30 replies to this topic 1 votes

[+Mephistopheles]

Apple Seeking $2.5 Billion from Samsung in U.S. Patent and Design Infringement Trial

FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller reports that recently-filed court documents in the ongoing U.S. patent and design dispute between Apple and Samsung reveal that Apple is seeking a total of $2.5 billion from Samsung to cover alleged infringement by Samsung's mobile products. From the court filing:

Samsung has reaped billions of dollars in profits and caused Apple to lose hundreds of millions of dollars through its violation of Apple's intellectual property. Apple conservatively estimates that as of March 31, 2012, Samsung has been unjustly enriched by about [redacted; presumably $2 billion] and has additionally cost Apple about $500 million in lost profits. Apple also conservatively estimates that it is entitled to over $25 million in reasonable royalty damages on the proportionately small set of remaining sales for which it cannot obtain an award of Samsung's profits or Apple's own lost profits, for a combined total of $2.525 billion.

Mueller notes that Apple is not allowed to collect both royalties and profits from a single device, and thus focuses its claims on the $2 billion figure related to design infringement, as that tactic would allow Apple to request both lost profits of its own and unfairly earned profits by Samsung on those devices. In calculating the royalty rates it believes it is owed for Samsung's use of Apple's intellectual property, Apple arrived at the following figures:

These are the per-unit royalties that Apple calculated for its different intellectual property rights-in-suit:

- $2.02 for the "overscroll bounce" (or "rubber-banding") '318 patent
- $3.10 for the "scrolling API" '915 patent
- $2.02 for the "tap to zoom and navigate" '163 patent
- $24 for use of any of Apple's design patents or trade dress rights

On a separate note, Apple's filings also reveal its estimates of how much it should pay in royalties for Samsung's patents, which are related to 3G standards and are required to be licensed under fair and reasonable terms. While Samsung has been requesting a royalty rate of 2.4% on Apple's sales of 3G devices, Apple argues that the amount should only be one-half cent per unit based on Samsung's small share of essential 3G patents and a belief that the royalty should be calculated on the cost of the baseband processor rather than the entire device.

As part of the ongoing court case, Apple CEO Tim Cook met with Samsung CEO Choi Gee-sung back in late May, but the negotiations yielded little progress. Reuters reported yesterday that the two executives met again last week but that the sides remain far apart in their valuations of their respective intellectual property.

Source: Mac Rumors

[thealexweb]

That is just plain wrong, in terms of how small this feature is in terms of the whole software and hardware experience a more realistic fee would be a few cents, and even that is generous tbf.

[.Neo]

Apple can ask as much as they want. It's their patents being breached after all. Obviously the same goes for Samsung.

[xeleraph]

.Neo, on 24 July 2012 - 15:07, said:

Apple can ask as much as they want. It's their patents being breached after all. Obviously the same goes for Samsung.

Agreed. Apple can ask however much it wants, like how Oracle asked for billions over nine lines of code. Of course, whether they'll get the money is another question.

[Buttus]

my blackberry had the overscroll bounce for years!

[.Neo]

Buttus, on 24 July 2012 - 15:29, said:

my blackberry had the overscroll bounce for years!

So does iOS.

[+techbeck]

For ****s sake. Just meet and settle this patent bull**** already.

And yes, Apple can ask anything they want but doubt they will get it. And love how they come out as being the victim and like they do nothing wrong. Because we all know all Apple does is innovate. They dont steal or take ideas from others....../s

[+techbeck]

Buttus, on 24 July 2012 - 15:29, said:

my blackberry had the overscroll bounce for years!

Doesnt matter. Apple is a patent whore. They get patents for tech that is already implemented, claim it as their own invention, and then sue people who use/are using it. Like slide to unlock, multitouch (at one time) and others.v Jobs himself said that they invented multitouch.

Quote

“We have invented a new technology called multi-touch…and it’s phenomenal.”
–Steve Jobs at the Macworld Expo 2007 keynote that introduced the iPhone

[.Neo]

techbeck, on 24 July 2012 - 15:53, said:

Doesnt matter. Apple is a patent whore. They get patents for tech that is already implemented, claim it as their own invention, and then sue people who use/are using it. Like slide to unlock, multitouch (at one time) and others.v Jobs himself said that they invented multitouch.

Yeah sure, lets all pretend Apple is the only one patenting minor things and look the other way when it involves other companies. Samsung can wash its hands in complete innocence. The company didn't go extremely far in trying to mimic the iPhone's design. They didn't copy iOS' Dock and the home screen. They surely didn't modify Android in such a way so it automatically generated square app icons to resemble iOS. Samsung's connector ending up being exactly the same, short from color, as Apple's? Pure coincidence! Nope, Samsung didn't do anything to make their devices look remotely similar to Apple's in the hopes to lure in customers. It's all Apple and Apple alone. /s


Gimme a break techbeck, Samsung has just as big of a part in this as Apple. They play victim all the same denying all accounts of deliberately trying to make their products appear similar to Apple's. Complete and utter BS. Please don't act as if it's a one-way street because it's not.

[BajiRav]

*Makes a mental note of all Android fans opposing unreasonable patent licenses so that they can be reminded of this thread when the Googarola/MSFT thing comes back in the news*

[+techbeck]

.Neo, on 24 July 2012 - 16:56, said:

Gimme a break techbeck, Samsung has just as big of a part in this as Apple. They play victim all the same denying all accounts of deliberately trying to make their products appear similar to Apple's. Complete and utter BS. Please don't act as if it's a one-way street because it's not.

Didnt say Samsung was innocent nor did I say Samsung this was a one way street. I said that Apple is acting all innocent here and blaming Samsung and others for copying. But then again, Apple can copy and its widely accepted. Hypocrites. Only difference is that Apple is a patent troll and will go after anyones product that looks slightly like theirs. They wanted to ban the 10.1n tab when it clearly looks different that the iPad and Apple even had the balls to send Samsung design tips that would make their product unusable. Not to mention the recent letters Apple sent to all the sellers of the GNEX warning them not to sell the product anymore.

Apple is clearly the aggressor here and they have also lost patent cases several times as well. So it seems that not every court system is agreeing with Apple.

[.Neo]

techbeck, on 24 July 2012 - 17:35, said:

Didnt say Samsung was innocent nor did I say Samsung this was a one way street.

You're giving the impression all the same.

techbeck, on 24 July 2012 - 17:35, said:

I said that Apple is acting all innocent here and blaming Samsung and others for copying. But then again, Apple can copy and its widely accepted. Hypocrites. Only difference is that Apple is a patent troll and will go after anyones product that looks slightly like theirs. They wanted to ban the 10.1n tab when it clearly looks different that the iPad and Apple even had the balls to send Samsung design tips that would make their product unusable. Not to mention the recent letters Apple sent to all the sellers of the GNEX warning them not to sell the product anymore.

Samsung was an uninspired copy troll still publicly acting as if they haven't made any mistakes of their own. Apple offered Samsung and Google a cross-licensing deal but they said "no". Samsung has an enormous part in these cases dragging on and on as well.

techbeck, on 24 July 2012 - 17:35, said:

Apple is clearly the aggressor here and they have also lost patent cases several times as well. So it seems that not every court system is agreeing with Apple.

Apple became the aggressor after Samsung started pushing its luck about two hundred bridges too far.

[HSoft]

I'm just wondering what Apple actually spent in R&D on these "patents"? Probably nowhere close to the 2.5Billion they are asking.

[+Blank]

Man this patent crap is getting annoying. Every day you hear about Apple moaning about Patents. AHH!

Entire system needs to be scrapped and rewritten with some common sense incorporated into it.

[+techbeck]

.Neo, on 24 July 2012 - 17:46, said:

You don't have to, you're giving the impression all the same.

Oh, I see. Since I tend to like Android and think that many of Apples suits are dumb, I automatically think Samsung is innocent in everything. Thanks for clearing that up.

EDIT: I see you edited your post. But still, dont assume that because I tend to lean towards one side that I agree with everything Samsung has done.

Quote

Samsung was an uninspired copy troll still publicly acting as if they haven't made any mistakes of their own. Apple offered Samsung and Google a cross-licensing deal but they said no. Samsung has an enormous part in these cases dragging on and on as well.

And reportedly Samsung tried to work things out with Apple and Apple didnt want to play ball either. They both are acting stupid and I am glad some courts are starting to see this. But again, Apple said the Galaxy Tab looked to much like the iPad. Samsung introduced the N version which looks even more so different than the iPad but it wasnt good enough for Apple. Luckily, they lost the appeal.

Quote

Apple became the aggressor after Samsung started pushing its luck too far.

Samsung pushed it, but then Apple came out and really pushed it over the edge. Some of Apple's claims I tend to agree with, but a lot are stupid which again, some courts are starting to see.