Apple v Samsung Aftermath; Google Statement; Juror Speaks Out & More

[dgstorm]

The biggest patent trial of the decade (maybe ever) just wrapped up on Friday, and Samsung lost to Apple to the tune of $1 Billion. Of course there will be appeals filed and other lawsuits from other companies still to follow, but at least this particular daily-news headache is waning. We will soon be able to focus on less frustrating topics in the mobile tech world. Before we can move on, there are a few "aftermath" stories to share. Here's a breakdown below:

First, we have a couple of interesting statements to share from some of the players in this game. One is an internal memo from Samsung that was designed to reassure its employees, and the other is a statement that Google issued in regards to the trial outcome. It is designed to reassure the consumer regarding Android. Here they are below (sourced from AndroidCentral),

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. ~ Samsung Internal Memo

The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don't relate to the core Android operating system, and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office. The mobile industry is moving fast and all players — including newcomers — are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don't want anything to limit that. ~ Google

Second, Samsung released a separate statement to the public that directly addresses the ridiculous damages claim from the court case. It is a bold statement that will likely be a big part of their appeal. They make a great argument that the damages were poorly calculated, which could easily go in their favor in an appellate court. Speaking to that argument, we found an analysis of Apple's damages claim over at Phandroid. It eloquently breaks down why many of the supposed infringing devices should not have been calculated in the damages because they were on carriers that never (or later) carried the iPhone. Here's Samsung's statement followed by a quote from the article with the breakdown (in the breakdown, the bolded items could not really have taken any business away from Apple),

“Apple’s arguments boiled down to an assertion that everyone who bought a Samsung device would have bought the equivalent product from Apple had the Samsung product not been on the market. But that reasoning ignores any brand loyalty customers might have had to Samsung, or they might be customers of carriers that at the time didn’t offer Apple products. I would say there are quite a few problems with the way Apple calculated damages.” ~ Samsung

Captivate . . . . . . . . . .80,840,162

Continuum . . . . . . . . . .16,399,117

Droid Charge. . . . . . . . .50,672,869

Epic 4G. . . . . . . . . . .130,180,894

Exhibit 4G . . . . . . . . . .1,081,820

Fascinate. . . . . . . . . .143,539,179

Galaxy Ace . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

Galaxy Prevail. . . . . . . .57,867,383

Galaxy S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

Galaxy S 4G . . . . . . . . .73,344,668

Galaxy S II (AT&T). . . . . .40,494,356

Galaxy S II (i9000). . . . . . . . . .0

Galaxy S II (T-Mobile). . . .83,791,708
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch).100,326,988

Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) . . .32,273,558

Galaxy S (Showcase) . . . . .22,002,146

Galaxy Tab . . . . . . . . . .1,966,691

Galaxy Tab 10.1 WiFi . . . . . .833,076

Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE . . . . . . . .0

Gem. . . . . . . . . . . . . .4,075,585

Indulge . . . . . . . . . . .16,011,184

Infuse 4G . . . . . . . . . .44,792,974

Intercept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

Mesmerize . . . . . . . . . .53,123,612

Nexus S 4G . . . . . . . . . .1,828,297

Replenish. . . . . . . . . . .3,350,256

Transform. . . . . . . . . . . .953,060

Vibrant . . . . . . . . . . .89,673,957

TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . .1,049,423,540

Total, removing the damages for the above devices……………..$251,873,686. That is $797,549,854 less than the initial damages.

Here's a quote from the jury instructions that makes this more clear,

The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty.

Third, a man named Manuel Ilagan came forward to share hist thoughts on the verdict. The reason why his perspective is worth paying attention to is because he was one of the jurors. Here are a couple of his statements, (you can read more of his perspective at CNET),

"We found for Apple because of the evidence they presented," Ilagan said. "It was clear there was infringement."

"Well, there were several. The e-mails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, [Apple] showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea -- I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn't answer one of them. They didn't help their cause."

Of course we will keep you guys updated of any breaking news regarding these and other patent wars, but it will be nice to focus on more tech-friendly stuff for a while!

 

[J515OP]

"And also, on the last day, [Apple] showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out."

I thought this was interesting at the time. Here are the images from court they are talking about.



Now what I find disturbing about this is there is a 4 year gap in Samsung phones missing from this graphic. Are they saying that Samsung made no phones during this time period and their design wasn't evolving? How about even the 1 year gap from the "previous" phones to the iPhone. I don't think this is something many people caught. Sure just looking at the picture is damaging but the gap is so big. If you look at any device and then skip 4 years and look at that device it will look much different. How about just doing this with a range of phones from all manufacturers 2006 models and then their 2010 models? I bet you will find almost all go from buttons and Blackberry look to no buttons and iPhone look.

How about this as an example? 2003 iPod vs. 2007 iPod Touch:

 

[jimmyt]

I would not buy an Apple product after they not only claimed to invent windows but also the mouse and inyergrated computer, all of which got them banned in foreign countries where they are serious about lying. Then they steal the beatles name and logo, and sue everyone on the planet for a living. Not a company I would do business with, when I can do everything I need efficiently on a PC or android device.