What is being decided is the definition of an article of manufacture. Does Samsung owe Apple based on the revenue it earned from selling handsets that used Apple's patents sans permission? Or, should the damages be a small percentage of the total revenue, based only on the value of the design infringed on by Samsung. In broader terms, should the judgment be computed based on total sales of the infringing product, or a small percentage of that amount based only on the component used without obtaining a license?
the burden is on Apple to prove that that an article of manufacture is a complete handset, and not just a component. The jury in the original trial, which awarded Apple more than $1 billion, heard improper jury instructions and never knew that an article of manufacture could be anything but an entire phone. Judge Koh said that the result was a jury that was biased against Samsung.Last month, Judge Lucy Koh said that
Over the years, the original judgment was whittled down. With the closing arguments marking the end of the current legal proceedings, we should know how much Apple will receive from Samsung very soon. The former is looking for $1 billion and the latter wants the final judgment to be no more than $28 million.