Apple v. Samsung II jury verdict threatens far-reaching consequences

“The jurors deciding the outcome of the second Apple vs Samsung trial haven’t yet returned a verdict, but their options are limited to a few possible outcomes, ranging from a fiery thermonuclear blast to a wintery new Dark Ages,” Daniel Eran Dilger writes for AppleInsider. “The first verdict the jury could potentially render is to return a decision along the lines of Judge Richard Posner’s in the parallel iPhone-related patent trial between Apple and Motorola. In that case, Judge Posner decided that, at least in the case of Apple’s iPhone, patents should have no value because if they did, Motorola would be left trying to sell Google’s indisputably ‘inferior non-Apple technology’ and it would be ‘catastrophic’ if customers had only one source to obtain Apple technology.”

“A second outcome, only slightly worse for Apple, would occur if the jury decided to award Apple nothing while taking seriously Samsung’s counterclaims for the two patents it acquired for its cynical countersuit-defense after being sued by Apple in 2011,” Dilger writes. “The amount of money Samsung asked for is small because the entire point of Samsung’s countersuit was to portray all patents as worth very little, in a hopeful bid to reduce its own liability for infringement of Apple’s patents.”

“The jury might also select a more charitable possible outcome by ‘fairly’ awarding both sides everything they asked for. In this case, Samsung would get virtually nothing and Apple would be awarded as much as $2.2 billion,” Dilger writes. “A fourth possible verdict could result in awarding Apple even more than $2.2 billion in damages… On top of a finding of willful infringement, Samsung’s worse case scenario would also involve sales bans of all of its infringing products and every substantially similar product variant that also infringed Apple’s patents. A sales ban would interrupt Samsung’s entire ‘copy & cash out’ strategy, forcing it to scramble to change how its products work before it could begin selling them again. ”

Much more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: In other words, options 1 and 2 are Florian Müller’s wet dreams and 3-5 are his bad, worse, and worst nightmares.

Related article:
Apple v. Samsung II Jury asks if Google was cited when Steve Jobs sued – May 1, 2014

17 Comments

  1. Keeping my fingers crossed for an Apple landslide. If they don’t completely beat scamslum in this trial, what is next? Another 4 years of trials with goozle?

    Come on juniors!! Please have some common sense and do the right thing.
    Win one for the hipper. (Steve)
    You did well Steve. Very well. Still miss him.

    1. The subtlety of your statement is lost on mouth breathers, who are denigrating your comment, believing you’re a Samsung sympathizer.

      Samsung is crossing fingers, legs, and eyes praying there is a god.

      They’re going to get dinged for sure, and there won’t be a victory dance for them either.

      I’m praying for Option-4 but wouldn’t feel the least bit heartbroken if Samsung took Option-5 up their wAzzooh.

      😀

  2. A conspiracy theory to be confirmed by Snowden’s further leak: The U.S. Government wants more political control of the South Korea by trading away Apple’s valuable patents in return…

    I know… Very Hollywood kinda story. Just get too tired with these things and too worried that Steve can’t “sleep” well in his afterlife.

    1. political control of the South Korea by trading away Apple’s valuable patents in return…

      by siding with Apple, to use Apple’s IP as leverage against the S Korean government…

  3. That decision from this judge is the DUMBEST slap in the face for Apple hard work and disrespect for IP.

    “The first verdict the jury could potentially render is to return a decision along the lines of Judge Richard Posner’s in the parallel iPhone-related patent trial between Apple and Motorola. In that case, Judge Posner decided that, at least in the case of Apple’s iPhone, patents should have no value because if they did, Motorola would be left trying to sell Google’s indisputably ‘inferior non-Apple technology’ and it would be ‘catastrophic’ if customers had only one source to obtain Apple technology.”

    1. The thing that worry me is that both here in the US and the EU, all these Judges know that Apple’s IP is legal and legitimate. They are trying to protect the Market. To enforce Apple’s IP would result in all iPhone clones being eliminated. They are not going to let Apple have this all to themselves, even though it belongs to them. Right now only iPhones and iPhone clones are succeeding in the Market.

      1. Perhaps, but don’t go to far with your skepticism.

        You have to believe Americans will do what’s best for America. However, if the jury is populated with 12 Koreans, forget about it.

    2. Perhaps, but Posner was undone on appeal, setting precedent, indicative of stalling tactics. In the interest of speeding things up, this judge isn’t about to be overturned on appeal.

      My sense is, that jury wants to do the right thing. They’ve scoured the amicus briefs to get a real sense of what’s at stake and they’ve watched the presentations, put forth like a Steve Jobs keynote.

      Apple is gaining sympathy in all sectors of industrial America, becoming a champion of America’s spirit of innovation, spreading all over the globe as a righteous brand.

      Regardless of the outcome, Apple will prevail.

      Karma, Bitch!

    3. What a maroon! With this sort of muddled thinking, it is hard to believe Judge Posner has such a respected reputation as a scholar and Federal Judge. Age-related memory loss, maybe?

      Seems to completely overlook (1) the law, and (2) the fact that without Android, other _legitimate_ competition would likely have emerged, instead of being steam-rolled by Google’s Android and their illegitimate offspring. Maybe RIM, Nokia, Microsoft, Palm? And did he consider that maybe Google Android’s anti-competitive pricing strategy — how does anyone compete with so-called “free”??? — eliminated potential competition from other companies or smartphone operating systems before they even got developed?

  4. Only a Sales Ban makes sense. If Apple loses this case – again – then setting up headquarters in another country, where patents are respected, could be a possibility too.

  5. Why do I have a sinking feeling that the Jury has been swayed by the slick willy Samsung Lawyers.

    I know people think all Lawyers are a bunch of lying aholes, but to me it seems that Apple Lawyers were a little more truthful and really tried to stay away from as much BS maneuvering that Samsung Lawyers were going all out with.

Reader Feedback

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