Jury: Samsung infringed on at least one Apple patent; Apple awarded $119.6 million

Jury: Samsung infringed on at least one Apple patent; Apple awarded $119.6 million
A jury in the second Federal patent trial between Apple and Samsung, concluded that the latter did infringe on at least one Apple patent. But unlike the verdict in the first case, which ended up with Apple awarded nearly $930 million following a second jury trial related to the damages awarded, the jury on Friday concluded that Samsung must pay Apple the much smaller figure of $119.6 million. Most experts had expected a higher damages total considering that the devices involved in this case were more current than the ones involved in the first trial.

The jury concluded that Samsung infringed on Apple's '647 data tapping patent, which deals with saving data on your device, and then calling it up and using it later. The jury also ruled that Samsung did not infringe on the '959 patent or '414 patent. The latter deals with syncing data. The infamous '721 "slide-to-unlock" patent, was found to have been infringed on by some Samsung devices, like the Samsung GALAXY Nexus. The jury also computed the damages that Samsung owed for infringing on Apple's '172 Autocorrect patent. Judge Lucy Koh had already ruled that Samsung had infringed on that patent and the jury only was asked to decided the amount of the damages.


The jury awarded Samsung  $158,400, ruling that Apple infringed on Samsung's '449 patent related to Apple's FaceTime video chat application.


Despite the ruling, this could end up being considered a victory for Samsung with the much smaller amount of the verdict. While the jurymight have accepted Apple's premise that Samsung had infringed on some of its patents, the jury clearly did not agree with Apple as to the value of the patents infringed on.

source: CNET

FEATURED VIDEO

81 Comments

1. Sauce unregistered

Just in: After several hours of deliberation, the jury has finally come to an agreement and found that Samsung has infringed on Apple’s patents… More to come (source: 9to5)

2. grahaman27

Posts: 364; Member since: Apr 05, 2013

9to5 what? It makes a difference!

11. Sauce unregistered

There is 9to5google, 9to5mac, 9to5forums, 9to5toys I said 9to5 because thats what my RSS client pushes.

25. PAPINYC

Posts: 2315; Member since: Jul 30, 2011

You forgot Dolly Parton's 9to5, which is probably more appropriate given this travesty of justice or iNjustice!! Samsung shouldn't pay them a penny. Apple should be grateful to Samsung because if it were not for Samsung you guys would still be on iPhone 3GSX.

39. Arte-8800

Posts: 4562; Member since: Mar 13, 2014

And still be using outdated outdated screen and specs iJustice is a must

72. Sauce unregistered

By the way (http://9to5google.com/2014/05/02/verdict-reached-​in-apple-v-samsung-patent-trial-with-mixed-results​-apple-awarded-119-6-million-in-damages/) I believe it says, "..//9to5GOOGLE.com…" Does it make a difference now? LMAO

8. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Thanks for the tip...this lil nuggest was posted at 9to5mac: Apple was found guilty in the case of Samsung patent ’239, which deals with streaming video during FaceTime calls. The court also ruled that Apple had infringed on some of Samsung’s property and awarded the Korean company $158,400 in damages. So....seems Samsung can use some of the money from this to pay for what they owe... Overall so far...Samsung found guilty on 2....mixed results on 1...not guilty on other 2.. Apple found guilty on 1, not guilty on another... Let the fanboys wars begin!!!!

19. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

I'm confused about how apple can "infringe" on a patent and only have to pay 160k, versus 119million. I mean FT is one of apples signature apps. So it seems like the valuation would be much higher there vs. sammy.

62. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Yea...its crazy...I know.

76. StanleyG88

Posts: 240; Member since: Mar 15, 2012

Because the Judge is in Apple's pocket. Also, how can Samsung be liable for Apple's patent on the SS Gal Nexus when it is a 100% Android device. Samsung did not supply any SW for it.

57. Ashoaib

Posts: 3282; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Apple's patents are expensive 119 million and samsung only 158400.... so only apple's patents are worthy, other company's patents are not worthy... still its a small win for samsung bcoz its proved that apple copy too

58. Ashoaib

Posts: 3282; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Title of this post is missleading... it should be"Apple Also Found Infringing Samsung's Patents"

3. Alan01

Posts: 616; Member since: Mar 21, 2012

It's not true...verdict has yet to be released Alan F.

4. brrunopt

Posts: 742; Member since: Aug 15, 2013

let me guess; they will decide in favor of apple ...

5. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Title says Samsung infringes on at least 1 patent.... If after all this and its only for 1 patent....this was almost an absolute waste of time. And should be alot less than 2.2 billion..... Cant wait for further details.

6. gamalielct

Posts: 2; Member since: Dec 11, 2013

i really hope samsung finally wins... that will make apple fanboys cry :D CANT WAIT!!!!!

27. The-Sailor-Man

Posts: 1095; Member since: Mar 25, 2014

Agree Samsung is not happy for that. Even $1 paid for such a BS trial, is offending. Even if Google pay it, it's a stain on Samsung, not on Google(US). That's what Apple want. They know that trey will lose in the tech batle, so they try to bite Samsung's honor(just to keep the iZombies united, and not to run away).

40. Arte-8800

Posts: 4562; Member since: Mar 13, 2014

Lmfao iZombies.

7. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Ok....title update says Apple has been awarded...119 million.... Wow...thats a wee bit less than 2.2 billion....lol. I cant wait to find out what this one patent was...

9. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Ok....read my other reply....seen more info about the ruling after posting this....

13. Sauce unregistered

"The first verdict read was for patent 5,946,647, Apple’s “data detectors” that transform typed text such as addresses into actionable links. Samsung was found guilty of infriging on this patent in all devices listed in the suit." "The next patent in question was number 8,074,172, which deals with how autocorrect suggests words. Here the jury found Samsung guilty of infringing Apple’s intellectual property." "In the case of patent 8,046,721, a gesture-based unlock screen (“slide to unlock”), the jury returned mixed results. Samsung was found to infringe on some of its devices, but not all of them." _________________ "The court also ruled that Apple had infringed on some of Samsung’s property and awarded the Korean company $158,400 in damages."

28. androiphone20

Posts: 1654; Member since: Jul 10, 2013

ReCode says the amount can be increased from $120m since n thee infringement was 'wilful'

67. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

I hope thats the same case for what Apple owes too. Face Time feature vs every patent Apple was suing over....The amounts really should be reversed.

10. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

With the '721 patent, some Samsung devices, like the Samsung GALAXY Nexus were found to have infringed on it. Ok.....that was stock Android....... Which reminds me....I wonder if this is one of the patents Google will cover the loss on.

68. deathgod

Posts: 122; Member since: Nov 23, 2011

As a current Galaxy Nexus owner this is Total BS!! Did any of the jurors even use this phone to come to that conclusion!?

12. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

FCK YOU APPLE. FCK YOU JUDGE KOH/JURIES.

14. jellmoo

Posts: 2588; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

Um... Is that really necessary? A jury reached a decision after weighing the evidence, and the monetary award is *way* less than Apple was seeking. I can't for the life of me understand your reaction.

18. The-Sailor-Man

Posts: 1095; Member since: Mar 25, 2014

Evidence?? What "evidence"? BS patents that can be patented only in US and only by Apple. And existing in the stock Android?(Google is US company- so no problem there) Come on. What Samsung is to be blamed, or punished? Oooh wait...I get it...they smash Apple litle by little.

23. jellmoo

Posts: 2588; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

Again, there is a lot of opinion being flung around about what is or is not a valid patent. I happen to agree that the patent system in the US is ridiculously broken. But the jury is limited by patent law. They made their decision based on it to the best of their abilities. Whether you or I agree with the decision is moot. Insulting the jury for having done their job, and odds are one they never wanted is completely unnecessary.

30. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

I highly doubt they could find enough intelligent people to sit on a jury, nowadays..lol

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 https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.