Samsung: Apple's 'icon layout' patent isn't worth $539 million, cue the retrial

Samsung: Apple's 'icon layout' patent isn't worth $539 million, cue the retrial
Samsung isn't amused by the final court verdict that it has to fork over $539 million to Apple in the endgame of the patent infringement saga that has been going on for years now. Its lawyers have apparently filed a post-trial motion demanding that the case is re-judged, with the following counter-claim:

Samsung's premise is that Apple's icons layout patent applies only to the interface and the screen, not the entire phone, so it shouldn't be asked to pay damages for the whole of handsets it shipped with such UI arrangements, just the relevant part. Apple's case rests on exhibits like the one you see above, from the Relative Evaluation Report submitted to the court then, arguing that Samsung changed both its hardware and software design significantly after the OG iPhone was introduced.

In addition, Samsung asks that Apple returns to it $145 million that it paid in 2012 over a touchscreen patent, with interest, as the patent in question seems to have been invalidated by the United States Patent and Trademark Office already. A jump from $539 million to $28 million seems like a long stretch, but whatever Samsung manages to shave off the top end in a potential retrial, will be a welcome reduction anyway.

source: Law360 via SamMobile



1. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

Lol, is that the only patent left from the original trial now?

2. Back_from_beyond

Posts: 1485; Member since: Sep 04, 2015

A few were pulled for re-evaluation, at least one invalidated since. I think only about 6 patents were actually involved. For at least one Apple patent Samsung created the same function through a completely different method, which is perfectly well allowed and still had to pay for it despite they didn't violate any rules or regulations by doing so.

3. j2001m

Posts: 3061; Member since: Apr 28, 2014

The only problem with the above images are, that the before is them just using Nokia os, why the after is them using android, as the os looked nothing like Nokia then it was going to change big time, hahaha I.e. most of the closer changes are from Android and then They just changed css

6. yalokiy

Posts: 1124; Member since: Aug 01, 2016

Are you blind not to see the windows logo? All those smartphones on the left were running Windows Mobile OS.

4. j2001m

Posts: 3061; Member since: Apr 28, 2014

Please note it was google that copied Apple as we only have to look at what android looked like before iPhone and it looked more like Nokia software, than it did Apple software

13. blingblingthing

Posts: 986; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

Android copied Apple? Are you serious? A grid of icons can't be something that ANY serious phone person attributes to APPLE. Even old non-color Nokias had the option to change the single icon at a time menu to a group of icons at the time. Even old Sony Ericsson's had this prior to Apple. Check BlackBerry, Palm, Nokia and Symbian who are all prior to Apple.

5. piyath

Posts: 2445; Member since: Mar 23, 2012

Why isn't this ending???? Why US justice system is so lame and pathetic???? Why they cannot give a proper judgment and stand by that???? This is not democracy, this is insanity. This is how people can bribe the system and get away with things so easily like Hillary Clinton did. This is so damn shameful.

7. L0n3n1nja

Posts: 1603; Member since: Jul 12, 2016

Entire lawsuit is BS, Apple basically sued Samsung over what Google created. Apple should of went after Google in the first place.

9. whatev

Posts: 2444; Member since: Oct 28, 2015

Your grammar is lit

11. tedkord

Posts: 17511; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

In this instance, they went after Samsung for what had been on PCs for decades: a grid of icons. That's the problem with the US patent system, and it's what Apple under Steve Jobs relied on to stifle competition.

10. tedkord

Posts: 17511; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

This isn't ending because there hasn't been a proper judgement, yet. Oh, never mind. You're a Trumper. I won't bother wasting logic or facts on you.

8. LikeMyself

Posts: 631; Member since: Sep 23, 2013

Icons really? Pathetic jury & case. They don't even look similar. The status bar is different. That's a good enough difference for me

12. apple-rulz

Posts: 2198; Member since: Dec 27, 2016

“Proper judgment”. I’ll translate-a judgment that is beneficial for Samsung and is detrimental for Apple. People can cry, whine, gnash their teeth, whatever, but the bottom line is Samsung themselves admitted to copying the original iPhone as a template for their own devices.

16. tedkord

Posts: 17511; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Proper as in the grid of icons was established as a standard on PCs for decades prior. And, no, Samsung did not admit to copying.

14. Mr.Pussy

Posts: 348; Member since: Feb 16, 2017

Wow! They got sued for that look?lol. What about other companies. What about all the Chinese companies that been copying over 90% of the iPhone looks for years and what's Apple going to do about it? Did Apple really worry that Samsung is the only company that can keep up with them? Maybe that's it. Steve Jobs knew it along before he passed away. I am sure Apple/Stevy or someone been inside Samsung when they start making business with Samsung and saw all their technologies and got worry. So picking on Samsung is a way to do this. Wow!

15. darkkjedii

Posts: 31763; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Samsung, just pay the money already. You got caught with your hand in the cookie jar, you copied.

17. chebner

Posts: 249; Member since: Oct 17, 2011

Just wondering... how much has Samsung paid in legal fees for all of this? The lawyers gotta be laughing all the way to the bank.

19. tedkord

Posts: 17511; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

A comparison to the competition, which every company does. Next?

20. apple-rulz

Posts: 2198; Member since: Dec 27, 2016

Ted you’re reaching; that document clearly lays the groundwork for Samsung to use the iPhone as a template going forward. A little thing called a trial has found Samsung liable. I realize Apple in some way has hurt you, and you want Apple to get the comeuppance they so richly deserve, but sorry, this ain’t it.

21. shihte

Posts: 61; Member since: Sep 02, 2013

Samsung f700 and f520 same old as first iphone and very similar Samsung could not copy

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.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless