Samsung Must Pay Apple $539M For Infringing iPhone Design Patents - Jury Finds

[Buzzsaw Checkerling]

A jury goes halfway between what Samsung and Apple want in a patent
case that dates back to 2011.

by Stephen Shankland
MAY 24, 2018
http://www.cnet.com

Samsung must pay Apple $539 million for infringing five patents with
Android phones it sold in 2010 and 2011, a jury has found in a legal
fight that dates back seven years.

The unanimous decision, in the US District Court in San Jose in the
heart of Silicon Valley, is just about halfway between what the two
largest mobile phone makers had sought in a high-profile case that
reaches all the way back to 2011.

The bulk of the damages payment, $533,316,606, was for infringing three
Apple design patents. The remaining $5,325,050 million was for
infringing two utility patents. Samsung already had been found to
infringe the patents, but this trial determined some of the damages.

The figure is a step back for for Samsung, which had fought earlier
damages findings. This trial had reconsidered $399 million of Samsung's
earlier payments, so $539 million is a significantly larger sum.

Samsung had argued a $28 million penalty was appropriate as a penalty
for infringing three Apple design patents, but Apple sought $1.07
billion. Apple believes Samsung's stance would mean a carmaker could
build something just like a Volkswagen Beetle but then pay damages only
based on the outside shell, but Samsung thinks Apple's stance would
mean a company infringing a cupholder design would have to pay patents
on an entire car. Samsung didn't fight Apple's suggested $5.3 million
penalty for infringing two utility patents.

The jury's rationale isn't clear, but the figure is high enough to help
cement the importance of design patents in the tech industry. Even
though they only describe cosmetic elements of a product, they clearly
can have a lot of value. That's good news for designers in Silicon
Valley, where Apple products like the iPhone and MacBook have helped
elevate design's role in product success. But it could also concentrate
power in the hands of the bigger businesses that have the resources to
obtain and defend patents.

This is a developing story...

______________
"What adult deems 16-year-olds capable of making a wise voting
decision? The answer is an adult with the wisdom of a 16-year-old -
'Hey, I'm no wiser than most 16-year-olds. Why should I have the vote
and they not'?"