 |
| An Apple iPhone 4Ss and a Samsung Galaxy S III |
A California jury awarded Apple $119
million (£70 million) - far less than it demanded - in a patent battle with
Samsung over alleged copying of smart phone features.
The verdict Friday was a far cry from
the $2.2 billion Apple sought and the $930 million it won in a separate 2012
trial making similar patent infringement claims against older Samsung products,
most of which are no longer for sale in the United States.
The jury found that Apple had
infringed one of Samsung's patents in creating the iPhone 4 and 5. Jurors
awarded Samsung $158,400, trimming that amount from the original $119.62
million verdict. Samsung had sought $6 million.
"Though this verdict is large by
normal standards, it is hard to view this outcome as much of a victory for
Apple," Santa Clara University law professor Brian Love said. "This
amount is less than 10 percent of the amount Apple requested and probably
doesn't surpass by too much the amount Apple spent litigating this case."
The award may be adjusted slightly in
favor of Apple. Jurors were ordered to return to court Monday to continue
deliberations on a minor matter that could result in a higher award for Apple.
Because the jury was still empaneled, jurors were prevented from talking
publicly about the case.
Samsung spokesman Lauren Restuccia
declined comment, citing the ongoing deliberations.
Apple declared the verdict a victory.
"Samsung willfully stole our
ideas and copied our products," Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet said.
"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."
Unlike the first trial in San Jose
federal court in 2012, Samsung lawyers made Google a central focus of their
defense. Google makes the Android software that Samsung and other smartphone
manufacturers use as their operating systems. Samsung argued that Google was
Apple's real target.
More than 70 percent of smartphones
run on Android, a mobile operating system that Google Inc. has given out for
free to Samsung and other phone makers
Both companies will now try to urge
the judge to remove the others products from store shelves in the United State.
Love and other experts say that neither company is expected to succeed with
those demands.
"So far Apple has been
unsuccessful at doing so and, without a sales ban, this case is unlikely to move
the needle on the larger battle between Apple and Android," Love said.
The verdict marked the latest
intellectual property battle between the world's top two smartphone makers.
Apple and Samsung have sued each other in courts and trade offices around the
world.
Apple and Samsung are locked in a
bitter struggle for dominance of the $330 billion worldwide smartphone market.
Samsung has become the leader of the sector with a 31 percent share after being
an also-ran with just 5 percent in 2007. Apple, meanwhile, has seen its market
share slip to about 15 percent from a high of 27 percent three years ago.
The jury of four men and four women
delivered its verdict in the latest case after beginning deliberations on April
29.
During the monthlong trial, Apple
argued that many of the key functions and vital features of Samsung phones were
invented by Apple. Samsung countered that its phones operate on the Google
Android software system and that any legal complaint Apple has is with the
search giant.
Google entered the smartphone market
while its then-CEO Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board. The move infuriated Apple
co-founder Steve Jobs, who considered Android to be a blatant rip-off of iPhone
innovations.
After removing Schmidt from Apple's
board, Jobs vowed that Apple would resort to "thermonuclear war" to
destroy Android and its allies. At the recent trial, Samsung attorneys produced
an email Jobs sent to executives in 2010 urging them to wage a "holy
war" against Android in 2011.
Early in deliberations, the jury wanted
to know if Jobs had mentioned Google when considering the lawsuit that was
eventually filed in 2012, several months after the Apple founder died of
cancer.
US District Judge Lucy Koh told
jurors no additional evidence was available to them beyond what was presented
during the trial.
Koh answered similarly to questions
about Samsung's chief executive officer's reaction when informed that Apple
executives had complained to executives at the South Korean company about
alleged patent infringement.
Source: Telegraph
previous article
Newer Post
No comments
Post a Comment