Yale professor's analysis puts value of Apple's patents at $38.4 million, not $2.2 billion

Yale professor's analysis puts value of Apple's patents at $38.4 million, not $2.2 billion
If yesterday was Monday, it means that we should have the latest information from Judge Lucy Koh's courtroom. Apple, as you know, has already wrapped its case, and we are on the second week of Samsung's defense against Apple's claim that Samsung owes it $2.2 billion for illegally infringing on its patents. So far, Sammy has presented witnesses that claim that it was a shift in marketing that led to Samsung's sudden popularity in the smartphone market, not because it copied the iPhone. Google engineers have testified that it was already developing all of these inventions patented by Apple. And as the trial adjourned for the weekend, Samsung experts explained that Apple's patented features have nothing to do with a consumer's decision to buy a particular phone. As a result, these experts said that Apple's patents are not as valuable as Apple thinks that they are.

On Monday, Samsung called Yale economics and finance professor Judith Chevalier to the stand. Her testimony was that Apple's patents are worth no more than 35 cents per device. That works out to a figure of $38.4 million owed to Apple, according to her analysis, not the $2.2 billion that Apple is suing for. She also failed to include any lost profits in her calculations, saying that Apple did not lose 1 cent of business due to Samsung's alleged use of Apple patents.

On cross-examination, Apple attorney Bill Lee tried to impeach the quality of the professor's report, questioning the evaluations from iPhone customers. Lee pointed out one customer review from an iPhone buyer who claimed that he was shot by "Seeri." Chevalier says that the five Apple patents that are at issue in the case, had nothing to do with the actual decision by consumers to buy a particular phone.

After the professor finished her testimony, Samsung rested its defense. It will now start on Tuesday with its cross-claim against Apple. Samsung claims that Apple infringed on a pair of Samsung patents and is seeking about $7 million from its rival. Closing arguments are expected to take place April 28th.

source: CNET



1. maherk

Posts: 6953; Member since: Feb 10, 2012

No matter how strong Samsung's defense is, it won't matter that much, the judge showed in the previous trials how biased she can be towards the American Apple, and at the end kf this case Apple will be warranted another crappy win.

4. mayur007

Posts: 593; Member since: Apr 10, 2012

they wont win , if this happens america's justice will be ruined .. all companies will loose faith ... i want samsung to get justice bcoz its not a big crime . even though Samsung should pay few millions but apple should be punished as well for wasting laws time

5. maherk

Posts: 6953; Member since: Feb 10, 2012

will be ruined? lol well then, flash news, it is tarnished not just ruined.

7. Tizen007

Posts: 575; Member since: Jan 07, 2014

It's been a long time since America has seen its demise in their justice system. All because of something all of us commenting here enjoy; capitalism.

8. mayur007

Posts: 593; Member since: Apr 10, 2012

what i feel is apple is a biggest spot in the tech world

9. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

But if Sammy were to win (even if they were ordered to pay $34 million to Apple, that would be a win for Sammy), then all would be well and equilibrium would be restored to the competition between Apple and Sammy? Net-net, I think that Sammy's attorneys learned a lesson in the last go-around that they are applying in this case. Time to attack the economic justification that Apple is using to value its patents.

21. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

technically, the system was ruined after the Civil War with the misuse of some of the newer Constitutional amendments and in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act...

6. Tizen007

Posts: 575; Member since: Jan 07, 2014

This is stupid Although we tech fans here mock each other for being fanboys of a company we all know that they are just simply multinational corporations whose priority is to maximize their profits whatever it takes. It's dumb for anyone to be biased to any of those greedy, unethical powers.

28. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Actually, no. The pricing for future handsets is going to be influenced by this case, it matters to the consumer how this trial ends. Best case for the consumer is the fees paid by Samsung is minimal, not the 2+ billion that Apple is asking.

12. max9777

Posts: 78; Member since: Dec 11, 2011

Judge Koh already announced that the verdict will be solely dependent on the jury, and not her decision. So the only question remains if the jury listening to whats going on.

13. deewinc

Posts: 455; Member since: Feb 21, 2013

I think they have heard $38 billion and not million =D

20. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

the justice system already died. Recently, the Supreme Court removed campaign spending limits..just look at who is on the Supreme Court bench will tell you that money is all that matters...

2. mayur007

Posts: 593; Member since: Apr 10, 2012

Judith Chevalier is right. apple(greedy) is overestimating. they think they are protecting .. no its not , they are trying to steal money in law way.. they are asking dollar for a penny. apple says consumer buys because of there feature what a Idiot thing .. i buy devices for not just for features for after sales service as well , if for features why windows phone(it is the most immature os right now) 8 is selling well its also about value for money device as well ,, apple is just a egoistic patent troll company .. Samsung , sony are way ahead of apple in providing value for money phones .. as far as doing business , aim is for more profit i agree but.. apple is not an innovator Samsung is and they are proving they are not just innovating and they are earning as well almost to the level of apple - thats y apple is jealous - bcoz they want to have monopoly even in earnings.. apple sell are good in america only may be in china and in the remaining world they are just overpriced crap

3. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

This trial is just another example for the world to see how hypocrisy prevail in America.

10. BCMWorld

Posts: 59; Member since: Mar 24, 2014

Pathetic Apple...

11. dontneedtoknow

Posts: 158; Member since: Feb 17, 2014

2.2 billion is a lot but 34 million is way less. I'm not trying to pick a side but both numbers are ridiculously opposite ends!

14. deewinc

Posts: 455; Member since: Feb 21, 2013

Not ridiculous, if Apple can prove that each device Samsung sold is worth the $30+ on patent infringement, then let them have it. Apple simply implies that their iPhone is worth $5000 in patents or something.

31. Ashoaib

Posts: 3298; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Its not less, apple should be paid 1cent for each patent... that is the actual worth of these silly patents... specially slide to unlock is a pathetic patent, seems like some monkey in a Uspto has granted this patent... "sorry for disrespecting monkeys by calling someone in uspto by their genre"

15. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

"She also failed to include any lost profits in her calculations, saying that Apple did not lose 1 cent of business due to Samsung's alleged use of Apple patents." With each iPhone outselling the last one...setting sales records every year...iPads too.... I agree. How much more sales did Apple expect if Samsung wasnt in the picture? Greedy much Apple? Are they assuming no other Android OEM would have sold as much as Samsung if Samsung wasnt selling phones? Greedy is greedy. For all the Apple, iPhone fans that like to go on about iPhone sales, Apple profits....I have yet to see a compelling reason why Apple isnt considered greedy with all the sales records they have with iDevices.... I have yet to see any lawsuits from Android OEMs over this type of thing....and quite a few borrow ideas from each other. Only Motorola hinted at it right before the Google purchase because they were in financial trouble.

29. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Agreed, it's hard to play the victim when you're making the biggest profits in mobile. Strange how perception clouds people's judgment though, if Apple was an oil company, people would be outraged at their pricing scheme. Because they are a tech company, iFans seem to be okay with overpriced hardware. smh

16. Slammer

Posts: 1515; Member since: Jun 03, 2010

If Samsung loses at the smaller prevailing damages, maybe Samsung should charge Apple an extra 35 cents per component that Apple incorporates into its devices. John B.

17. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

There you go....just charge Apple more. I like it. Wonder how will that play out....because for Apple...as prestigious as they claim to be or are perceived to be....they keep using this low down, copy cat rival Samsung for manufacturing components of their products. Just seen an article on here that says Samsung or LG will be building some component of a future Apple product. I'm sorry....but if I felt a rival....who helps build my products...is basically stealing from me.....I wouldn't wanna do business with them. But thats just me...

18. cheetah2k

Posts: 2271; Member since: Jan 16, 2011

Maybe Apple already feels like they were charged 35 cents too much for components and by winning 2.2Bn that would basically nullify the price in parts they've purchased from Samsung over the last 3 years Bit greedy much? Money for nothing and chips for free???? Fk you Apple

19. Slammer

Posts: 1515; Member since: Jun 03, 2010

Apple is claiming patent infringements. Granted that it has nothing to do with hardware made by Samsung, but rather software. However, Apple claiming damages seems like a double edged sword. Apple has relied on other manucacturers to build its devices(most notably Samsung). This theoretically, puts Apple in a position of having software but no place to put it. It needs the manufacturers. Samsung has equal patents on the products it is selling to Apple. I feel Samsung should have the right to increase the price of its components to compensate for expenditurers just like every other business in every industry does. Inflation. Apple can then increase the cost of its devices to compensate for its expenditurers. That is why all this litigation only hurts the consumers in the long run. John B.

23. mrblah

Posts: 577; Member since: Jan 22, 2013

It all started when Apple was the only company to figure out the multi-touch dilemma, then it was immediately ripped off like wild fire among other things, there has to be justice!

24. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010


22. mrblah

Posts: 577; Member since: Jan 22, 2013

Should of went to Harvard.

25. jove39

Posts: 2147; Member since: Oct 18, 2011


26. express77 unregistered

Who the hell bought iphone/ipad for 'slide to unlock'? I like swipe to unlock more. Apple is extremely overcharging and dont deserve more than above amount( maybe 5-6 millions more as fines). Patent law should be improved and properly 'educated' and non biased judge should be appointed.

30. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

I can tell you one of the biggest reasons why I switched from Win Mo to Android. Free GPS, navigation. The others were capacitive screen ( which most probably dont know what capacitive is), lots of free apps, physical keyboard. Because the touch screen experience was so bad on my Omnia 1 I thought I needed the keyboard. Turns out I just needed a better screen. Those to me is a hell of alot more important, noticeable than slide to unlock. I cannot tell you many hours I tried to get free GPS on my Samsung Omnia 1. I never got it, gave up...it involved too much hacking, modding at that time. When I found out Android had free GPS and navigation.....I jumped on the Droid 1...and havent looked back since.

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.