Apple, Samsung comment on $1 billion U.S jury verdict

Apple, Samsung comment on $1 billion U.S jury verdict

Both Apple and Samsung have issued statements following the massive U.S. jury verdict earlier which saw Apple awarded just under $1.05 BILLION in damages, and Samsung awarded nothing.

Apple told The Loop

We are grateful to the jury for their service and for investing the time to listen to our story and we were thrilled to be able to finally tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.

Samsung told AllThingsD:

Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.

It's not over, of course, until it's over, and appeals are inevitable, but it's hard to tell just how much relief Samsung can expect following this decision. And how much more Apple can press for.

Update 1: Tim Cook has sent Apple employees a variation on Apple's statement.

Update 2: A Samsung executive was also quoted by a the Korea Times:

``It’s absolutely the worst scenario for us,’’ a senior Samsung executive said as he rushed into the company’s compound in southern Seoul. Inside the building, Choi Gee-sung, former Samsung Electronics CEO and now the head of Samsung Group’s corporate strategy division, was holding an emergency meeting attended by Shin Jong-kyun, the company’s mobile devices chief, and Lee Dong-joo, lead marketing official.

Update 3: Google has finally weighed in and The Verge has the comment:

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.

Innovative and affordable products, but not indemnification?

Source: The Loop, AllThingsD, Korea Times, The Verge

Rene Ritchie

Editor-in-Chief of iMore, co-host of Iterate, Debug, ZEN and TECH, MacBreak Weekly. Cook, grappler, photon wrangler. Follow him on Twitter, App.net, Google+.

More Posts

 

8
loading...
0
loading...
56
loading...
0
loading...

← Previously

Find great apps for your kids with WeWantApps! for iPhone and iPad

Next up →

Forums: Searching maps in iOS 6, New Facebook thoughts, What was your first cellphone?

There are 29 comments. Add yours.

msw323 says:

Rene:

You may want to include BILLION in the $1.05 settlement, not to confuse...

pappy53 says:

It is amazing that the Korean court found no copying, and a U.S. court did.

ScottyT14 says:

I feel like it has a lot to do with it being their home turf. I really do hope that's not the case.

As for this decision, there really isn't a winner here. Apart from the lawyers. I only want the best of the best to be on the shelf for me, and these court fights aren't making that any easier.

BBPandy says:

The Korean court found that they did copy the "bounce back" but not on the round corners ect.

Meanwhile British Courts not only found that Samsung didn't infringe they made Apple Apologise publically to Samsung for accusing them

eric6052 says:

Now I want to see a press conference where the head of Samsung Mobile hands over a giant check to Tim Cook like a winning lottery ticket.

paleh0rse says:

I'd prefer to see Samsung air-drop the payment on Cupertino... in pennies.

birdman_38 says:

One has to wonder how this will affect Samsung's partnership with Apple with regards to supplying parts. Samsung got their asses handed to them on a plate today and suffered major public embarrassment. They could just say "screw you" and cease manufacturing & shipping of any parts to Apple, no matter what the breach of contract costs may be.

nevermind says:

I think Samsung makes too much money supplying parts to Apple to do this.

BizarreFoodie says:

Breach of contract costs? A full 9% of Samsung's yearly revenue comes from Apple Inc. Do you know what investors do when almost a tenth of the value of a company tanks? Sell! Sell! Sell!
Who's the new supplier? Buy! Buy! Buy!
I don't know what you do for a living, but most businesses aren't in the habit of saying "I'm going home, and I'm taking my ball with me!"
Well, the successful businesses don't do such childish things, anyhow.

birdman_38 says:

What I do for a living is none of your concern. And it wouldn't be a childish action on Samsung's part. It would potentially screw Apple out of...let's say...a billion dollars in revenue. Business is business. It's a cutthroat industry which Apple proves through this endless litigation against one of their suppliers.

nevermind says:

Potentially screwing Apple out of a billion in revenue while definitely screwing themselves out of 5x times that. I just don't see Samsung doing it. Apple remains their biggest customer by a long shot. I think HP is next, providing Samsung a third of the revenue Apple does annually.

felface says:

"Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they pruchase samsung products" Tell that to the people who returned galaxy tabs thinking they were iPads HAHAHAHAH lol

BBPandy says:

Yes Apple did claim that in court....but were unable to find ONE person who actually did that.

boovish says:

my friend did it once but she ain't too bright

FrankTheTank369#AC says:

This is a tragedy to us consumers whether you are an Android or iOS fan. The only real winners here are the lawyers. Windows Phone right now is starting to look real good.

D Rey says:

I completely fail to see how this effects consumers at all. If they ban a product then Samsung will slap something else together and market the crap out of VERY quickly. In six months "the consumer" will have plenty of choices. And probably better and different ones since Samsung and other smartphone manufactures will be forced to try to come up with some new and innovative.

teepeeayy says:

Interesting that Samsung's statement included a reference to the rectangle shape, the one piece the jury said they didn't copy.

BBPandy says:

No, Jury found that they coppied that too

DonS50 says:

I wonder how other manufacturers will now alter their future products to avoid this sort of thing. Wonder what my next car will look like?

davebitner says:

Now I hope Samsung stops making anything for Apple. Make them scramble to find suppliers that can't keep up with production, and make more mistakes during production. Give them their billion and wash your hands of it. Samsung will have a friend by the name of Google, one of the few that can go toe to toe with the rotten apple.

davebitner says:

Yes, but it could hurt Apple more in the long run. Making them find a less reliable manufacture for higher prices.

LucasPukus says:

I got no problem with healthy competition. I DO however, have a problem with outright copying. Innovate DONT imitate!!

davebitner says:

OK. Since Apple was the first to do anything, right. Right.
Wrong. The first digital media player was in 1979 by Kane Kramer. The first smartphone was in 1973, although is nothing near what we would consider a smartphone. The next one that somewhat resembles what we see today is the 1994 Simon Personal Communicator. Which could browse the internet, send and read emails, all through a TOUCH SCREEN. The only thing Apple was first with is the tablet with their 1987 Newton. After that there was a slew of tablets from Microsoft, and Linux from 1994 till the iPad in 2010.

As far as copying goes. Ha, don't think Apple never copied anything. They all do. Google, Apple, Microsoft. Palm could make a killing suing Apple.

Wakasaki808 says:

I really don't care about who won the case. BUT...

I for one wish that the patent system goes away...I mean really... there was a patent FOR ROUNDED CORNERS!!...

if Samsung had the same patent I would say the same thing. There shouldn't ever be patent's for things like that the patent agency should at least remove all these ridiculous patents from existence.

I can see patents that base on things of software, maybe how a software looks...but the bounce back thing that my iPhone does?...really...So can somebody patent the non-bounce back thing some browsers do?...then whats left...a shaking back thing if it goes off the page?

To me if there is a patent for something why is there nothing for the opposite...should it not be possible to patent every variation of anything?

For example...
Apple has the rounded edges on the corners of the phone, right?...so couldn't somebody patent sharp corners for a phone? Would that just leave jagged edges on a phone or something...and what happens if somebody patents that? What about the screen to glass technology Apple has...would it not be possible to patent a screen that is not to edge technology?

That is why I wish that the patent agency at least removes all these ridiculous patents. It should be like some other countries patent systems such as those like in Australia where it prevents some types of ridiculous patents from existing.

Also...why didn't Apple sue HP during the release of their Touchpad? Was it because Palm's patent portfolio covers even more than Apple's? or because Apple knew the Touchpad and products like that wouldn't be as large as how Samsung has become? You can look at the Touchpad and the iPad(original) and you can tell where inspiration has came from. I don't think Apple could even touch Palm since they have the patent for the smartphone architecture itself.

BTW, I do have an iPhone 4s on Sprint and like their smartphones(I am a PC guy all-around). To me its just Apple is ridiculous with all these patent lawsuits.

paleh0rse says:

why does this article have a photo of a S3 next to the iPhone? The S3 was not one of the phones included in this case, nor should it have been. The S3 does not look or act like an iPhone in any way, shape, or form.

Apple: "...stealing isn’t right."

LOL, that's rich!

lornaevo says:

Which product of Apple, did samsung copy with the moment? Because I would like to get a check for that one.