The Ruling Is In: Jury Rules In Favor Of Apple Over Samsung In Landmark Case, Samsung Ordered To Pay Over $1 Billion In Damages

 

The verdict is officially in folks— Apple has officially claimed victory over Samsung. Based off extensive review and hours of deliberation, the jury believes Samsung not only violated numerous Apple patents, but also Apple has not infringed on any of Samsung’s patents. Here’s a quick rundown of each verdict:

 

  • Jury finds Samsung infringement of Apple utility, design patents for some (though not all) products
  • Jury upholds Apple utility, design patents
  • Jury upholds Apple trade dress ’983
  • Jury finds Samsung “diluted” Apple’s registered iPhone, iPhone 3 and “Combination iPhone” trade dress on some products, not on others
  • No Apple infringement of Samsung utility patents
  • Jury found Samsung violated antitrust law by monopolizing markets related to the UMTS standard

 

As a result of the jury’s decision, Samsung is also ordered to pay a king’s ransom in damages— all to the tune of $1.05 billion, while no damages are assessed to Apple in Samsung’s countersuit.

Thoughts?

source: CNet Live Blog
via: CNet

» See more articles by Roy Alugbue


  • blkscorp75

    Congratulations Apple….! This is the perfect opportunity for Samsung to prove that they are innovative moving forward. All devices like the Galaxy Note 10.1, Galaxy Note and Galaxy SIII will still hold the majority of the mobile market. What will Apple’s excuse be then?

  • Lost_Fan

    Where is Robert? I wanted to read his “spin” on this.

    @eae3b44440c76a240a9ab5ddccfca24f:disqus – Apple doesn’t need excuses. They make very good products that alot of people want to buy. Samsung makes very good products that people want to buy. Problem is they copied and a Jury of their peers just said they did. They wanted a jury verdict and got it.

    • RobertNazarian

      I’m here, but I’m traveling this weekend and couldn’t do the post. I’m thoroughly disgusted with the result and might do an editorial over the weekend.

      • Lost_Fan

        I look forward to reading it… ;^)

  • http://www.facebook.com/Revmacd Jim Macdonald

    If I were Samsung I would pay for the judgement by raising the price of the processors the will be manufacturing for the ipad and iphone in their Texas plant. Put it on the bill as a “patent compatibility surcharge” or some such. :)

  • JE

    Wow… I don’t know what to say. Of course they are similar, so were all the cars that came after the Model T … but Henry Ford didn’t make it his mission in life spending his fortune trying to destroy Cadillac, or Dodge (both who started with Ford and ventured on their own to form brands and be successful).

    Apples anti-competitive ways have won the battle, but they are far from winning the war. Samsung is eating their lunch on innovation and Android keeps winning more marketshare…

  • anakin

    Is anyone really shock at the outcome? Given how biased the whole trial became in support of Apple since the start, is this really surprising?

    I think not.

    • SebaKL

      That’s true, but I guess, deep deep down there, we all hoped for some positive outcome. Perhaps not positive but at least fair to a degree. We all know where all the ideas used in today’s iPhone came from, and none of the Apple’s claims are valid as they were all stolen from someone else. Some right off the people who tried to sale it earlier to Apple.
      I honestly hoped jury will see through that, and exercise some common sense and common decency.
      Was I wrong…. damn.

  • Chris

    An American Jury rules in favour of an American company over a South Korean one, doesn’t exactly take Columbo to predict that would of happened. Yet a similar case in the UK Apple was on the losing end and ordered to put on their website and all future advertisements that Samsung did not copy them!

  • gaandu

    Let’s all boycott apple products now….and lets protest for bringing sammy back in US in interest of innovation and technology

  • Guest

    Technology Patents are hypocritical in that it places creativity on the back burner, because all it takes is a half competent argument to prove similarities then your done. Example, explain how PCs and Macs both browse the internet, that’s right Tim Berners-Lee didn’t bother with patents or billing everyone cause he knew he did something greater on the whole without COMPENSATION! Imagine for second how much his creation is worth then find time to thank him for the gift… If you have difficulties imagining think in the billions hits per day worldwide, then bill a pittance at one cent per hit. Google alone would rack up a bill of 10 million each day.. Thanks for reading.

  • http://www.facebook.com/garry.burkhalter Garry M Burkhalter

    Patents are hypocritical in that it places creativity on the back burner, because all it takes is a half competent argument to prove similarities then it is settled. Example, explain how IBM PCs and Apple’s Macs both browse the internet. In this aspect they are identical. So as an argument this similarity creates an infringement on IBM’s patent. One might even argue that they both use mathematics for logic and the argument would be solid as the silicon they are built with. At which point IBM would then have patent rights on Apple, because they created the first ‘computers’ in the 50′s. Case closed pay damages do not pass go. Now lets go full circle back to the internet and look at it’s creator:Tim Berners-Lee. He didn’t bother with patents or billing everyone cause he knew he did something greater on-the-whole without compensation. Imagine for second how much his creation is worth… If you have difficulties imagining, think in the billions for website hits per day worldwide, then bill a pittance at one cent per hit. Google alone would rack up a bill of 10 million dollars each day.. Then-again, maybe someone should start a collection plate going in case he decides to call in his ‘patent’ rights. Thanks for reading.

  • http://www.70plus-feeling50.com/ millgate

    Viewed from the other side of the world (actually, the Atlantic …) what else would we expect to hear.
    I can make up my own mind … and so will millions of others.

  • Mitch Lambert

    Nepotism? I think so. The UK jury seemed to be a lot less convinced. Either way, Samsung have been fined £600 million for patent infringement for copying and making a better version of the iphone. They must be smiling from ear to ear. It’s chicken feed for a £100 billion company. Microsoft paid more or at least the same for Skype. The publicity from this has fired them to the largest mobile phone manufacturer in the world and estimate they will soon be selling 1 billion mobile phones a year (to put that in context, only 100 million iphones are being sold a year at the moment). So if it is considered nepotism by Samsung, then it’s a dangerous game to play, considering the investment Samsung is making in the US to manufacture smartphone components! They might pay for this in job cuts?

    Own-goal for Apple? You decide….but I bet HTC, Sony, Nokia and RIM all wish they would have used rounded corners and 1 button, too.