After Friday’s devastating legal loss for Samsung where Apple practically took a landslide victory, with infringements ruled true regarding the “trade dress,” or the visual appearance of products, Samsung has released an internal memo to help keep moral up.
Samsung’s punch line is at the end, where the company makes it clear that it is focusing on innovation, while some other company relies on litigation.
The Korean phone maker also doesn’t forget to stress that it tried to negotiate a deal with Apple instead of resolving the issue in court, but Cupertino denied.
Most importantly, the judge’s final ruling is yet to be announced and we’re sure Samsung will appeal everything it can. Moreover, the Koreans are also puzzled by the jurors’ decision after courts in the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany and Korea ruled the complete opposite to the verdict issued by the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
Here's Samsung's full internal memo:
We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers. However, Apple pressed on with a lawsuit, and we have had little choice but to counter-sue, so that we can protect our company.
Certainly, we are very disappointed by the verdict at the US District Court for the Northern District of California (NDCA), and it is regrettable that the verdict has caused concern amongst our employees, as well as our loyal customers.
However, the judge’s final ruling remains, along with a number of other procedures. We will continue to do our utmost until our arguments have been accepted.
The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple’s designs. These courts also recognized our arguments concerning our standards patents.
History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.
We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritize innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt.