Jury says Samsung has to pay Apple $119.6 million for infringing on a few patents

Ian Hardy

May 2, 2014 9:28pm

The long and drawn out court room battle between Apple and Samsung has once again come to a close. After several months of both camps claiming that ideas were copied or stolen, the jury — consisting of four men and four women — declared today that both companies violated each others patents.

Heading into the case Apple was seeking $2.2 billion in damages and Samsung to the tune of $38 million. Samsung violated a number of Apple’s patents and awarded the Cupertino-based company over $119.6 (USD) million in damages. On the other hand, Apple violated Samsung’s patents but the damages were far less at $158,400.

Samsung infringed on patent 5,946,647, which is for “data detectors” that transforms typed text into actionable links; patent 8,046,721 that is for the “slide to unlock” feature on some devices; and patent 8,074,172 that represents how autocorrect suggests words.

As for Apple’s infringements, Samsung patent 5,579,239 that hones in on the ability to stream video during FaceTime/video calls.

In a statement to Re/code, Apple noted that “We are grateful to the jury and the court for their service. Today’s ruling reinforces what courts around the world have already found: That Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products. We are fighting to defend the hard work that goes into beloved products like the iPhone, which our employees devote their lives to designing and delivering for our customers.”

Source: Re/code
Via: 9to5Mac

  • cs098

    Also while Sammy has to pay $119.6 mill, they also receive 158k from apple’s infringement.

    • d a

      I love it, steal from each other, then pay, in the end the consumer wins as I see it. I hope it doesn’t stop. Risky doing that way but like I said, consumer wins.

    • Lion5

      These lawsuits are bad for the consumer. The enormous cost of litigation will inevitably be factored into the cost of the products we buy.

    • d a

      LOL so you think prices would be less if these lawsuits didn’t exsist? Or prices wouldn’t keep going up? Have you happened to check the profits of both of them lately? These lawsuits mean nothing. I love them. That is, I love that they keep stealing each others tech and “I” the consumer gets to enjoy the new tech regardless of the company selling the product. I’m not an idiotic fanboy of either company and therefor I don’t care about either one of them, or any tech company.

  • Super_Deluxe

    If you can’t beat em, take their money…

    • It’s Me

      Sometimes you get to do both.

  • JB

    Protectionism.

    • smokinjoe

      Why are you upvoting your own posts? Lol

    • MikeOxlong

      Insecurity.

    • gommer strike

      wow. you can actually upvote *your own* posts?! I think that’s a problem with how disqus is setup…

      unless the person is making fake accounts to upvote himself? that I can see…

  • Pawv

    Screw you apple.

    • cartfan88

      Its the price of doing business in America. If you want a good background on how this works look at the Loewen Funeral Home lawsuits in the US in the 90s. Loewen was a CDN company.

  • K_p0w3r

    Great I so look forward to that stupid phony news story about samsung paying apple in nickles getting passed around again

  • milagroful

    That last line sounds so sad. Devote their lives to designing iphones…

    • Jay

      I caught that too… Job offer letters signed in blood!

  • HD Z

    I kinda agree with Apple.
    The firsts Galaxy phones were abviously complete cheap rip-off of iPhone design.

    • Mo Dabbas

      While design wise they were. That was for the first lawsuit where apple won with almost a billion. This lawsuit is more for the software and features of the OS and it included devices such as the S3 and note 2 which past the first galaxy phones and are far to represent how iphone looks. So your comment is kinda out of place and misleading to those who don’t read which is sad considering many on this blog comment without reading anything but the title.

    • HD Z

      This lawsuit was about among other things the “slide to unlock” feature…

      Design does not necessarily imply looks. They are about software design, etc.

      I don’t really care about Samsung nor Apple. Never owned any of both companies products.

    • Mo Dabbas

      sure, explain everything to make it sound like you know what you were saying.

      so here is what you meant: Samsung made cheap rip-off “slide to unlock” with the first galaxy phones…… oh wait, the first galaxy devices are not part of this lawsuit.

      I know design does not only imply look but you clearly meant the physical design unless they can make cheap rip-off for software and “slide to unlock”, which is far of any contextual sense.

    • HD Z

      wow, you are realy passionate about this.

    • MikeOxlong

      He’s something. That we can all agree on. Man, there are some insane people over here by looking at some of these posts. Wow. Bunch of whackballs.

  • Mo Dabbas

    I don’t understand why Samsung is being punished for features of Android OS. I don’t understand why the galaxy nexus is within the list of phones with software infringements. Obviously the jury knows jack about technology. Still, who didn’t see a biased decision in favor of Apple on this one.

    Don’t get me wrong, I care little about both companies. But when we already don’t get much of great products you see in Europe and Asia. This won’t help. If this continues this way, companies will either take very strict precautions before releasing a product in North America, or even not bother to release it at all since the north American market is not as big as Asia and Europe. And that’s what makes me sad about this entire lawsuits going on.

    • Lion5

      What great products (mobile phones) are available in Europe that are not available here?

    • Tom

      There isn’t a single OEM that wouldn’t give their eye teeth to be in the North American market. Which products are you referring to?

  • rgl168

    I’d like to know the rationale for this jury of finding GNex in violation of “slide to unlock”. iOS slide is a single-action slide to reveal 4-digit pin code (if used), then to home screen; camera access came only on later iOS versions and require sliding at a different location. GNex slide is dual-action, where slide to one side for camera, another side to home screen; if PIN code is used, there wouldn’t even be a slide.

    • FlamesFan89

      Because ‘Merica.
      Nevermind the fact that judges all over Europe are smart enough to see that Apple’s slide to unlock patent is completely invalid.

  • Josiah McMillan

    hmm… the autocorrect and detect links were in android before iocrap and the slide to unlock isn’t used on any touchwiz rom so I have no idea where apple is going with those claims

  • Tyrone_83

    Funny how Apple started this nonsense in the first place and they actually won. Apple the biggest patent trolls. When you cant be innovated sue your competition that’s Apple motto.

  • sally

    I love these battles

  • SHAMESUNG

    LMFAO SHAMESUNG – ALL THEY DO IS COPY

  • WatDah

    Prejudice people with hate are much more emotionally attached than they accuse of others.

  • Jakob

    This is new. I’ve never seen two cell phone companies with negative feelings towards each other. I thought they were great pals! I never thought in a millions years that they would battle it out in court.

    [/sarcasm]

  • calysto

    Good. Apple deserved the victory.

  • Zul Rizvi

    Apple is such a loser, whining about everything. They need to grow up and face the competition like an adult