Apple and Samsung square off in court for day 3 of trial on damages issue

Apple and Samsung square off in court for day 3 of trial on damages issue
Apple and Samsung faced off in court as the damages trial continued on Thursday. You might remember that this past March, Judge Koh ruled that the jury mistakenly presented Apple with just one damage award on certain Samsung devices, even when the jury voted that these specific models infringed on more than one patent. As a result, Koh vacated $450 million in damages and ordered a new trial on those devices only. Apple is seeking a payment of about $380 million while Samsung says that the correct figure should be $52 million.

During Thursday's court session. Apple's Senior VP of worldwide marketing, Phil Schiller, took to the stand to discuss how the Apple iPhone turned into a 'bet-the-company' product. Ironically, work on the iPad pre-dated initial development of Apple's iconic smartphone. While 100 people originally worked on the handset, now "almost everyone" at Apple does, according to Schiller.

Most of the day's testimony came from Julie Davis, an expert accountant hired by Apple whose job is to determine how much Samsung owes Apple for infringing on its patents. Davis said that Apple lost sales because of the patent infringement, and even if it hadn't, Samsung should pay $287 million. Another expert witness, MIT Professor John Hauser, testified that in a $199 smartphone, Apple has three patents that people would pay $100 additional to have on a phone. One is the bounce back feature at the bottom of a page that is over-scrolled.

Apple bases its $380 million demand on $114 million in profits it lost due to the infringement, Samsung's profits of $231 million and licensing fees of $35 million. Apple says that had Samsung not sold infringing models, it would have sold 360,000 more iPhones. Samsung's position is that Apple should not receive damages for lost profits, but should receive $52.7 million for Samsung's sales and $28,452 for royalties. That figure is low because Samsung says that the patents had limitations. Among the devices involved in the damages trial, the original jury ruled that the Samsung Galaxy Prevail was responsible for $57.9 million in damages. Koh said that this showed how mistaken the jury was since the phone was found to have infringed on utility patents, not design patents.

Thursday's court session was day three of the current damages trial. Jury selection took place on Tuesday and the trial is expected to last 6 days before it goes to the 6 women and 2 men on the jury, for deliberations. Besides this legal battle, a whole new patent trial between the two rivals takes place in March, Judge Koh asked both sides to hold settlement talks and submit a proposal on January 8th.

source: CNET



1. DaHarder

Posts: 177; Member since: Oct 10, 2009

Oi Vey! End This Nonsense Already... and reform the patent system immediately thereafter so as to thwart any further Apple-esque patent trolling in the future.

14. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

also stop posting PATENTS news too. getting sick of this B.S. already

2. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

No comment is all I can say.. No comment.

7. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Does US government make money from this form of lawsuits?

16. techaman unregistered

i think so at this point lol

3. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

"Another expert witness, MIT Professor John Hauser, testified that in a $199 smartphone, Apple has three patents that people would pay $100 additional to have on a phone. One is the bounce back feature at the bottom of a page that is over-scrolled." $100 additional? What the flying f--k is this guy smoking?

12. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

He HAS to be on Apple's payroll. Or they shouldnt let fanboys be witnesses or even on the jury. Who in the hell would pay $100 extra for bounce back. How many ppl even pays attention to it enough to even care or notice? EVen if he means $100 spit between the 3 patents....$33 for bounce back? Come to Android....and you can have it for free from some launchers on the Play Store. Which boggles the mind....they wanna sue for that feature...and yet dont go after developers on the Play Store.

17. rusticguy

Posts: 2828; Member since: Aug 11, 2012

This guy is an INSULT to MIT.

4. mr.techdude

Posts: 571; Member since: Nov 19, 2012

Get a room u 2

5. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

"Apple says that had Samsung not sold infringing models, it would have sold 360,000 more iPhones." How can anyone say that with any certainty. Maybe when the purchase was made, it was between the Samsung phone and a phone by HTC, or Motorola, or even a Windows Phone. In Carrier's brick and mortar stores, I've seen a number of people who went in planning to buy a certain phone, and end up with something completely different because of handling the phones or salesmen's recommendations. That happened with me. In 2010 I was set on picking up a BB Storm 2, handled it and wasn't impressed. I then went looking at a WinMo phone, and a salesman showed me an Android phone. A few months later I had a Droid Incredible. So for them to say with any certainty that those lost sales would have bought an iPhone is not realistic. There is no way they could know that for sure, and is their guess. The only way they could know for sure is if Apple and Samsung were the only manufacturers in business. I also agree with the other commenter, who would pay $100 extra (or even a third of that since there were three patents) for the over-scroll bounce back feature? There are people who are up in arms over paying $100 more for more on board storage or a larger battery, but they'll gladly fork over that for what is essentially an animation? OK...

6. nothingmuch

Posts: 201; Member since: May 03, 2013

Im tired of this BS from Apple! Who in there right mind knew of any of these piddly features when iphone came out, not like it was pointed out in commercials or ads and certainty NOT the f*****g reason to definitely buy an iphone, most people then were coming from Razor and other flip phones and the biggest drawback iphone had was unable to bluetooth to non iphones, store files, and save text of what those flips had and Galaxy could DO ALL OF IT and it was a smartphone too... to me thats the biggest reason iphone lost sales not some stupid bounce back! Its the reason I dropped using iphone after 2mo of regrettably owning one and went android and aint looked back since!

8. D.Aceveda

Posts: 432; Member since: Jun 30, 2012

Apple, f**k off. You to Phil. You too.

9. GeekMovement unregistered

Blah blah blah and some more blah blah blah. It's going to be really quiet after the Apple vs Samsung war ends. (if it ever does)

10. ianbbaa

Posts: 332; Member since: Mar 20, 2013

iPhone is a st***d product which is way overpriced, has its own "goods" but the price for it is ridiculous high...i would feel bad if even homeless guy in US uses an iPhone a i would have one as well. Everybody in streets in US, UK has an iPhone - iPhone is not anymore a good product - it is just a thing of how you cheat yourself to be a rich and better person. Apple just made Hitlerious campaign to fool people around the world and make huge succes to fool those buyers. These childish steps from Apple how they cry on courts are just another evidence how low-minded this company is. Ideas are gone, where to make another money? Just sue everybodys pant off. Go people, buy WP8 devices, or even MOTO X which is made in US and gives your US people a job. Even NEXUS is cheap and good one. I cant stop to laugh - bounce effect feature etc....haha - +100US for those features.

11. Ashoaib

Posts: 3297; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Now iPresident Obama will ever vito this? never... Apple is a crying baby, the cancer of technology world...

13. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Sorry, I wouldn't pay an extra $100 on a phone for three features. Not really sure where Apple dug up this guy but I'm sure most people would agree that bounce back and similar features shouldn't cost people an extra $100.

15. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

The question becomes, what are the other two patents? Screen gestures perhaps? How many would like to use android solely like the WinCE mobile devices?

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.