Jury awards Apple $290.45 million in damages against convicted patent infringer Samsung

“A U.S. jury on Thursday awarded Apple Inc $290.45 million, or 76% of Apple’s requested amount, in a damages retrial against Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, the latest battle in global patent litigation between the two mobile giants,” Reuters reports.

Apple had requested $379.8 million, while Samsung argued that it should have to pay only $52.7 million. In August of 2012, a nine-person jury sided with Apple on its claims patent infringement against Samsung. At that time, the jury awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages. Subsequently, Judge Lucy Koh in March ordered a new trial to recalculate some of the damages in the case, striking $450.5 million off the original judgment against Samsung.

The judgement is expected to be appealed by Samsung. yet another U.S. Apple v. Samsung patent trial is scheduled to begin in March 2014to deal with more recent devices, including Samsung’s Galaxy S3 phone and Note 2 phablet.

MacDailyNews Take: Samsung is a despicable outfit. Do not buy Samsung-branded products.

57 Comments

      1. It’s this much plus another $600 million from the previous trial, meaning a total of $890 million, and only on a small set of patents and a small set of products. The suing and damages will continue. That, according to the Times.

      1. But the problem is, the patents that SameDung/Scum violated are NOT FRAND patents. They were Apple’s proprietary IP. $1 per infringing phone isn’t even a slap on the wrist.

        Like WhoKnows observed, seems that crime does pay

      2. FRAND does not apply to “design” patents. FRAND applies to SEP’s.

        SEP: Company “A” decides to include its patent in a Standard (e.g. 803.xx) in agreement with the Standard setting Body (e.g. IEEE).

        The Stanadard setting body (eg. IEEE) allows company ‘A’ to licence the patent on a FRAND basis co company ‘B’, “C’, ‘D’…..etc..

        Company ‘A’ is not allowed to patent at ‘any’ rate for the “advantage” of being part of “the standard”.

        Apples “design” patents are NOT part of any Standard. These patents are free to licences at “whatever rate” Apple wants to licence. There is no FRAND for these patents.

        If sometime down the road Apple wants its patent to be part of a Standard, then and only then, will Apple will have to come to an agreement with the Standards body to licence their patent on a FRAND basis.

        1. Not all of the patents Apple is asserting in this suit are design patents – the pinch-to-zoom patent is a utility patent. But you are right that none of the patents Apple is asserting against Samsung are SEP (Standard Essential Patents), and so FRAND (Fair Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory) requirements do not apply to them.
          Patents are the right to stop someone else from using your invention. Many patent-holders use that to make people pay them royalties. However, many other companies (like Apple!) would prefer to use them to maintain a competitive advantage by actually NOT allowing anyone else to practice that patent. Any kind of damages trial that assumes otherwise undermines a major point of the patent system. In theory, damages for infringement should be an attempt to discover how much the patent-holder would have (honestly) been willing to accept if the infringer had offered to pay. In Apple’s case, that is probably a VERY high amount, since they really didn’t want anyone else to be able to use it at all.

          Now, all that being said, I think the vast majority of patents issued today are bullshit, including those held by Apple. The patent terms are also way too long for fast-moving fields like software and electronics. The whole thing is a giant mess, and most of the “easy fixes” cause more problems than they solve. I took a bunch of classes on this at law school (I am an attorney, but not yours *grin*), and fixing this is tricky. But, there are definitely improvements that can be made. Good luck on that, though, since some of it requires Congressional work, and both parties are heavily influenced by powerful corporations that want to maintain the status quo and screw the public.

  1. It’s unfortunate that after admitting in a court of law under oath that they infringed upon Apple”s patents, the jury does not see fit to award the full amount being sought out by Apple. Maybe another court will make up the difference overseas.

  2. Congratulations to Apple in their case, but, I still feel like this is a drop in the bucket considering how much Samsung has been able to profit from stealing Apple’s IP.

  3. Samsung should really be paying $20/handset – the entire usability of touchscreens was invented by apple. before apple touch-screens needed a stylus or HUGE, simple, single touch buttons. Multi-touch and heuristics made the touchscreen usable. samsung and android should be forced back to a stylus, or fork over $20/handset.

  4. Did I read that right? They are expected to appeal it? WTF? How many times does Apple have to prove Samsung stole Apple’s designs? By the time this all over, court costs and lawyer fees gotta be taking a huge chunk of that money..

Reader Feedback

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