or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Samsung wrap up testimony in patent retrial as jurors prepare for closing remarks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Samsung wrap up testimony in patent retrial as jurors prepare for closing remarks

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
Apple and Samsung counsel finished the testimony phase in the pair's damages trial on Monday, leaving only closing remarks before the jury will deliberate and ultimately decide what amount the Korean company owes for infringing on certain patents.

Bressler Testimony
Comparison of Apple and Samsung devices. | Source: Apple v. Samsung court documents


According to in-court reports from CNET, each side trotted out expert witnesses who gave testimony as to how much Samsung should pay for infringing on five Apple patents.

Apple is seeking $380 million for lost profits on an estimated 360,000 potential devices sold, Samsung profits earned and royalties. For its part, Samsung does not dispute infringement, but argues damages should be limited to roughly $53 million, with $52.7 million going to profits, $28,452 for royalties and nothing for lost Apple profits.

When the Apple v. Samsung jury trial was decided in 2012, Apple was awarded $1.05 billion relating to damages incurred by Samsung's copycat products. But Judge Lucy Koh in March vacated some $450 million after finding discrepancies in the jury's calculations.

Judge Koh called for a retrial on 13 Samsung products found to be in infringement of five Apple patents. Today's proceedings brought that case one step closer to conclusion.

During Monday's session, Apple and Samsung used their final hours to set the stage for Tuesday's closing arguments. Of the eight hours Judge Koh gave both companies for testimony, Apple used all but 16 minutes, while Samsung had two minutes remaining.

Over the past week, Apple and Samsung brought familiar faces to the stand, with the Cupertino company calling on SVP of Worldwide Marketing Phil Schiller to offer testimony as it pertained to the iPhone. He said that making such a product was a huge risk for Apple.

"We had a saying inside the company that it was a 'bet-the-company' product," Schiller said when he took the stand last week. "We were starting to do well again in iPod. Then here we're going to invest all these resources, financial as well as people, in creating this product."

Apple will argue in its 90-minute closing remarks that Samsung's patent infringement and subsequent production of copycat smartphones and tablets cost Apple the sought $380 million. Samsung is likely to rebut, saying any ill-gotten gains were much less substantial given the funds sunk into advertising and marketing, something Apple's expert witness did not account for in their estimations.

Following tomorrow's statements, the jury will deliberate on a damages amount Samsung owes Apple, though no deadline is set for a decision.
post #2 of 22

“We, the jury, find it ludicrous that any part of this was retrialed. As such, we award Apple $4 billion in additional damages and suggest an import ban be levied on all Samsung mobile electronics of all make and model in the United States until such time as a full investigation into the company’s workings be done.”

post #3 of 22
I'm really, really hoping that Scamsung is going to have to add a few more zeros to the end of what they thought they would have to pay.

Maybe they can just put it on their credit card and get some serious travel-miles added to it! 1smile.gif
post #4 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I'm really, really hoping that Scamsung is going to have to add a few more zeros to the end of what they thought they would have to pay.

Maybe they can just put it on their credit card and get some serious travel-miles added to it! 1smile.gif

Not even mileage accumulation! Samsung copied everything from Japan, US, and Canada... The mileage will get them to copy from France next. But then again making more croissant is probably okay. 1smile.gif
post #5 of 22

Hopefully the damages will be sensibly calculated this time round. I don't think anyone particularly wants to see another repeat of this case.

post #6 of 22
The Samsung idea that 8c royalties to Apple per Samsung device sold just shows how much they think of a) other people's stuff and b) the law. Not a lot.

And of course they should pay for lost profits, plus have to pay punitive damages on top.
post #7 of 22
Really? Samsung lawyers say they owe less because the calculation doesn't include Samsung's advertising expenses? What BS. What if Amazon had copied Apple? Their business model makes it so that they make little or no profit on anything. Would they then owe Apple nothing? You copy someone else's stuff, especially if it's patented, you should pay a huge fine. Otherwise what's the point of having a patent? Lawyers need to get their story straight: this case will define if a patent protects you or it does not. A slap on the wrist means that it's open season on copying everything. Do all companies want to pay the legal expenses to fight this kind of behaviour?

You copied. You admitted it. Pay up and stop copying.
post #8 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissMac2 View Post

The Samsung idea that 8c royalties to Apple per Samsung device sold just shows how much they think of a) other people's stuff and b) the law. Not a lot.

And of course they should pay for lost profits, plus have to pay punitive damages on top.

It's all very well to say that, but you have to have some idea of what the "lost profits" are before you can make them pay for it. Both companies will submit wildly diverging "estimates" with dubious connections to reality, and it'll be left to the jury to sort it out. Then there'll probably be a retrial, because people will disagree.

 

They've got to estimate how much profit Apple has lost as a direct result of Samsung's devices copying these patents. I don't even see how you could account for the vast number of factors influencing Apple's profits, let alone narrowing it down to something as specific as "profits lost due to pinch-to-zoom". 

post #9 of 22
If anyone copy an LV purse or Polo, our government will ban the imports, destroy the copycat products, put the importer into jail... Here we are, The guilty party admitted they copy a US patented produc, got a Korean judge, received an appeal court order, and order a retrial due to her misguided jury instructions, threw out some patents...I think Apple should hire a private investigator to check her bank account....so what good is a patent when you have a less lobbied judge? Regardless if you are the most valuable and innovative company in America? God help America.
post #10 of 22
Its silly to be discussing how much money apple should get. They have 150 billion dollars.
What I would like is to jury to validate Patent Laws and show Samsung their business of copy and pay will be COSTLY . I hope the jury makes them pay 300million then fines them treble damages, maybe a 1billion .!!!!!!!!!! Then maybe companies with wake up and stop coping each other.
post #11 of 22
Its silly to be discussing how much money apple should get. They have 150 billion dollars.
What I would like is to jury to validate Patent Laws and show Samsung their business of copy and pay will be COSTLY . I hope the jury makes them pay 300million then fines them treble damages, maybe a 1billion .!!!!!!!!!! Then maybe companies with wake up and stop coping each other.
post #12 of 22

Finally someone with some sense.    Our patent laws are a joke and Samsung knows it.    I wish I was on the jury.   This judge is an idiot.

post #13 of 22
i often wish the death penalty existed for companies. this is one of those times.
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #14 of 22
I agree that the punitive value of this case is more important than the financial value. Either stealing intellectual property is wrong or it is open season. Large companies with deep pockets, like Samsung or Apple, could easily afford to steal IP if the cost was merely financial. Indeed, it might in some instances make financial sense. To prevent wholesale theft of intellectual property as this century progresses, the courts have to look to making such action a clear bad business decision for companies. The judgement in this trial needs to send out a clear message in this respect, or there is a risk that tech chaos will ensue!
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkmd View Post

Finally someone with some sense.    Our patent laws are a joke and Samsung knows it.    I wish I was on the jury.   This judge is an idiot.

Our patent laws are largely fine. The difficulty and expense of enforcing their validity makes their value questionable at times.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLite View Post
 

It's all very well to say that, but you have to have some idea of what the "lost profits" are before you can make them pay for it. Both companies will submit wildly diverging "estimates" with dubious connections to reality, and it'll be left to the jury to sort it out. Then there'll probably be a retrial, because people will disagree.

 

They've got to estimate how much profit Apple has lost as a direct result of Samsung's devices copying these patents. I don't even see how you could account for the vast number of factors influencing Apple's profits, let alone narrowing it down to something as specific as "profits lost due to pinch-to-zoom". 

 

Well, you obviously missed the bit where Samsung says they won't pay a red cent for any lost profits. It isn't a matter of negotiation, it's a real case of because Samsung sold 360,000 devices, Apple sold up to that number fewer devices as a result. The manufacturing costs of those devices are easily calculated, and so are the direct profit per item. Also, they don't have to show anything is a 'direct result' but is 'connected with'.

 

You are clearly following Samsung's lawyers' bad reasoning, which was ruled as incorrect by the Federal Appellate Court on Monday.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/18/appellate-court-breathes-new-life-into-apples-quest-for-samsung-android-device-ban

post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkmd View Post

Its silly to be discussing how much money apple should get. They have 150 billion dollars.

 

That is totally irrelevant. 

 

This case not only is about two companies, it is also about a very important legal principle, and could set a precedent that is followed in all future patent cases, so the law is the most relevant issue, not how rich a company is. They are both rich. That doesn't mean they can break the law.

 

Samsung is acting as if it thinks any patent is just a blueprint for how to make a copy; Apple is saying it is a protection for the thousands of people they employ who design and invent new things. And the law of patents was set up to stimulate technological development which drives economies forwards. If Samsung pays no lost profits, this aim will be weakened.

post #18 of 22
Hmmm, profit Apple lost has nothing to do with how much samsung paid to advertise.
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Bonner View Post

Hmmm, profit Apple lost has nothing to do with how much samsung paid to advertise.

Both are being as creative as the court will allow in coming up with "figures". For that matter the argument could be made that Apple didn't lose a single penny in profit since they sold every single iPhone they could build and couldn't keep up with demand as it was.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #20 of 22

I have bet with a friend years ago that if Samsung didn't copy Apple I would never use a single Apple product again. It's not that I loved Apple product, but it was so clear from day 1 that Samsung blatantly copied Apple. What the f it took so long for the judges to realize it? If you look at those Korean automobile companies, do you think they came up with these cool latest designs? All copycat, a little piece from each BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Audi...Why? Save on R&D cost. My last Samsung product in my house was 67" DLP projector bought in 2007 with defective DMD chip which caused black dots all over the screen after I owned it for 2 years and they refused to replace it. I promised myself from that point that I wouldn't buy any Samsung product in my life ever again. They are dishonest copycats.

I Want My iOS UI Like in Apple Watch"
Reply
I Want My iOS UI Like in Apple Watch"
Reply
post #21 of 22

Is Apple's design truly unique, I don't know and I honestly don't care or have zero interest in who wins this lawsuit or any of them. Both sides are being babies. Apple copies, Samsung copies, they all do it and we are better for it. it's how these companies advance in design and technology, leapfrogging each other. Apple looked at what was and is and made it better, yay for us. I miss the 80's and 90's, before all the suing. Apples has made enough money to last them for the next 50 years, I wish they would just focus on themselves and not what the competition is doing. Even an idiot will know if they buy a Samsung it's not an Apple, let the name speak for themselves.

Samsung F700

 

TabletPC Circa 2004

 

 


Edited by Relic - 11/19/13 at 4:01pm
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Is Apple's design truly unique, I don't know and I honestly don't care

Except you've been around long enough to know and cared enough to post your usual anti-Apple comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Samsung F700

The Samsung F700 wasn't like that before the iPhone:

http://androidcommunity.com/who-was-really-first-apple-vs-samsung-story-truly-debunked-20110420/

The original iPhone had a lot of Samsung parts. You don't think Apple suddenly started ordering touchscreen displays and high-end mobile components and the suppliers just assumed it was business as usual. The suppliers had to give them everything they needed to build the prototypes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

TabletPC Circa 2004

That's what it looked like in 2008:

http://www.tabletpcreview.com/default.asp?newsID=1130

The previous model before Apple brought iOS devices to market looked like this:

http://www.tabletpc2.com/Review-Electrovaya%20Scribbler%203100%20Tablet%20PC.htm

There was nothing that looked and behaved like an iPhone or iPad prior to those devices coming to market. People hate that fact and don't want to admit that Apple designed the template for all their modern gadgets. This revising of history to try and cover it up won't ever stop because people really don't want to give Apple credit for anything but it's false and petty. By all means use products from another manufacturer but give Apple the credit they're due.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Samsung wrap up testimony in patent retrial as jurors prepare for closing remarks