Apple, Samsung settle their long running patent suit for an undisclosed amount

Apple, Samsung settle their long running patent suit for an undisclosed amount
Apple and Samsung have buried the hatchet. The long running patent infringement suit that at times was acrimonious, has been settled for an undisclosed amount. Apple sued Samsung in 2011, accusing the South Korean based manufacturer with copying the design of the Apple iPhone to produce its own smartphone line. In August 2012, the jury awarded Apple $1.05 billion.

Over the years, the award amount was whittled down, and a final verdict was reached last month after a new trial on the amount of the award. Apple was seeking $1 billion and Samsung wanted the amount reduced to $28 million. The jury met both companies half-way and awarded Apple $538.6 million.

During the fierce courtroom battle between Apple and Samsung, the pair still had a working relationship. Samsung sold Apple chips and displays for the iPhone. In fact, according to the Wall Street Journal, Samsung earns $110 for each Apple iPhone X. With the court battle over between the two biggest names in the industry, we could see more cooperation between them.

source: Bloomberg



4. antroid

Posts: 392; Member since: Jan 24, 2018

OMG, after all the time, money and effort from both sides and after it seems it was a close sentence. They decided to settle, I guess it's a victory for all the lawyers

33. shm224

Posts: 295; Member since: Mar 19, 2015

No. The case was settled after the recent loss by Samsung. It doesn't mean that they shake hand and everyone walks away without any loss. Samsung probably has to pay some huge $XXX less the damage awarded by the last trial for infringement and some humiliating terms and conditions. It's a victory for Apple and future design patent trolls (which includes lawyers).

37. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

Unlikely that they lost anything but money. Most of Apples patents have been invalidated relating to this lawsuit and they probably met at a lower sum than the jury awarded. There are no terms needed since the devices involved are a decade old so they have to need to change anything.

40. j2001m

Posts: 3061; Member since: Apr 28, 2014

Hm, Samsung only need to say, we pay you only 1$ or you get no screens for your iPhone X this year and we own the phone market

5. sissy246

Posts: 7124; Member since: Mar 04, 2015

It's about time it's over. Of course the lawyers are happy it went on for years, they could probably retire.

7. NateDiaz

Posts: 1090; Member since: Mar 03, 2018

SamsungNewbie be like "That's just loan Apple will return the money soon"

13. sissy246

Posts: 7124; Member since: Mar 04, 2015


32. Alcyone

Posts: 488; Member since: May 10, 2018

Agree to that one. But the next check will probably negate the money samsung paid out. A penny higher on the check then what was paid out, isn't so bad. Cause the following would be all profit; and I do believe 2 more check will come.

38. Trex95

Posts: 2383; Member since: Mar 03, 2013

Apply playing in smart way they sue Samsung got the money from Samsung like last case then pay again from the same money for iPhone and iPad parts lol.

17. Jrod99

Posts: 762; Member since: Jan 15, 2016

Hmmm. Missing someone here I see.

19. kiko007

Posts: 7513; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

He’ll be here... you can count on it.

18. Alcyone

Posts: 488; Member since: May 10, 2018

$110 a phone? If that's true, do the math. Even, if it's only from one model, that's not to shabby. Appears to me that the iPhone X helped pay the settlement. A loss is a loss, but Apple helped pay out.

20. kiko007

Posts: 7513; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Those two things are as unrelated as me and Thomas Edison. I get the sentiment of not wanting to lose, but this is an idiotic stance to take. Apple isn’t losing anything here... they literally gain something. Likewise with components: gaining something by paying. Do you lose money every time you pay for Starbucks? No... you’re getting a product in return. That’s how real life works

27. Alcyone

Posts: 488; Member since: May 10, 2018

Good point. I go back to my last Starbucks coffee from October on a daily basis. I also like to enjoy my cookie while I'm at it. Material goods and perishable items are in two different categories. Ones meant to last more then one use, the other is meant (usually) for one time (consumption). You can try to drink a phone, hell I wish you luck on that one. Personally, I know it won't turn out well. Bottom line, Samsung is (and will) continue to make revenue off Apple. My iPhone 5s battery went out; not worth my time to do apples bs battery change.

30. Alcyone

Posts: 488; Member since: May 10, 2018

And my idiotic straight answer. Yes, I do lose money at starbucks. That $4.50 columbian blend is a tad over priced. A columbian blend (most likely from the same fields) at circle k is no more than $2.00. 2 cups at that price and I still have .50 cents left. Logical, yet not practical thinking to some I see.

23. Aircrackng

Posts: 56; Member since: Jan 09, 2015

Probably just paying in the pennies to reel in the big bucks. Who cares if you lose the little battles when your probably going to be making all of Apples upcoming processors the moneys just too damn good.

29. Alcyone

Posts: 488; Member since: May 10, 2018

When Apple can produce their own required components, someone else will always bank off them. Not always samsung, but someone will. Think more money was made selling to apple then what was settled in court. Simple business 101.

24. domfonusr

Posts: 1087; Member since: Jan 17, 2014

A distinct win for Apple... Samsung and Apple are now hopelessly entangled. Apple makes the big profits, Samsung gets Apple's table scraps, and everybody else gets little crumbs or nothing (except for the Chinese OEM's which can actually thrive solely by producing products that have razor-thin margins). Now, the next phase has to be for Apple to go after LG, Motorola, Kyocera, HTC, and Google (and all their friends, though not Sony since Apple pointed to Sony during the Samsung trials as having a product that did not infringe on the iPhone, and not Nokia since Apple and Nokia already settled years ago... though I suppose anything is possible now that Apple has extracted an undisclosed sum from Samsung), and I think they would like to go after Xiaomi, Huawei, ZTE, and so on, but those companies will probably be sheltered and protected from Apple by the Chinese government and international trade organizations. The battle is really over for the most part now, although I would watch to see if China invests more in Apple and its suppliers and contractors in spite of CFIUS oversight...

26. Vokilam

Posts: 1278; Member since: Mar 15, 2018

Your comment is a bit run-on, but fun read nevertheless.

35. shm224

Posts: 295; Member since: Mar 19, 2015

It was an impossible battle for Samsung -- especially when POTUS comes out in support of a domestic company, Apple and reverses Samsung's win. So why blame the Chinese gov't for being unfair? Apple's absurd patents got pretty much destroyed elsewhere around the globe, and it was clear that only with the support of the US gov't, Apple emerged as a winner. China can and does whatever it wants to promote their own companies, just like the US did with theirs. Samsung, the copycat, will never have the glory (sales/profit) it enjoyed a few years back. It might as well get out of the smartphone business altogether.

39. domfonusr

Posts: 1087; Member since: Jan 17, 2014

Samsung is in second place behind Apple, and Huawei will not likely enjoy the profits that Samsung does despite being in the #3 position for global marketshare. Huawei operates on thinner margins than Samsung, for sure. The US is where Huawei needs to be able to compete in order to make higher margins, and you are right about the US government protecting itself and its own by keeping Huawei and others from China out. The Chinese have, by now, clearly already been able to reverse engineer most anything that the US makes. Heck, China makes most of everything that Americans buy now. The American companies that base their production in China, like Apple, have already had to share technology with China and Chinese companies in order to access the cheap labor market there. I don't think they teach American kids nowadays in school about the old system of mercantilism... England imported all the raw materials from its colonies, and then shipped out manufactured goods for a huge profit (trade imbalance) to the very same colonies... America stopped being a place where we produced a whole lot of anything, and so now we are a service-driven economy, while we pay out so that other countries, like China among others, can do all of our manufacturing for us with very low labor costs. Trump only has it half-right: reverse-mercantilism is a hallmark of the US trade now, but the US economy provides services to other nations that others can barely afford. The information economy is largely in American hands because of Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and others that are responsible for the most lucrative businesses on the planet. The laws in the US, and the protections of the Constitution, make America an (perhaps THE) ideal place to grow a business from scratch in our modern times. As for Samsung... they are not doing too bad, even though they can't truly compete with Apple. They have the lawsuit behind them now, and now they can go on being #2 in the mobile phone industry, and making decent money (I still think their products are overpriced, not quite as bad as Apple) while they leverage everything they've got to compete in the Android space. I don't think they'll be quitting any time soon. My fear is that the little guys... the ones who barely eek out a living on Android, like Motorola, LG, BLU, Nokia, BlackBerry, and Sony, etc... will start disappearing in droves. HTC is undoubtedly the next one that will go under if they can't get their latest phones to fly right. I worry about Kyocera as well, among others. Also ZTE, with the latest fiasco... I worry about the loss of diversity in the Android space, but the market pressures there are huge. It was inevitable.

31. Alcyone

Posts: 488; Member since: May 10, 2018

My wife's lg g pro is still on the original battery and can almost last as long as it did 5 yrs ago. Apple does run the table, and samsung is at the right side. Lg is sitting at the kiddies table. That quality from 2013 isn't there for LG and others. If it were, it'd be a different field. Her s7 is 2 yrs and still going; so is my avant, yet my 5s after 3 yrs was not worth my time. So I literally put it in the trash, no less to me. My 19 yr old Motorola StarTac still holds up, give me those days before apple and samsung.

34. japkoslav

Posts: 1517; Member since: Feb 19, 2017

Glad it's over, BUT details, details ... are what I would like to get. Well, all we can do is to speculate.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.