Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd May 2014 00:28 UTC

An eight-person jury on Friday handed back a mixed verdict in the Apple v. Samsung patent-infringement case.

The jury found Samsung's gadgets infringed Apple's '647 patent, but not the '959 patent or '414 patent. Results were mixed for the '721 patent, with some Samsung devices, such as the Galaxy Nexus, found to infringe, and others not.

The jury awarded Apple only $119.6 million for the infringement.

Apple wanted more than $2 billion. The verdict is still being read, and the jury has also ruled that Apple infringed on one of Samsung's patents, awarding Samsung $158000 for it.

So, pocket change both ways. A total waste of money, public resources, the jury members' time, and the court system. Well done you, patent system.

Permalink for comment 588058
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Sat 3rd May 2014 00:48 UTC
Member since:

This was me March 2013:

Edit: And yes, its about the money, but in a different way. Apple doesnt' need a billion dollars. They have 100 billion dollars. What they do need is the stigma and cloud of uncertainty that will arise over Android, and the import bans. Monetary compensation is secondary to all that.

This is a complex, multi trial, multi year, game of chess between two of the biggest companies in the world. Apple will lose some, Samsung will lose some, but its how it affects the larger picture that matters.

Apple is systematically trying to shut out Android, and damage the Samsung brand by associating them with being a copier, AND make it so OEMs think twice about licensing Android.

The point isn't really how much they get awarded, but the perception that surrounds each company moving forward. Being labeled a copier is something Samsung is extremely sensitive to, given that it has the potential to damage any premium branding they're aiming for.

It might be chump change for Samsung, a multinational conglomerate but it's certainly not chump change for any other OEM who might be considering aping Apple's intellectual property.

Moving forward though we'll likely see the figure revised up or downwards as the various legal mechanisms start working over the course of the next few months/years.

Btw, re: Apple's original damage claim. They're almost always comically overshooting with damages. Look at Moto wanting billions from MSFT a year and getting $14M.

I don't think $120M is a figure to sneeze at though, it definitely sends a message. Even Florian from FossPatents thought $2B was an unreasonable amount ($40 per device)

Edited 2014-05-03 00:49 UTC

Reply Score: 4