Samsung may only have to pay Apple $600 million in legal battle

The massive court battle between Samsung and Apple in the US took a new and odd twist today, several months after Apple was awarded over $1 billion in its claim that Samsung copied the design of its iPhone and iPad products for many of Samsung's smartphones and tablets.

AlllThingsD.com reports that Judge Lucy Koh has now ordered a new trial for many of the Samsung products that were included in the decision last fall. The products include the Galaxy Prevail, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy SII AT&T, Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Tab, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, and Transform.

According to Judge Koh's statement, the sudden shift was made due to a " ... impermissible legal theory on which the jury based its award ...". Judge Koh therefore determined that the court ".. cannot reasonably calculate the amount of excess while effectuating the intent of the jury."

The decision means that if the new trial, based on the products named by Judge Koh, rules in Samsung's favor, the company could cut its $1 billion in damages to Apple to "just" $600 million or so. The fact that a new trial for parts of this case is going to be held at all is a huge legal blow to Apple.

Source: AllThingsD.com | Image via Cult of Mac

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Facebook plans News Feed revamp Thursday; will it be greeted with protests?

Next Story

Stardock teases upcoming Windows 8-based product

34 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

even a people who know nothing about technology can tell that samsung just copy the whole iPhone concept and package it as their own. Come on...this is ridiculous and if someone just copy exactly the same stuff you wouldn't like it as well.

What really scare me is that does the judge really know or even understand what is the differences of iOS and Android OS or know the history. If this judge got absolutely no idea about it then it's waste of time. They need a judge who know every aspect of iOS and Android element in order to know who really plagiarise. I hope the people who follow this patent war can provide more information about the jury background which is so crucial...

How very interesting. Just a couple of weeks ago, I was debating someone on here over this.
My argument was Apple didn't get paid yet and that figure will change. Guess I was right.

This can't be serious...??? The judge decided for Apple then and now she says Samsung is right (or half wrong, lol)? While I don't agree with the initial decision, I just can say WTF??

Neowin = Ignorant Commenters 'R' Us

If any of you knew the corporate history of Samsung in regards to blackmail, corruption, theft, embezzlement, and conduct, you wouldn't be defending them. Not that Apple is innocent in this regard either, but Samsung is no flower child that needs defending, rather they could use a good stepping on.

Apple made Samsung what it is today. Xerox made Apple what it is today. Many great products are the result of stealing/borrowing ideas and then improving or implementing them.

maxslaterrobins said,
The damage is done; Samsung is already viewed as an copycat. Their "new" Wallet app just proves the point.

Nothing is original anymore. Everyone copies. Even Apple. So every company can be viewed as a copycat.

The less Samsung pays, the better. It seemed like Apple wanted to hurt Samsung financially rather than defend their patents.

Phouchg said,
That image is going to haunt me. Good job, Neowin.

yea, damn, doesn't anyone have a better picture of her?

Good. That greedy company deserves less. Especially since hey wanted over twice as much as they were awarded and tried to get 20 products banned that Samsung is no longer selling/producing. Protect your property, I am all for that. But it was clear from the trial that Apple was trying to knock out the competition via legal action. Samsung was at fault in several areas, but they more than got their asses handed to them and it was clear the trial was one sided.

Galaxy Prevail, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy SII AT&T, Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Tab, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, and Transform

What are these phones? Are they US exclusives? I've only heard of 3 of them

Majesticmerc said,

What are these phones? Are they US exclusives? I've only heard of 3 of them

A lot of these are variants for different providers. Like the Captivate was for AT&T. The variants are Vibrant (T-Mobile) and Fascinate (Sprint). All 3 phones are pretty much the same.

Carriers messed up the name for the Galaxy S II. Samsung had more power with the Galaxy S III. It isn't Samsung's fault for all some of the silly names. Blame the carriers.

I don't know how I feel about it. There is no doubt Samsung blatantly copied Apple's designs but I can't help but kind feel like Apple is getting hit with karma.

Most people have forgotten but many years back, Bill Gates introduced ONE OF the first tablets to market. That device was far ahead of its time. Apple then does it years later at the perfect time and they are lauded for it. Bill Gates also gave us the Spot Watch many years back and now we hear that Apple is about to launch a watch. So, I'm not crying any tears for Apple.

NPGMBR said,
I don't know how I feel about it. There is no doubt Samsung blatantly copied Apple's designs but I can't help but kind feel like Apple is getting hit with karma.

Most people have forgotten but many years back, Bill Gates introduced ONE OF the first tablets to market. That device was far ahead of its time. Apple then does it years later at the perfect time and they are lauded for it. Bill Gates also gave us the Spot Watch many years back and now we hear that Apple is about to launch a watch. So, I'm not crying any tears for Apple.


The first Tablet PCs; I know it exactly because I bought one of first of such devices on the market, Toshiba 3505, and since then I kept buying only Tablets PCs, specifically Convertible ones.
What was, at least for me, incomprehensible since then is the reason why MS never tried to register the name and/ or form factors related to it.

NPGMBR said,
I don't know how I feel about it. There is no doubt Samsung blatantly copied Apple's designs but I can't help but kind feel like Apple is getting hit with karma.

Most people have forgotten but many years back, Bill Gates introduced ONE OF the first tablets to market. That device was far ahead of its time. Apple then does it years later at the perfect time and they are lauded for it. Bill Gates also gave us the Spot Watch many years back and now we hear that Apple is about to launch a watch. So, I'm not crying any tears for Apple.


In Apple's defense... They had tablet prototypes in the 80s. Not working ones back then, but the idea existed.

The first table was made by GRID way back in the late 80s early 90s. Prototypes where made even way before that. So no, B.G. did no introduce one of the first.

Hell, Apple had prototypes, papers and designs published way before.

NPGMBR said,
Apple then does it years later at the perfect time and they are lauded for it. Bill Gates also gave us the Spot Watch many years back and now we hear that Apple is about to launch a watch.

They were praised more so for their execution of a tablet device. Apple may not have been the first to make a tablet or a smartphone, but they simply made them better. Those earlier tablets were hardly touch-optimised even if they were running the Tablet PC edition of Windows. Neither did they have the same level of simplicity as an iPad. Those differences helped the iPad become popular and that's why it changed the market. We're no longer seeing a mouse-and-keyboard OS with touch-capability thrown in as an afterthought. Current tablet devices, including Microsoft's Surface RT, are running operating systems designed specifically with touch-input and ease of use in mind.

The same applies to Microsoft's SPOT-based devices. If Apple executes the idea of a smartwatch better then they deserve to be lauded for it, not Microsoft for its now defunct technology.

BoredBozirini said,
Samsung shouldn't have copied Apple.

Apple shouldn't have copied all the smartphones, computers and tablets before it.

I had one of the original Grid "tablets". It was utterly useless until Grid went to Microsoft and employed them to redevelop the entire software experience around Windows. Then it was useful. But it was never very functional. It wasn't a "tablet" because you couldn't write on it, which is where the term "tablet" comes from.

The first real tablets I used were hybrids from Toshiba. They were very functional - that's where I first discovered OneNote. These tablets were all based on Windows XP Tablet Edition which worked very well - specially since I also write Chinese, the stylus was a huge productivity gain.

Apple also had a "tablet" called Newton. It flopped badly for exactly the same reason the iPad is flopping (yes it is) in the two biggest markets, business and students - Apple could never get handwriting recognition to work in English, let alone Chinese. There is a wonderful potted history of Apple's attempts at handwriting in the archives of Dilbert, which ripped Apple apart. Apple STILL can't do handwriting which is why Jobs was really so down on a stylus. Meanwhile Microsoft has had fully functional and excellent handwriting recognition integrated into the OS for at least a decade.

One of the reasons for such high demand for Surface Pro is because it's a "tablet" - you can read and write on it. iPad is a "reader" not a tablet. Cue howls of horror from the fanbois.

Apple is now in a curious position. It either needs to copy Microsoft - handwriting, live tiles, etc - innovate, which they seem to be having trouble doing, or get left behind, which is obviously happening already. Where I live here in China, Apple are dying a very rapid death and are now considered "uncool". Samsung, Nokia and (yes) Microsoft are now considered the "cool" companies. Apple is for laoren (old folks).

Major Plonquer said,
snipped

Stop the lies, the Gridpad writing recognition wasn't as bad as you claim. In fact it served as the basis for a more successful project, the Palm.

Other thing, a tablet was never meant for hand writing recognition as the main way to interact with the device. You claim to have done your homework, then answer me this: What was the main GUI component in the original 'tablet' concept, Alan Kay's Dynabook?

Hint: It was NOT handwriting.

By the way, two interesting tidbits. One of the longest friendships Kay had in his life was with Jobs. Kay have said many times that many of the ideas that he executed as materialization of Dynabook ideals came from conversations with Jobs. He also said only two devices in history approached the Dynabook principle: The 84's Mac and the iPhone... if only it had a bigger screen... I wonder when that will happen.