Samsung to Appeal $119M Patent Verdict as Foreman Says Apple Should Target Google Instead

Samsung yesterday confirmed it will challenge the $119.6 million verdict in the second Apple versus Samsung patent infringement trial, claiming the decision was “unsupported by evidence." According to Bloomberg, Samsung will ask Judge Lucy Koh to reduce the damages to zero and will follow with an appeal if this initial request is denied.

apple_samsung_logos
After several days of deliberations and weeks of testimony, the jury found that Samsung willfully infringed on three of the five Apple patents involved in the lawsuit and ordered the company to pay $119.6 million, a figure well below Apple's requested $2 billion. Speaking after the verdict, jury foreman Thomas Dunham said the compensation was "fair and just" based on the evidence presented at the trial (via Re/code).

“The damages were based on the fact that both sides presented their view of what a reasonable amount of, I guess, compensation would be,” he said. “We didn’t really feel either one was what we felt was a fair and just compensation.”

Dunham, who is familiar with the patent system from his work at IBM, hinted that Apple should pursue Google because the Android operating system is the real target in this case, an argument that Samsung's lawyers used during the trial (via The Wall Street Journal).

"If you really feel that Google is the cause behind this, as I think everybody has observed, then don't beat around the bush," said Mr. Dunham, whose job at IBM was to oversee developers expected to file patents. "Let the courts decide. But a more direct approach may be something to think about."

Though Samsung was the defendant, Google played a role in the case as it was part of a larger "holy war" against Android instigated by Steve Jobs following Android's debut Google also sent VP of engineering Hiroshi Lockheimer to testify on behalf of Samsung and agreed to offer partial legal protection to Samsung in case of an Apple win.

While Dunham suggests that Google should be Apple's real target in the ongoing litigation, jurors claim that Google’s part in the trial was not a factor when they were deciding on the merit of the infringement claims. It also did not influence the amount of damages ultimately awarded to Apple.

Popular Stories

iPhone SE 4 Vertical Camera Feature

iPhone SE 4 Rumored to Use Same Rear Chassis as iPhone 16

Friday July 19, 2024 7:16 am PDT by
Apple will adopt the same rear chassis manufacturing process for the iPhone SE 4 that it is using for the upcoming standard iPhone 16, claims a new rumor coming out of China. According to the Weibo-based leaker "Fixed Focus Digital," the backplate manufacturing process for the iPhone SE 4 is "exactly the same" as the standard model in Apple's upcoming iPhone 16 lineup, which is expected to...
iPhone 16 Pro Sizes Feature

iPhone 16 Series Is Just Two Months Away: Everything We Know

Monday July 15, 2024 4:44 am PDT by
Apple typically releases its new iPhone series around mid-September, which means we are about two months out from the launch of the iPhone 16. Like the iPhone 15 series, this year's lineup is expected to stick with four models – iPhone 16, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, and iPhone 16 Pro Max – although there are plenty of design differences and new features to take into account. To bring ...
bsod

Crowdstrike Says Global IT Outage Impacting Windows PCs, But Mac and Linux Hosts Not Affected

Friday July 19, 2024 3:12 am PDT by
A widespread system failure is currently affecting numerous Windows devices globally, causing critical boot failures across various industries, including banks, rail networks, airlines, retailers, broadcasters, healthcare, and many more sectors. The issue, manifesting as a Blue Screen of Death (BSOD), is preventing computers from starting up properly and forcing them into continuous recovery...
iphone 14 lineup

Cellebrite Unable to Unlock iPhones on iOS 17.4 or Later, Leak Reveals

Thursday July 18, 2024 4:18 am PDT by
Israel-based mobile forensics company Cellebrite is unable to unlock iPhones running iOS 17.4 or later, according to leaked documents verified by 404 Media. The documents provide a rare glimpse into the capabilities of the company's mobile forensics tools and highlight the ongoing security improvements in Apple's latest devices. The leaked "Cellebrite iOS Support Matrix" obtained by 404 Media...
Apple Watch Series 9

2024 Apple Watch Lineup: Key Changes We're Expecting

Tuesday July 16, 2024 7:59 am PDT by
Apple is seemingly planning a rework of the Apple Watch lineup for 2024, according to a range of reports from over the past year. Here's everything we know so far. Apple is expected to continue to offer three different Apple Watch models in five casing sizes, but the various display sizes will allegedly grow by up to 12% and the casings will get taller. Based on all of the latest rumors,...
tinypod apple watch

TinyPod Turns Your Apple Watch Into an iPod

Wednesday July 17, 2024 3:18 pm PDT by
If you have an old Apple Watch and you're not sure what to do with it, a new product called TinyPod might be the answer. Priced at $79, the TinyPod is a silicone case with a built-in scroll wheel that houses the Apple Watch chassis. When an Apple Watch is placed inside the TinyPod, the click wheel on the case is able to be used to scroll through the Apple Watch interface. The feature works...

Top Rated Comments

Brian Y Avatar
133 months ago
It kind of confirms the articles floating around re Samsungs business practices.

Steal an idea. Delay. Delay. Delay. Delay. Countersue. Delay. Delay. Delay.
Score: 34 Votes (Like | Disagree)
keterboy Avatar
133 months ago
There we go again, confirming the prior post. Way to go Samsung, do what you do best! :apple:
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
hexor Avatar
133 months ago
Do these companies ever have to pay money if they just keep dragging this out forever or what? Talk about a joke of a system.. If you have enough money, copy your competitor and it will be years before you ever get in trouble. By then you would have made enough money to negate any court costs.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
brewcitywi Avatar
133 months ago
pledge

Again, I can only pledge that I will never purchase a Samsung branded product for the rest of my life! I can't avoid products with internal samsung parts, but I can avoid all outer branded products.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Four oF NINE Avatar
133 months ago
The legal saga here is off the graph in terms of irrationality
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Renzatic Avatar
133 months ago
So, if someone disagrees with you, they are automatically a "hanger-on". Thanks so much for your contribution. :rolleyes:
Ooh, the rolleyes emotes. THINGS JUST GOT REAL!

Where did I say that? Hell, where did I even imply that? What I'm saying is that people who don't have an emotional investment in the case don't see it as being all that important. The patents are vague, little things that can't even rightly be considered inventions or even improvements, and are hardly worth the price demanded in the trial. It's a lot of hulabaloo over nothing much at all, and it's only here that we're acting like it's a life or death situation.

----------

LOL, seriously. The jury found Apple's infringement was worth $158K. Apparently you missed the significance of that. :rolleyes:
Ooh, there's that rolleyes again! OH THE DISDAIN AT THE IGNORANT!

Apple got 5% of their asking price, Samsung got 3%. The biggest message of this whole trial was basically "both of you, shut up".
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)