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 588064
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Nelson
by galvanash on Sat 3rd May 2014 02:14 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Member since:

The point isn't really how much they get awarded, but the perception that surrounds each company moving forward.

I agree, I just think your being a bit myopic about it... The perception that the damages verdict creates is that patents (even Apple's) really aren't worth that much in litigation. $120 million probably doesn't even cover Apple's legal expenses for this trial.

Just saying... The key patent that Samsung was found to be infringing was 5,946,647 - which is a particularly dangerous one imo as it is difficult to work around. But $120 million? Considering the number of phones Samsung sells that is peanuts - it comes out to $2 per phone by Apple's own accounting (they wanted $40).

If the rumors are true most Android makers are paying MSFT more than that for licensing (rumor is $8)... It's kinda sad since the only difference between Apple and MSFT in this case is that MSFT bothered to ask for the money instead of going the litigation route directly.

Sure, everyone hates them for it, and I don't really blame them, but regardless pursuing licensing agreements (using patents as leverage) is more civilized than Apple's usual approach (using patents as nuclear bombs).

Think about that. Microsoft is making MORE money through licensing that Apple is through litigation... So yeah, like them or not patents seem to be a great way to generate licensing revenue - but as a tool to block competition? No working out so great... Even with the $1 billion verdict (assuming it holds up), Microsoft will STILL make ALOT more money over the long haul ($3-4 billion annually and growing...).

While the legal battles drag out over the years MSFT will keep raking in cash. Apple's refusal to license anything to anyone (for the few patents they have that actually have teeth) is costing them $$$ over the long haul. And the clock on their biggest weapon (the 5,946,647 patent) runs out in 2 years...

I'm not hating on Apple either - I'm being serious. I think this whole thing was and is a utter waste of time and money on their part. They are still seeing tremendous market success, and if the best they have is the stupid 647 patent they should just stop bothering. Its not worth their time. Sure, 1 or 2 billion dollars sounds like a huge deal, but considering what it is costing them to get it (assuming it holds up) and the time and energy involved, AND the size of the company they are getting it from (to Samsung 2 billion is a bad bee sting, nothing more) - what is the point? The only rational answer is to try and deter Android growth - and it is absolutely not accomplishing that AT ALL.

Reply Parent Score: 7