Apple makes case for why it deserves $379 million more from convicted patent infringer Samsung

“Apple is making its case Tuesday for why it believes it deserves most of the $400 million in damages that is at issue in a partial retrial of last year’s patent infringement case with Samsung,” Ina Fried reports for AllThingsD. “Apple argues it is due $379 million for the products at issue, while Samsung has maintained it should only have to pay $52 million.”

“Apple lawyer Bill Lee said that both sides agree that Samsung sold 10.7 million infringing phones during the time at issue in the case, generating $3.5 billion in revenue,” Fried reports. “‘No one is trying to take all of their revenues away,’ Lee said. ‘We have asked for approximately 10 percent of what they collected for infringing our products.'”

“He also rejected as ‘woulda, coulda, shoulda’ the contention that Samsung could have easily and quickly designed around Apple’s patents if it had to. ‘But they didn’t,’ Lee contended,” Fried reports. “Lee wrapped up by extolling the virtues of the patent system and saying Apple deserved to be compensated for its innovations. ‘Apple sat in those rooms and they invented,’ Lee said. ‘They took an enormous risk.'”

Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Dan K.” for the heads up.]

Related article:
Closing arguments in Apple v. Samsung retrial – November 19, 2013

29 Comments

    1. Of course they would be and it in no way punishes them enough to keep Samsung and other companies from doing it again. I’m sure they had figured Apple would eventually sue them but the amount of money taken in on these copycat products far outweighs any consequence. This isn’t the first time they’ve blatantly copied another company’s products and with wrist-slap verdicts like these it ensures that they will do it again and again until a verdict is handed down that truly punishes them severely enough once and for all.

  1. Why shouldn’t they take all their revenues away; plus the additional fines on top of that? This is chump change for Samsung. We should be enacting an Import Ban of all their products, and then have Samsung prove to our courts that they should be allowed to sell their goods in the United States. While that sounds excessive, it doesn’t seem as if anything else will send the proper message about patent violations.

    1. I totally agree! They stole more than profits from Apple and deserve to have to pay for that egregious action. On top of it all, they knew that in the United States there is no fairness or justice and that they would get away relatively unscathed with what they were doing. What a joke!

    1. I expect that after she’s able to get Samsung off with owing Apple what amounts to the price of a Happy Meal, she’ll retire as a judge and begin her new job consulting for Samsung.

  2. In a typical case of an award for patent infringement you’re talking about cents to the dollar, maybe 2-3% of the cost of the component, not the sale price of the finished product.

    There’s no way in the land of the living that a judge will award anywhere near that amount. Samsung’s figure is more reasonable.

    Besides Apple is copying Samsung’s TouchWiz for its excretory iOS 7 anyway, so some counter damages is due. Both sides are equally guilty of copying – Samsung copying Apple when Steve Jobs was still alive – Apple had original ideas then, and now Apple copying Samsung after Steve Jobs’ death because Apple can’t innovate any more other than copying another’s handiwork.

  3. Samgsung should have designed around by patenting their own gestures and features, but, but … they had no innovative engineers.

    As time goes on, Samsung is losing mindshare in both engineers and consumers.

    It is not the way to succeed in the 21st century.

  4. If it were that easy to design around Apple’s patents, Blackberry, Microsoft, Google and a host of others would have done so by now. That’s why the processes are patented: They’re not easy to create.

  5. The real issue here is that Samdung couldn’t wait to innovate around those patents because Apple would have grown to dominate and command the market. They had to cheat in order to get in the game. That’s what’s so bad about their action. It was all a holding pattern allowing them to grab market share while they caught up to Apple, which is easy to do because copying is a lot less work and time consuming than actually innovating. That’s why the damages need to be trebled.

    1. Everyone copies the market leader. It’s a natural inborn instinct. The only person who could resist that temptation and strike out in his own path was Steve Jobs.

      When Samsung copied Apple, in 2007-2011, iOS was the dominant mobile platform, full of innovative ideas and beautiful icons. Now in 2013 that the tables are turned, and Samsung is the market leader, the Jobless Apple in striving to recapture lost market share copied Samsung’s TouchWiz wholesale for its excretory iOS 7.

      That’s the cycle of life.

        1. Apple’s innovation bank is bankrupt, as bankrupt as Obama’s government. So in the hopes of grabbing market share, Apple, through Ive, forced its designers to copy Android, Windows Phone 8, Windows 8, WebOS, Samsung TouchWiz, and whatever mobile OS they could lay their hands on. The result of all this is the uglier than sin iOS 7 which is a mishmash of prevailing ‘modern’ ideas incoherently put together.

    1. Unfortunately, the general public doesn’t care about patents, much less about this particular patent dispute the way we do.

      Reminds me of Hitler’s contention that no one did anything about the genocide of the Armenians to justify in advance his plans for the Holocaust.

  6. Stop bellyaching. It’s pathetic. Samsung stole significant intellectual property from Apple. They will be assessed some damages. Move on.

    If you want people to buy your product, make it better, or cheaper, or both.

    A court is not your mom.

    1. The problem with your advice is that it is unspecific. You say “cheaper” and we’re to take that to mean “cheaper than other products providing the same capability.” But in fact, Apple produced a product that was substantially cheaper than all solutions prior to the iPhone (web browsing, phone calling, music). The effort they undertook to produce that was substantial and had no guarantee of success. Their reward comes after that risk is taken. What Samsung has done in copying the iPhone and selling theirs for less is to deny Apple the reward they deserve. This is not bellyaching. If the risk Apple took is not rewarded they won’t undertake such risk in the future. The risk Samsung took is that they would get sued and penalized for their actions. Being assessed “some” damages does not properly transfer their reward to back to the company that undertook the risk in a legally correct manner.

  7. Koh is Korean.

    We all know already what the verdict will be regardless that it’s an open and shut case for apple to win.

    Every person with a brain can see the blatant copying.

  8. To be honest I prefer having a screen protector than a case..I’ve looked at the otter box and while it looks great it does add considerable bulk and they are pricey…in the other hand screen protectors are lightweight and inexpensive if you know which one to get. You can pick a GEARMAXX screen protector for cheap…They sell on ebay and are high quality, lightweight and durable!

Reader Feedback

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