9 ms·

Samsung to pay Apple $548M in patent dispute

95 points by tosseraccount 11y ago

jfoster 11y ago
It's interesting that at the same time as coming to an agreement to partly settle, they're disputing whether Samsung should be reimbursed if the court reverses the partial judgement. This might be as simple as the two companies agreeing to publicly disagree on that point. My previous impression of this type of situation was that the companies involved would be more rigid about the terms of settlement. Another possibility is that neither of them can decide, and that reimbursement part is actually up to the court.
- sergers 11y ago
  there was a partial final judgement that samsung has to pay a certain amount, and were denied not having them pay. so the statement is. samsung forking over certain amount to apple apple receiving a certain amount. samsung still thinks it doesnt owe a cent(especially since atleast one patent has been invalidated already and possibly a 2nd one now) and says its owed the money back if they win appeal. likely taking to supreme court (requested whole trial reviews). apple noted it doesnt think samsung should get any money back if the courts change their mind. a bit more info: http://www.fosspatents.com/2015/12/samsung-announces-payment-of-548.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2015/12/samsung-announces-payment... samsung paid while still saying they are in the right, i believe they "settled" to avoid any fines and continued device blocks.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mSparks 11y ago
well that should keep apple from going bankrupt for another year or two. ridiculous though that a company that basically does nothing but buy things from other companies and puts them in a shiny box should be allowed to win and lose cases like this IMHO. annoying we have to wait for 2021 for all the obvious patents granted during the dot com bubble to expire.
- zitterbewegung 11y ago
  That's not the point of the cases even to win lawsuits it's to remove features from other people's products.
- WoodenChair 11y ago
  Apple is anything but a commodity assembler. In fact that's what distinguishes it from its competitors in most markets. Most people are upset with Apple for the opposite - choosing to create from scratch proprietary software and hardware standards instead of choosing commodity options.
  - nitrogen 11y ago
    Many of the ideas they assembled into the iPhone were derivative of work done by others in academia and private companies, especially the things they sued Samsung for. Maybe that's what the OP was getting at.
    - gh02t 11y ago
      Well yeah, that's true in just about every industry. Everything from biotech to nuclear reactors have a technology flow like that. I don't own any Apple products (at least not nowadays), but they are really good at recognizing what upcoming tech has potential, buying it and then packaging it in a way that makes it appealing to consumers. They may not have invented many of the things they sell, but they definitely helped to popularize a ton of things that we take for granted now. Smartphones are a good example. They existed before the iPhone (I remember the days of ye olden Palm Treo), but they weren't something the average person really cared about or wanted until the iPhone came around. Now, I won't go so far as to say that we wouldn't have smartphones like we do now without the iPhone as I think largely that it was just about the right time that smart phones were really becoming technically feasible, but Apple still deserves credit for being the ones who were there first with the pieces put together into a product that finally made people want one. Though I also remember the strange delusion they seemed to have had with the original iPhone pre-App Store that people would be OK with just HTML "apps", but that's a different tale.
sidcool 11y ago
It's like taking a cup of water from sea and pouring it in ocean.
- posnet 11y ago
  That's a good idea to stop rising sea levels. If everyone just chips in and fills a bucket with ocean water and then tips it down the drain at home it will be lower in no time.
tmuir 11y ago
Why would Samsung expend the effort to argue the seemingly obvious concept that if the verdict is overturned, the awarded damages should be returned? Apple's position appears to be standard, in claiming victory, and dismissing the possibility that any higher court will come to a different conclusion, thereby refusing to entertain that damages would _need_ to be returned. Under what circumstances would Apple be entitled to keep monetary damages, if, in fact, a higher court reverses the current decision?
- yeldarb 11y ago
  It's a settlement so in most cases this would be the end of it and there should be no higher court ruling. But in reality Samsung is still pursing an end around via the USPTO.
pearjuice 11y ago
Does it hurt for Samsung at all to loose this money? Surely it it is 548M$ lost which could have been used otherwise, but in the big picture is it like a needle sting or a blast with a hammer? Also, how is this kind of money generally paid? They just wire more than half a billion to Apple? Send it over in cash? In gold? Do they get an invoice?
- at-fates-hands 11y ago
  Its a drop in the bucket really. Samsung's revenues run around 4 billion per quarter and you also have to keep in mind they're not like Apple where they're only in one industry - they have a ton of products across a spectrum of industries. source: http://www.statista.com/statistics/298704/samsung-quarterly-revenue/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/298704/samsung-quarterly-... Also, I just read the book "Haunted Empire" which detailed the Apple v. Samsung battle in pretty good detail, it's an excellent read: http://www.amazon.com/Haunted-Empire-Apple-After-Steve/dp/0062128256/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1449330315&sr=8-1&keywords=haunted+empire http://www.amazon.com/Haunted-Empire-Apple-After-Steve/dp/00...
datashovel 11y ago
Prediction: Within 10 years Alphabet will be in a position to buy Apple.
- davito 11y ago
  Haha, I like this statement. BTW I'm curious. Humour me, What do you see happening in the not too distant future
  - datashovel 11y ago
    Don't get me wrong, my personal take on this is not based on anything about these 2 companies except what is exposed via press releases and news. These days it seems to happen quite often that when I read about what's happening at Google I'm genuinely amazed. And so often when I read about what's happening at Apple I'm underwhelmed or disappointed. Not that things can't change, but my impression is the entire core culture / trajectory of Apple will take many years to change even if they decided to start today. My hunch is they won't, and will end up paying the price for it.
    - aplummer 11y ago
      "Not that things can't change, but my impression is the entire core culture / trajectory of Apple will take many years to change even if they decided to start today." You are aware they are the most valuable company in the world? I'd say they are probably hoping that trajectory doesn't change...
      - datashovel 11y ago
        I totally get it. Sounds like a crazy prediction. I don't try to make predictions all the time, but am always interested in how accurate they were, and so all I can say is I've added a date on my calendar ~10 years from now and so you can rest assured that I'll learn either way whether I was right or wrong.
        11y ago
TeMPOraL 11y ago
Will they actually pay Apple in trucks full of coins this time?
- braythwayt 11y ago
  I don’t know about other jurisdictions, but in Canada there is actually a law in place that allows the receiver of a payment to refuse more than a certain amount of the payment in coins. A quick googling turns up this Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender The net-net is that an armoured truck full of coins is not necessarily “legal tender” in every country.
hellbanner 11y ago
Apple: "Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products.”" Apple has forced developers off its own iOS ecosystem by removing their app from the store then introducing its features in the next iOS upgrades. Hypocrites.
daniel-cussen 11y ago
Measuring how smartphone profits are distributed across makers should take instances of patent litigation, like this one, into account.
peter303 11y ago
I wonder if this less than the total lawyer fees from nearly a decade of litigatiom?
- samspenc 11y ago
  I think this article from 2013 is telling: The Verge: Apple paid its lawyers over $60 million to beat Samsung in court http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/6/5182736/apple-paid-its-lawyers-over-60-million-to-beat-samsung-in-court http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/6/5182736/apple-paid-its-law...
on_and_off 11y ago
>on some technology and packaging patents for devices. That's not very informative. What patents are we talking about exactly ?
- mSparks 11y ago
  no one dare say or the (paid) apple fan boys down vote you. what they don't realise in these times of paid shills down votes are a badge of honor :) On January 5, 2007, 4 days before the iPhone was introduced to the world, Apple filed a suite of 4 design patents covering the basic shape of the iPhone. ie they patented a phone in a small box with a screen and no keyboard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electronics_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electr.... personally I find that great addition to the world not exactly revolutionary or that exciting. never have.
Patronus_Charm 11y ago
A drop in the bucket for Apple. It is more about the principle I suppose, more so than the cash.
- karmakaze 11y ago
  Apple's not that big on principle as I recall. Remember the Xerox PARC visit, then Apple trying to sue Microsoft for stuff they stole then licensed?
- at-fates-hands 11y ago
  It was the same way with Samsung. Both companies dug in and essentially went to war with each other. Most people think it was Jobs' famous, "thermonuclear" comment that set the Samsung CEO off. Over the past decade both companies have been attempting to amass more and more patents to use against each other. Both have had limited success against each other in court. When one wins a victory, it's overturned somewhere else on appeal, or judgements are significantly reduced. Honestly, it's a total stalemate. Apple's suing over products that have been outdated for more than a decade. Samsung has already changed their design to avoid any more of Apple's patents, making any future litigation impossible.
  - mSparks 11y ago
    the best comment I saw was when apple sued Samsung that they are "the same". and suddenly an entire generation wondered why they were paying twice as much for half the service.
  - skue 11y ago
    > Samsung has already changed their design to avoid any more of Apple's patents, making any future litigation impossible. All the comments about the dollar value of this suit are missing this point. I would assume Apple cares much more about sending a message to Samsung and others that they feel are simply copying their innovations. And if it gets their competitors to change their behavior and differentiate themselves, then the lawsuits are probably worth Apple's investment.

95 points by tosseraccount 11y ago

It's interesting that at the same time as coming to an agreement to partly settle, they're disputing whether Samsung should be reimbursed if the court reverses the partial judgement. This might be as simple as the two companies agreeing to publicly disagree on that point. My previous impression of this type of situation was that the companies involved would be more rigid about the terms of settlement. Another possibility is that neither of them can decide, and that reimbursement part is actually up to the court.

sergers 11y ago
there was a partial final judgement that samsung has to pay a certain amount, and were denied not having them pay. so the statement is. samsung forking over certain amount to apple apple receiving a certain amount. samsung still thinks it doesnt owe a cent(especially since atleast one patent has been invalidated already and possibly a 2nd one now) and says its owed the money back if they win appeal. likely taking to supreme court (requested whole trial reviews). apple noted it doesnt think samsung should get any money back if the courts change their mind. a bit more info: http://www.fosspatents.com/2015/12/samsung-announces-payment-of-548.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2015/12/samsung-announces-payment... samsung paid while still saying they are in the right, i believe they "settled" to avoid any fines and continued device blocks.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

mSparks 11y ago

well that should keep apple from going bankrupt for another year or two. ridiculous though that a company that basically does nothing but buy things from other companies and puts them in a shiny box should be allowed to win and lose cases like this IMHO. annoying we have to wait for 2021 for all the obvious patents granted during the dot com bubble to expire.

zitterbewegung 11y ago
That's not the point of the cases even to win lawsuits it's to remove features from other people's products.
WoodenChair 11y ago
Apple is anything but a commodity assembler. In fact that's what distinguishes it from its competitors in most markets. Most people are upset with Apple for the opposite - choosing to create from scratch proprietary software and hardware standards instead of choosing commodity options.
- nitrogen 11y ago
  Many of the ideas they assembled into the iPhone were derivative of work done by others in academia and private companies, especially the things they sued Samsung for. Maybe that's what the OP was getting at.
  - gh02t 11y ago
    Well yeah, that's true in just about every industry. Everything from biotech to nuclear reactors have a technology flow like that. I don't own any Apple products (at least not nowadays), but they are really good at recognizing what upcoming tech has potential, buying it and then packaging it in a way that makes it appealing to consumers. They may not have invented many of the things they sell, but they definitely helped to popularize a ton of things that we take for granted now. Smartphones are a good example. They existed before the iPhone (I remember the days of ye olden Palm Treo), but they weren't something the average person really cared about or wanted until the iPhone came around. Now, I won't go so far as to say that we wouldn't have smartphones like we do now without the iPhone as I think largely that it was just about the right time that smart phones were really becoming technically feasible, but Apple still deserves credit for being the ones who were there first with the pieces put together into a product that finally made people want one. Though I also remember the strange delusion they seemed to have had with the original iPhone pre-App Store that people would be OK with just HTML "apps", but that's a different tale.

sidcool 11y ago

It's like taking a cup of water from sea and pouring it in ocean.

posnet 11y ago
That's a good idea to stop rising sea levels. If everyone just chips in and fills a bucket with ocean water and then tips it down the drain at home it will be lower in no time.

tmuir 11y ago

Why would Samsung expend the effort to argue the seemingly obvious concept that if the verdict is overturned, the awarded damages should be returned? Apple's position appears to be standard, in claiming victory, and dismissing the possibility that any higher court will come to a different conclusion, thereby refusing to entertain that damages would _need_ to be returned. Under what circumstances would Apple be entitled to keep monetary damages, if, in fact, a higher court reverses the current decision?

yeldarb 11y ago
It's a settlement so in most cases this would be the end of it and there should be no higher court ruling. But in reality Samsung is still pursing an end around via the USPTO.

pearjuice 11y ago

Does it hurt for Samsung at all to loose this money? Surely it it is 548M$ lost which could have been used otherwise, but in the big picture is it like a needle sting or a blast with a hammer? Also, how is this kind of money generally paid? They just wire more than half a billion to Apple? Send it over in cash? In gold? Do they get an invoice?

at-fates-hands 11y ago
Its a drop in the bucket really. Samsung's revenues run around 4 billion per quarter and you also have to keep in mind they're not like Apple where they're only in one industry - they have a ton of products across a spectrum of industries. source: http://www.statista.com/statistics/298704/samsung-quarterly-revenue/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/298704/samsung-quarterly-... Also, I just read the book "Haunted Empire" which detailed the Apple v. Samsung battle in pretty good detail, it's an excellent read: http://www.amazon.com/Haunted-Empire-Apple-After-Steve/dp/0062128256/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1449330315&sr=8-1&keywords=haunted+empire http://www.amazon.com/Haunted-Empire-Apple-After-Steve/dp/00...

datashovel 11y ago

Prediction: Within 10 years Alphabet will be in a position to buy Apple.

davito 11y ago
Haha, I like this statement. BTW I'm curious. Humour me, What do you see happening in the not too distant future
- datashovel 11y ago
  Don't get me wrong, my personal take on this is not based on anything about these 2 companies except what is exposed via press releases and news. These days it seems to happen quite often that when I read about what's happening at Google I'm genuinely amazed. And so often when I read about what's happening at Apple I'm underwhelmed or disappointed. Not that things can't change, but my impression is the entire core culture / trajectory of Apple will take many years to change even if they decided to start today. My hunch is they won't, and will end up paying the price for it.
  - aplummer 11y ago
    "Not that things can't change, but my impression is the entire core culture / trajectory of Apple will take many years to change even if they decided to start today." You are aware they are the most valuable company in the world? I'd say they are probably hoping that trajectory doesn't change...
    - datashovel 11y ago
      I totally get it. Sounds like a crazy prediction. I don't try to make predictions all the time, but am always interested in how accurate they were, and so all I can say is I've added a date on my calendar ~10 years from now and so you can rest assured that I'll learn either way whether I was right or wrong.
      - 11y ago

TeMPOraL 11y ago

Will they actually pay Apple in trucks full of coins this time?

braythwayt 11y ago
I don’t know about other jurisdictions, but in Canada there is actually a law in place that allows the receiver of a payment to refuse more than a certain amount of the payment in coins. A quick googling turns up this Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender The net-net is that an armoured truck full of coins is not necessarily “legal tender” in every country.

hellbanner 11y ago

Apple: "Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products.”" Apple has forced developers off its own iOS ecosystem by removing their app from the store then introducing its features in the next iOS upgrades. Hypocrites.

daniel-cussen 11y ago

Measuring how smartphone profits are distributed across makers should take instances of patent litigation, like this one, into account.

peter303 11y ago

I wonder if this less than the total lawyer fees from nearly a decade of litigatiom?

samspenc 11y ago
I think this article from 2013 is telling: The Verge: Apple paid its lawyers over $60 million to beat Samsung in court http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/6/5182736/apple-paid-its-lawyers-over-60-million-to-beat-samsung-in-court http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/6/5182736/apple-paid-its-law...

on_and_off 11y ago

>on some technology and packaging patents for devices. That's not very informative. What patents are we talking about exactly ?

mSparks 11y ago
no one dare say or the (paid) apple fan boys down vote you. what they don't realise in these times of paid shills down votes are a badge of honor :) On January 5, 2007, 4 days before the iPhone was introduced to the world, Apple filed a suite of 4 design patents covering the basic shape of the iPhone. ie they patented a phone in a small box with a screen and no keyboard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electronics_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electr.... personally I find that great addition to the world not exactly revolutionary or that exciting. never have.

Patronus_Charm 11y ago

A drop in the bucket for Apple. It is more about the principle I suppose, more so than the cash.

karmakaze 11y ago
Apple's not that big on principle as I recall. Remember the Xerox PARC visit, then Apple trying to sue Microsoft for stuff they stole then licensed?
at-fates-hands 11y ago
It was the same way with Samsung. Both companies dug in and essentially went to war with each other. Most people think it was Jobs' famous, "thermonuclear" comment that set the Samsung CEO off. Over the past decade both companies have been attempting to amass more and more patents to use against each other. Both have had limited success against each other in court. When one wins a victory, it's overturned somewhere else on appeal, or judgements are significantly reduced. Honestly, it's a total stalemate. Apple's suing over products that have been outdated for more than a decade. Samsung has already changed their design to avoid any more of Apple's patents, making any future litigation impossible.
- mSparks 11y ago
  the best comment I saw was when apple sued Samsung that they are "the same". and suddenly an entire generation wondered why they were paying twice as much for half the service.
- skue 11y ago
  > Samsung has already changed their design to avoid any more of Apple's patents, making any future litigation impossible. All the comments about the dollar value of this suit are missing this point. I would assume Apple cares much more about sending a message to Samsung and others that they feel are simply copying their innovations. And if it gets their competitors to change their behavior and differentiate themselves, then the lawsuits are probably worth Apple's investment.