
No one would buy it without it…
Right on.
So where is the innovative “Samsung Sweep” they patented in the interim to take the place of Apple’s technology?
Fine. If no one buys Samsung’s semi-clone phones for the pinch/zoom touch interface, just remove it, and pay up for the infringement up to this point. You’ll be fine with your stylus interface, or whatever you replace it with to accommodate the same functionality. Case closed.
No one buys them because they have transistors in them either, but I doubt they’d buy one without. This patent relates to solving a problem normal users wouldn’t even know existed, of course they don’t buy because of it.
It would be great if the jury agreed with Apple and awarded the full amount they are asking for.
But still, what will happen next? Probably an appeal and it will take another year for that to begin. The legal system is so slow that it will be five years before Apple even sees a dime. The industry will have moved on again and Apple will have released a few more killer products that get shamelessly copied.
This system needs to be improved and block offending products from being sold much faster than it does now.
Here’s my plan: Force Lee Kun-hee to give Tim Cook a shoe-shine on live TV. That’d be worth waaaay more than a fine.
Samsung sure knows how to double-talk like a professional con artist. I wonder how they live their lives and if family members can even trust anything that comes out of their mouth.
I believe the phrase ‘CON ARTIST’ covers Samsung’s attitude in entirety. Expect nothing but deceit from ScamScabies.
At least they admit *some* money should be paid. That’s an admission of guilt.
Compare profits made by Samsung before and after the use of apple patented multi-touch tech . This will tell us how much profit is made from apple innovation
Apple should just request that
they RECALL ALL samsung phones with pinch to Zoom and REMOVE the FEATURE and then return them to user (as the feature was stolen) .
(no point in software online update because few android phones are updated… )
“No one buys Samsung gadgets for Apple’s patented Multi-Touch tech” Is that so?, ok, remove it.. make my day, let’s see if that sentence holds true.
No one buys Samsung gadgets for Apple’s patented Multi-Touch tech” But how many buy a Samsung phone for the fact that it is a Samsung?!
“But how many buy a Samsung phone for the fact that it is a Samsung?!”
About four times as many as those who buys an iPhone?
Then how is don’t copy apple to begin with! Just paid up the money already, the attorney costs lots of money!
The ridiculous bias and vitriol of this news feed and it’s users just gets worse and worse.
“Convicted patent infringer”. Really? Apple is a convicted patent infringer. Pretty much every tech company is for christ’s sake!
Whilst you are all painting Apple as the great innovator and Samsung as copiers. Have we all forgotten that Apple didn’t invent either the idea or the technology of multi-touch?
The idea was decades old and Apple bought their multi-touch technology with the acquisition of Fingerworks. How inventive and innovative of Apple. I’m sure Jeff Han and all the other people who contributed towards creating the multi-touch/multi-gesture paradigm are all very grateful to Apple for buying their ideas and then trying to lock everyone else out of ownership.
Have you all forgotten where Apple got the idea for the Mac from? Yep, they copied it. How innovative?
And before you all pile in with your Apple inspired hubris, I should point out I’ve been a Mac use since the late 80’s and I’ve never owned a Windows PC in my life or a Samsung smart phone for that matter. But neither of these things have made me blind to the facts, or prevent me from forming a reasonable opinion… unlike most of you it would seem.
No douche. You are not a user of Apple. If you were you wouldn’t make the stupid assertion ,”Have you all forgotten where Apple got the idea for the Mac from? Yep, they copied it. How innovative?”
NO. they actually offered a million dollars worth of Apple shares for the technology at PARC to Xerox. They didn’t “lift” the idea or steal it. Steve Jobs immediately saw the value in those ideas ( the Mouse, the GUI) and improved upon them ( such as overlapping windows). But they paid for the idea. Something Samsung has not done and has blatantly stolen from Apple. There is no comparison what Apple has done and what Samsung has always done as a criminal, patent infringing, IP stealing cartel.
Go crawl back in your troll hole.
Your not alone in your perspective, this is a fanboy site and very polarized and also very immature in how others handle opposing views. I too have only used Apple, sold apple in the beginning years at the first retail chain in the world to carry Apple, I am loosing the religion more and more. Stateing opinions on here, that don’t comply with the fanboys will only get you called names. To have on top of that PC police sensor realistic criticisms of Apples new leadership is even more disappointing. Clever fan boy posters for sure….
Apple haters who support IP theft are the reasonable ones?(the court case for the theft is already over and apple won and Samsung has in this new case for damages in their opening statements admitted to stealing Apple IP )
Supporting apple according to you in this is ‘immature’ vs supporting the convicted thief? lol.
“’Convicted patent infringer.’ Really? Apple is a convicted patent infringer. Pretty much every tech company is for christ’s sake!”
It is a matter of scale and pattern of business. In the vast majority of cases where Apple has been convicted of patent infringement it has been due to patent trolls — non practicing entities (NPEs) that have made up patents (that often should never have been awarded) or shell companies that bought up questionable patents just to sue companies like Apple. Alternatively, Samsung has a habit of infringing on large PRACTICING entities. Samsung copies technologies that actually are being sold by other companies — just because they ARE selling and they can make a quick buck with little or no work on their own part.
“Whilst you are all painting Apple as the great innovator and Samsung as copiers. Have we all forgotten that Apple didn’t invent either the idea or the technology of multi-touch?”
Apple didn’t invent the idea of multi-touch; neither did Samsung; Google; Microsoft; nor any other major company you can name. You can’t patent an idea. What you CAN patent, and what Apple DID patent, was a specific implementation of multi-touch. For another company to come along and utilize that same implementation without getting a license from Apple is illegal.
“The idea was decades old and Apple bought their multi-touch technology with the acquisition of Fingerworks. How inventive and innovative of Apple. I’m sure Jeff Han and all the other people who contributed towards creating the multi-touch/multi-gesture paradigm are all very grateful to Apple for buying their ideas and then trying to lock everyone else out of ownership.”
First: Then why did they sell to Apple? Because Apple paid them for their implementations AND they knew Apple could evolve it and get it into the hands of millions of users.
Second: the patents Apple holds are specific implementations of EXTENSIONS and EXTRAPOLATIONS of what Fingerworks did. No sane person would suggest that what is implemented in the iPhone is *exactly* what Fingerworks did.
“Have you all forgotten where Apple got the idea for the Mac from? Yep, they copied it. How innovative?”
No, they absolutely did NOT “copy” it. The Mac is not a “copy” of the Star. Apple licensed the underlying technology and then made MAJOR improvements on it. Have you ever actually compared directly what Xerox PARC had with with shipped on either the Lisa or the Mac? Of course you have not. You would not have made the statement you did if you had done so.
“And before you all pile in with your Apple inspired hubris, I should point out I’ve been a Mac use since the late 80′s and I’ve never owned a Windows PC in my life or a Samsung smart phone for that matter. But neither of these things have made me blind to the facts, or prevent me from forming a reasonable opinion… unlike most of you it would seem.”
Anyone can CLAIM to be a Mac user whether they are or are not. However, you *ARE* blind to the facts — or at the very least you are intentionally misrepresenting them.
So Apple bought Fingerworks. Well Samsung did not. Why should Samsung get any benefit at all from Apple’s purchase?
I got my Fingerworks pointing your way.
People might not have bought them specifically for it, but without it the package would have probably been less attractive and the other factors (price) may not have seemed to justify buying them as much.
Samsung IS INNOVATIVE!!!!
they are very ‘innovative’ in their marketing campaigns where they hire astro Turfers to post fake criticisms on rival products (Samsung imagination at work!) , make fake blog reviews of products etc (Samsung has already admitted to this in the court case brought by HTC. Samsung has been fined hundreds of thousands by the Taiwanese government).
Samsung chairman Lee is also innovative as after being convicted of major crimes in Korea and sentenced to jail he managed to convince his pal the President of Korea to pardon him. He was also innovative in his ability to hide and steal hundreds of millions from his relatives as revealed in the various lawsuits brought forward by them.
Samsung is also innovative in cheating their android customers by massive switch and baits schemes . After hyping 8 core Exynos chips (the ‘wonder chip of the future’ ) and giving S4s equipped with them to the world press to review samsung quietly substituted the Exynos with cheaper 4 core Qualcomm Snapdragon chips in millions of shipping S4s. They also substituted the HD Amoled screens. They are so clever and innovative that millions of dumb android fanboys are still unaware they are using non exynos but Snapdragon powered phones and still praising Samsung (Chairman lee must think Android fanboys as they dumbest dumb f*cks in the Universe)
(Note that Samsung’s TOP Of the LINE phone has the two most important parts of the phone the processor ( the muscle) and the OS (the brains) DESIGNED and BUILT BY OTHERS : Qualcomm and Google Android!! And the Design as seen from the lost court cases to apple was Stolen !. Thats INNOVATION for you! )
Schiller should show the jury the Samsung Stupid WATCH and just say ” see if they don’t copy this is the sh*t they come out with!” (Note: Antennagate iPhone 4 had a 1.6 % return rate, stupid watch has over 30% !!!! )
there’s no evidence that anyone has bought Samsung devices because of a particular patented Apple technology
THEN REMOVE IT Samsung and do without!
What a gang of bastards. Samsung deserves all the horrors coming their way. But listen to them wriggle, writhe, wrangle and rant as they BURN. No sympathy from my direction. 😛
I wish the court system could legally enforce that. That would be awesome! Hehe
That’s bulls**t! Samsung used Apple patented Multi-touch tech on all of their ads and promotion materials. They are faking user to think that their shitty gadgets is just as good as Apple iPhone! There is the prove!