Samsung confident in its appeal, prepares for multiple scenarios

We already knew that Samsung would be filing post-verdict motions to overturn the jury’s guilty verdict, but it’s unclear as to exactly what path the company will take. Samsung’s official statement solidified its stance on fighting the issue, saying “this isn’t the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims.” And, with $1.05 billion at stake, it makes sense for the South Korean-based electronics company to carefully prepare before it takes its next step.

It’s expected that Samsung’s appeal to Judge Lucy Koh will be centered around the argument that the jury’s verdict was either unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence in play. Very rarely do Judges grant these types of motions, but due to the amount of damages, Samsung feels it has a chance. However, if the company is unsuccessful, there may be a slew of other options.

“Apple’s arguments boiled down to an assertion that everyone who bought a Samsung device would have bought the equivalent product from Apple had the Samsung product not been on the market. But that reasoning ignores any brand loyalty customers might have had to Samsung, or they might be customers of carriers that at the time didn’t offer Apple products. I would say there are quite a few problems with the way Apple calculated damages.”

Potentially, the manufacturer could argue the method used by the jurors to determine financial penalties was inaccurate. It’s also possible that the jury’s verdict could lead both companies to discuss a possible settlement in which Samsung would pay a percentage of the $1.05  billion and agree to drop its appeal, as well as agree to remove some products from the US market. Another option is for the company to argue that designs similar to Apple’s iPhone and iPad existed before Apple even obtained specific patents on those products.

The worst part is that the jury found Samsung guilty of “willfully” infringing upon Apple’s IP, meaning Judge Koh could possibly “triple the damage award, and order Samsung to pay court costs and Apple’s attorneys fees.” Koh has another decision ahead of her as well, one that could mean an injunction on Samsung’s lineup of infringing products. With Apple already filing for a preliminary injunction, Koh will have to determine the effect of removing Samsung’s products from the consumer market. In the meantime, stay tuned for further developments.

Source: Wall Street Journal


About the Author: Colton Kaiser

Born in southern California, Colton is a self-proclaimed tech enthusiast. His first Android handset was the Motorola Backflip, though his passion for technology began when he received his first Windows 95-powered PC for a Christmas present as a child. Dumbfounded by the capabilities of the machine, he discovered an inherent fascination for software and electronics. Colton wrote for numerous news publications before establishing his own popular technology-oriented website. When he's not writing about or playing with the latest gadgets, he enjoys watching football and destroying friends in his fantasy league, preferably while eating Mexican food. Colton currently attends the University of Redlands, where he plans to major in journalism.


  • Scooter

    “everyone who bought a Samsung device would have bought the
    equivalent product from Apple had the Samsung product not been on the
    market”

    I definitely wouldn’t buy an iPhone… Had the Samsung S2 not been available, I would have gone for a HTC Sensation XL, or maybe a Sony Experia etc

    • Andi Springthorpe

      That is exactly what I thought when reading the article. Even down to the Sensation XL.

  • ravenas

    I started out with an LG. My interest was in a smartphone with a decent camera running android. iPhone wasn’t even offered by my carrier.

  • jesse

    honestly i didnt know about samsung until a friend showed me and so i looked i was just blowen away, and so i wanted their tablet as well and well as soon as apple got a ban in australia i pledged to never use a apple device again.

    • michael centeno

      Same. I don’t like to be limited by choices. Hate how crapple does business. having big pockets doesn’t mean you can be bullying business from competing. Screw you crapple. shame on you, you cant compete so you rely on eliminating the competition. Fucking cunts. as an it guy ive converted many isheeps to android. Just to know that ive diverted some of your business elsewhere is satisfying.

      • tehjoker

        Couldn’t agree more!

  • tehjoker

    Can you say mistrial – “Ilagan also admitted to CNET that the jury hadn’t really considered prior art – or technology that Apple copied when creating the first iPhone – in their decision. “In fact we skipped that one,” Ilagan continued, “so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down.” ”
    In other words, the jury didn’t do their job.

    • http://twitter.com/homncruse Aaron Burke

      They may as well have said “really, we were all tired and hungry and just wanted to go home to our families, so we just ignored all the inconvenient evidence that didn’t agree with the quickest way to get food in our stomachs.”

  • Kyle Green

    Apple: Oh no, we are slightly losing money because people aren’t buying our over priced products . Let’s start suing people so people will be forced to buy us.

    Boy am I glad I got rid of my iphone for an HTC One X