Jury awards Apple another $290 million in Samsung patent infringement retrial

Daniel Bader

November 22, 2013 12:04pm

Apple is attempting to extract all the water it can from the Samsung stone, and a jury in a retrial of last year’s patent infringement case appears to agree.

Samsung must pay Apple another $290 million, on top of the $639 million that was ultimately awarded during last year’s trial. Though the initial verdict was settled at over $1 billion, the federal judge, Lucy Koh, who also presided over the retrial, determined that $400 million was improperly calculated. Samsung’s lawyers also accused members of the initial jury of lacking impartiality, as one of the jurors owned Apple stock and others read about the trial when they were supposed to be blacked out from all media.

Now that Samsung owes Apple nearly $930 million, lower than the initial verdict but still a staggering amount, you’d think Cupertino would let things be and move on. Instead, Apple is taking Samsung to trial again next year for yet another patent infringement trial, this time labeled against a more recent crop of Galaxy devices.

With no end in sight to the conflict between these two competing giants, Apple seems to be confident that Samsung continues to copy its designs and infringe on its many patents. Whether we’ll see an end to this via arbitrator remains to be seen, but Apple appears to want to make an example of the Korean company in the meantime.

  • Matt Z10

    More nickels must be coming…

  • Collin dubya

    ugh, apple seriously sucks, could you imagine if the iphone was still the ONLY smartphone out there??? Monopolies are not good for anyone, those of us who live in BC know this first hand with the wretched greedy CEOS and upper managment of BC FERRIES.

    • It’s Me

      When was the iPhone ever the only smartphone out there? When did they ever have anything close to a monopoly?

      Being successful by doing something different doesn’t give everyone else license to copy it.

    • Collin dubya

      It was the only one with a multi touch screen.. Either way these lawsuits are getting old and are bullwhip apple is just passed that Samsung beat them at their own game

    • It’s Me

      Fair enough. But being first allows you to patent. Samsung has more patents than any other company in the world. They love patents. They just don’t like to respect other patents.Samsung is suing Apple too.

      How has Samsung beat Apple? In unit sales? Apple was never dominant in unit sales. They still bring in more profits on their phones that Samsung in total, so what is Samsung beating them at?

    • jamaal rashid

      I do not believe Samsung is besting them in sales but like Microsoft saw its days in the 90s apple saw its days for the last 13 years. I predict they will continue to do fairly well but as the saying goes what goes up must come down. I respect apple as a company that innovates. But I do not respect the old Steve jobs ideology. “Gonna due them for everything they got”

    • jamaal rashid

      Just like Microsoft decided to copy apple back in the late 70s ? If they didn’t we would have been stuck with apples software. But now we have windows lynux iOS android osx bb10 and probably 100s of others like it. Just because someone had an idea doesn’t mean they own it. We move forward by innovating and progressing on technology we already have. I could have easily made the argument that apple copied other companies to make the iPhone . which they did BTW. But they improved on it. Just as everyone should be doing.

  • DL1119

    2 months ago, the Apple spaceship headquarters was deemed over-budget.

    This week, the project has been given the green light.

    ‘murcia

  • J-Ro

    America loves their Apple. As much as I hate to see this, I do have to give them credit for supporting their own.

    • TomsDisqusted

      You’re giving the US credit for ‘protecting’ its own in this way. You must absolutely LOVE Russia! And I guess you look down upon countries that strive to have a fair and unbiased judicial system.

    • J-Ro

      It is disgusting but they are protecting their home brand. I don’t take their legal system very serious, so for me Samsung could never win on their home soil. The only fight that would be fair (sorta) in America, would be between two American companies.

    • Paul

      Samsung is a Korean company. FYI.

    • Taehoon A Kim

      Apple doesn’t love them back. They outsourced their product line

    • J-Ro

      That is how Apple shows the other countries love. They are a company that values emerging markets.

      Such a great response, I should be Apple PR.

  • Farhan Chaudhary

    We’re losing the market to Samsung anyway, lets just sue them and get some money at least. Good going Apple! :-/

  • mwahahahaha

    YEAHHHH! SUE those suckers good !!!!!

  • Dave

    The lawyers should have weeded out the person with personal interests in Apple before the ‘trial’ began. I doubt it had to be a unanimous vote, and im not sure if 1 vote in Samsungs favour would have mattered but… It could have.

    • Jonathan Schmitt

      Definitely could have. This one individual could have convinced others to vote against Samsung. More or less, the trial was held in the US where Apple makes a huge impact. Should have been help in…Russia lol

    • Dave

      Still though it should have been up to the lawyers to have juror removed from the trial for impartiality, but since they didn’t… Although i suppose it is the jurors responsibility to remain impartial but how can you when you’re invested into this… Its a toss up i suppose.

    • J-Ro

      The American legal system is very different to any other. There is no way to beat a home player on their soil.

    • It’s Me

      Enlighten us. How is the US system significantly different from every other.

    • J-Ro

      Have you seen US court cases compared to our own?

    • It’s Me

      You said the were very different to any other. Explain that. You mean better? You mean worse? You mean more experienced in IP related cases that most other countries?

      Cite examples, explain your position.

    • J-Ro

      The lawsuit itself was a joke. How could the same case be thrown out in easy country but the US? When does a political figure with no relation to the case step in and veto one of the parties? Maybe it happens a lot but I have only see one event of that happen so far and it was in the US. They can also sue for anything and everything. It just seems like more of a business than any kind of legal system.

    • It’s Me

      It has not been thrown out in every other country. Many of the same issues have held up in the EU, in Germany, in Korea, in Japan and elsewhere. In many countries it is still on going.

      It’s a myth that Apple has lost all over the world. They’ve won some and lost some. Overall, they have done much better than Samsung. Samsung hasn’t won any meaningful victories with their lawsuits anywhere in the world.

    • J-Ro

      I’m not sure if that is true. In the EU, Apple had to make a public apology on their website to Samsung, which they purposely batched and got called out for. I don’t think they cases are still open, unless Apple is still trying to appeal. But only in the US have made 2 big wins on Samsung.

    • It’s Me

      That was only the UK. While the appeals court upheld that order, they also said it was a mistake for the original judge to have ordered the public apology to begin with.

    • J-Ro

      I guess because I haven’t heard news on them, I figured they were done with. They don’t seem to be moving the same way as this on-going cases seems to be.

    • cartfan88

      The young know it all should read up on what happened to Canada’s Loewen in the US court system then the Genius Bar graduate might better understand how a US company vs a foreigner in a US courtroom plays out.

    • Guest

      thats so true….

  • Jonathan Schmitt

    I definitely am not pleased with this verdict. The fact that the a previous member had ‘Apple’ stocks should have immediately thrown out the case.

    I am not the most informed about the trial, as I lost interest about a month in, but when you look at the Samsung phones and the iPhone, the only ACTUAL similarity is the icons grid. But that wouldn’t stand in court because clearly apple stole the Palm Design from way back in the day…Why hasn’t that ever been mentioned?

    • J-Ro

      Because the CEO of Palm never had dinner’s with the president.

    • Dave

      Although a juror may have later been suspected to be impartial it’s not grounds for a mis trial on its own. Samsung lawyers should have gotten him out on a juror cross examination

    • Ali F.

      I am currently using a HP Pre 3 and it is way better than any iPhone and when I see what happens to WebOS and how Apple is doing, I cannot but feel pissed off. Anyway, good to Apple, they know how to sell and how to steel.

    • It’s Me

      I guess Palm introduced webOS too long _after_ the iPhone came out to make a difference.

    • It’s Me

      Umm, no, it wasn’t the grid icons.The entire concept of doing a fully multi-touch UI was basically unheard of.

      What did they steal from Palm? Do you know that Apple doesn’t have an agreement with Palm to use their IP, if in fact they are? Apple pays lots of licensing fees to other companies. Why? Because that’s what you do when you want to use their IP.

  • Ali F.

    How dare Samsung copy the rectangle shape with round corners from Apple. Don’t they know that inventing rectangles costs Apple every year billions of dollars?

  • It’s Me

    Well, other than their successes in Korea, Japan, Germany and the EU, you’re right, it just the US system.

    They’ve had ups and downs all over the world. Trying to blame it in the US courts is just ignorant.

    • It’s Me

      I was saying it’s ignorant and that still stands. As I said, they have had ups and downs all over the world. They’ve had successes in Korea, Japan and the EU in addition to the US.

      Meanwhile, all you are left with is fiction (Koh is paid by Apple) and exaggeration (It was thrown out in nearly all other countries).

      I mean, if we are going with your tact of “let’s just make up facts”, let’s claim that because Koh is of Koreandescent, she is obviously trying to side with Samsung and that’s why she ordered a retrial for part of the damages. But that would be dishonest BS and I won’t stoop to your level.

      In short your position is based on lying and confusion.

      Well done.

    • sid32

      Lets not forget that where the trial takes place in the USA mattes a lot. See the great planet money podcasts on this issue.

    • It’s Me

      That’s true. If Apple just wanted to play the system, they might have gone to Texas. Instead they sued in what is considered to be the most technologically competent district because of the high density of technology related companies.

    • It’s Me

      I think you need to invest in a dictionary and look up the word “fact”.

      When you claim Koh in paid by Apple, that is not fact. At best it is ignorant, at worst it’s slander and a lie.

      When you claim it’s been throw out of nearly every other court in the world, again, you are simply lying or exaggerating.

      Go take a look at fosspatents sometime. He’s been keeping score quite well. The fact is that Apple has had wins and losses all over the world. Their record overall is not bad.

      You shouldn’t use words like “fact” if you clearly don’t know what they mean.

    • sid32

      Slander is spoken, Libel is written. Just putting that out there. Not trying to be a dick, but if you want to tell people to invest in a dictionary…

    • It’s Me

      …my bad. I should dust off my dictionary.

    • It’s Me

      “the fact that Lucy Koh has been in Apple’s back pocket for who knows how long”

      yeah, ok buddy.

    • It’s Me

      Whatelse did you mean by “the fact that Lucy Koh has been in Apple’s back pocket for who knows how long”

      Do you think she literally fits in in Cook’s back pocket?

    • It’s Me

      I think you’re dishonest.

    • It’s Me

      As little as facts and honesty apparently

    • It’s Me

      Do have have any proof Koh was influenced by Apple or in their back pocket? Do you have any proof she isn’t influenced, as being of Korean descent, to side with Samsung? Any proof she isn’t simply an unbiased judge presiding over the case?

      Yes, there were cases thrown out. You’ll notice I never denied that. In fact I said Apple has won and lost some around the world. On balance, they are ahead.

      Aside from fiction, lies and exaggeration, what have you supplied?

      It’s great that you have a hate on for Apple. That’s your choice. But don’t you feel a little dirty that you have to stoop to lying to make your case? That’s pretty strong evidence of some sort of insecurity on your part. Facts don’t help so just make them up? Seriously?

    • It’s Me

      “…it was thrown out in nearly all other countries”

      Untrue no matter how you might try. At best a dishonest exaggeration.

      “the fact that Lucy Koh has been in Apple’s back pocket for who knows how long”. Unsubstantiated, but if you have evidence, let’s hear it. You can’t prove it’s true, then you shouldn’t be throwing it out as fact. You stated it as fact, literally. I could claim you love your dogs all night, but that would be a lie, right? Unless I have proof or a reason to state that. But I don’t, so it’s a lie.

    • It’s Me

      I’m not claim that she’s crooked or not therefore no lie.

      You are making a claim you have no evidence of or reason to believe other than she disagrees with you apparently. i.e. you made it up and it’s a lie.

    • zAlbee

      Sorry, but that’s not how this works. Ever heard of the null hypothesis? The extraordinary claim is the one that must carry the burden of proof, not the other way around. If I claim that I can fly, but give no proof, and you claim that I can’t, but also give no proof (since you have never met me), does that mean that our claims are on equal footing? No.

      As much as I don’t like the verdict, there’s nothing I have seen that obviously says corruption. Stop polluting this thread with conspiracy theories.

    • Thr1ve

      He means that before Koh was a judge, she was a lawyer for the very same firm Apple uses, she’s a rookie judge who shouldn’t even be on cases this large… Also, the FACT that Koh never let Samsung bring in evidence that would prove prior art and therefore invalidate MOST of the patents used in that case, the FACT that the jury foreman told the jury to ignore Samsung’s defense and to punish them to the full extent of the law, even for devices that didn’t infringe on a single of Apple’s patents, the FACT that the jury ignored (more like didn’t even bother reading) the very specific instructions given to them, the FACT that it took them so little time to come to a verdict that it would be impossible for a jury to do it without someone pushing them in a certain direction due to all the specifics in the case… And much, MUCH more…

      Just a single one of those “issues” by the jury is grounds for jury misconduct and thus, case dismissal or at the very least, a retrial, yet, Koh did absolutely NOTHING… If that isn’t enough to at least entertain the idea that Koh is in Apple’s pocket, I don’t know what is…

    • It’s Me

      She did nothing? She invalidated almost 1/2 of the award from the jury and order a retrial. She also required Apple to remove more than half of their claims during the trial in order to lighten the load on the courts. Samsung also had every ability to push for her to be recused if they knew she had previously worked for that law firm. Similarly, they had the opportunity to have the foreman removed but they messed up. As for the foreman’s actions, it is his duty and the rest of the jury’s to discuss the matter and reach a verdict. It is natural and expected that they will try to convince each other of their view. That’s why they have deliberations.

      When she ruled NOT to ban Samsung products, the appeals court said she was in error and ordered her to reconsider. She went out of her way not to ban Samsung products and had to be forced by another court to reconsider it. When the jury ruled that Samsung’s infringement was willful, that allowed for Apple to seek triple damages. What did koh do? She overruled the damn jury preventing Apple from seeking 3x the damages award.

      Oh and just so you are clear on your “facts”, when she was a partner at McDermott Will & Emery, she represented Creative _against_ Apple. She is also Korean, which might lead some to expect would explain her unusually generous behavior towards the Korean giant (note: I don’t believe that but it makes more sense than the crap you guys dissemble).

      You guys need to reexamine your “facts” before making claims of bias or corruption.

  • Smartphone_Expert

    Its actually Samsung that comes out with the ideas and innovation first. But its Apple that gets the patent for it later on after samsung and then Apple pretends its their ideas first. What a bunch of i****s at apple.

    • It’s Me

      Do you write fiction for a living or just here?

    • jroc

      Would you mind explaining that?

      If that were the case, it would serve Samsung right and your last sentence should be “What a bunch of i****s at Samsung.”

    • It’s Me

      Samsung is now the world leader for filing patents. They have now overtaken IBM when it comes to filing patents. They file for more than any other company in the world. It is a focus for their entire company. Yet this guy thinks Apple is beating to filing patents on their IP?

      Brilliant.

    • J-Ro

      Samsung should have more patients. They have been in the mobile field longer and do a huge amount of R&D. Apple is just really good at marketing and suing.

    • It’s Me

      And be assured that anyone using their patents without an agreement or paying a licensing fee will and has been sued by Samsung.

    • J-Ro

      That is why one files patents. To protect their IP

    • It’s Me

      Exactly. So why is Apple looked at differently for doing exactly the same thing that Samsung is a leader at doing?

    • J-Ro

      Apple is the leader of suing for patents. They spend more time suing than innovating, that is why people are upset.

      At first they claimed Samsung was stealing their design but a Galaxy hasn’t looked like an iPhone since the very first model.

      What about next year when Apple makes this alleged phablet. Will they sue begin to sue everyone again?

      They just seem very annoying.

    • It’s Me

      This case mainly involved the physical design of those older devices which you acknowledged looked the same. The parts that deal with newer devices mainly revolve around IP, like the UI and UX.

    • J-Ro

      The older devices ok, but they are claiming newer. Aren’t they trying to go as far as current models? And UX is very very different. Using Touch Wiz and iOS can be day and night. If anything iOS 7 is a blatant copy of Android.

    • It’s Me

      They are trying the newer models because they still contain patented elements. This isn’t so much look and feel but actual functional implementation details that were lifted from iOS.

    • J-Ro

      That’s the thing. Nothing they are doing is new. It may be new to Apple customers but it isn’t new to the mobile industry. Their design is old and their software is even older. I don’t know how they could sue someone at the same time that they decide to put full steam into copying others.

    • It’s Me

      That’s subjective. What isn’t subjective is that the patents they are suing over go back to 2007 or earlier in some cases. That’s 6+ years. It’s old now, but it was new back then. And Samsing infringement goes back years too and continues into newer models. As long as the continue to incorporate that IP into their newer models, then then newer models infringe as much as the older model. Samsung has started to implement work arounds for some of the violations but not all. That’s why newer models are being included in the actions.

    • J-Ro

      You have a better idea than I do. What exactly is Apple suing for? Because the UI and UX in newer models is very different and they got rid of screen bounce. What else are they suing over? And how did they win?

    • It’s Me

      There are quite a number of patents still at play, including the rubber banding effect. Recently the USPTO confirmed all 20 claims of the “Steve Jobs patent” which covers many aspects of a multitouch UI/UX. Many parts of this patent have been confirmed around the world. The rubberband effect is one that partially invalidated in the EU, not because it wasn’t valid but because Apple made the mistake of publicly demoing the effect before patenting it, which in the EU allows other companies to copy it.

  • Scott

    The should have recused all Jury members that owned or had owned Apple or Samsung products. I guess that would leave a few Blackberry owners to be on the jury, but where are you going to find 12 of those? zing!

    • realitycheck

      at that point? the president of the USA had one.

  • It’s Me

    Did Samsung steal Apple IP? Let’s hear from one of Samsung’s lawyers:

    “This is a case _not where we’re disputing that the 13 phones contain some elements of Apple’s property”, that doesn’t mean Apple gets to come in here and ask for a windfall …for more than it is entitled.”

    Of course, these may be the same Samsung lawyers that when asked to determine which of two tablets was a Samsung and which was an iPad were unable to do so in court.

  • Steve Black

    Apple should add lawsuit revenue to their income statements.

    • jroc

      They would have to report it under their unusual/infrequent items on the income statement, and disclose it in the notes. So, they do have that.

    • Steve Black

      I said that as a joke, since lately it’s not as unusual/infrequent as it supposed to be.

      I’m fully aware that they have to declare that amount in their income statements

  • Unorthodox

    Who cares anymore? Samsung should just reserve certain money for Apple tricks, and continue the expansion.

  • Delphus

    If only they were as creative with their products as they are with their legal wranglings…

  • It’s Me

    A win is a win. An injunction is usually the first step in any patent lawsuit that isn’t resolved out of court. The threat of injunction and the successful winning of an injunction is used as leverage when seeking damages or other resolution. Of course winning an injunction is winning and losing one is losing.

    if you want to ignore injunctions, then Apple has also won more in the cases that have sought damages.

    And this all started when Motorola sued Apple. After that, the gloves were off and Apple only then started their lawsuits.

    Don’t live completely in a world of fantasy,

  • rtg_500

    Why cant apple concentrate on being innovative as they were when the first iphone got released, instead of suing their competition. These law suits might bring them money but it might shift peoples opinion of the company , it seems they have lawsuits coming out every other week. Looks like they are beating a dead horse with these law suits but than what else can they do when the competition has caught up. They need phones in different price points with different screen sizes and scrap the iphone 5c(cheap) idea, if only they had priced the 5c around $300 it would of been much more successful.

  • Zee

    Wasn’t the patent that these awards based on recently declared “invalid” by the U.S. patent office? This case goes on and on for years to the benefit of nobody.

    • realitycheck

      not as black as white as you think, so no.

    • Zee

      The only thing black and white about this is, the lawyers are getting rich.

  • Jehovah Witness

    where are the SHAMESUNG fans now!?

    • J-Ro

      Reading this from their Galaxies.

  • It’s Me

    We’re talking about the dishonesty of making unfounded accusations and claims. You claim that you don’t need any proof (or really any reason) to make baseless claims and it’s up to others to prove you wrong. That’s exactly the same as the example I provided which were meant to demonstrate how ridiculous your position about false claims is.

    Guess I touched a nerve with those examples.

  • demigod79

    Speaking as a long-time Samsung user, I actually do think they copied Apple in many ways, at least for their earlier products. One of the most obvious examples is Samsung’s proprietary connector in their tablets – something which I ABSOLUTELY HATED! Their “home” button is also another example – even with the Note 3, they continue to use a physical button, even though standard Android now uses all on-screen soft-buttons. These are just a few of the more obvious examples.

    I also think that their lawsuits were misguided, and were done out of spite or revenge. They should have limited their legal actions to defending themselves in court, not launching more frivolous lawsuits. They recently faced the possibility of a massive fine in Europe, and I certainly hope they do the wise thing and refrain from further lawsuits.

    On the other hand, it was also clearly wrong for Apple to sue others for “borrowing” ideas like a grid of icons or rounded corners. The judge should have dismissed such claims outright, instead of going to court like it did. Although some things like pinch-and-zoom were genuine innovations, I don’t think a product ban was the right response (a simple royalty payment should have sufficed).

  • DinkinFlicka

    Keeping my fingers crossed that karma comes back to Apple in a big way.

  • Henry Huynh

    I hope people vote with their money and say no more of this bs.e

  • Ibrahim Elmi

    companies don’t take apple seriously anymore. they know apple has nothing new to offer. samsung is on the verge to become one of the best tech company.

  • Nouman Ali

    Anyone who says that an Apple phone and Samsung phone look too similar needs to get their eyes checked. This whole thing should be thrown out. Apple can’t compete with Samsung on value so has to play dirty to make up lost revenue from selling their overpriced iFruits.

    • realitycheck

      where have you been?

  • Ashish Diwakar

    adds cold water >_<

  • Thr1ve

    If you can’t compete on a level playing field, sue! It worked for Apple and their, dubious at best, “patents”… Funny how everywhere else in the world, Apple’s ridiculous patents have been invalidated and their cases against most of their competition were thrown out… Gotta love the US justice system!

  • Ashish Diwakar

    HATE Apple :/

    • realitycheck

      so you hate a corporate entity that has a duty to protect their IP but say nothing about the rival that blatantly steals ideas and designs. Look at dyson vs samsung.

    • J-Ro

      There is an amazing company. Dyson makes me want to buy a vacuum and I don’t even own a carpet.

    • Ashish Diwakar

      Yes I do hate apple !
      and I didn’t care to read after that part :)

  • J-Ro

    It funny how they can sue a company for copying them as they update their phones to an Android like Os (iOS 7) and are currently testing larger screen devices after they said they weren’t needed.

    Of course, when they create larger phones. People will say it was innovation and everything before was rubbish. Apple people crack me up.