What's the news?
A nine-member jury at a San Jose, California court awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages after finding that Samsung infringed on six patents. It’s less than half of what Apple claimed. But, the judge, who is yet to give her verdict, could triple the amount, since the jury said Samsung’s infringement was willful.
What exactly did Samsung copy, according to the jury?
Apple claimed Samsung had infringed on four design patents and three software patents, and used those design elements and features in 21 devices. Here are some: the ‘bounce-back’ or ‘the rubber band’ effect that occurs while scrolling on Apple devices; double-tap zooming and centering technology; pinch-to-zoom capabilities and one-fingered scrolling. The jury also said Samsung copied Apple's design including how iPhone's front, back and the homescreen looked. The only reprieve for Samsung was a Jury ruling that its tablet did not copy iPad’s physical design. More here.
So, what does it mean for the companies, competitors and consumers?
For Samsung: The judge, when she gives her ruling, will ask Samsung to pay anywhere from $1.05 billion to a little over $3 billion. As such, the damages awarded by the jury is only 1.5% of Samsung’s annual revenues from telecom. A bigger impact would come from a possible ban on the sales of Samsung devices in US. Which is why, Samsung is very likely to appeal. They might even have another
reason to appeal: unfair treatment. The battle, really, is far from over.
For Google: There’s a
view that the battle is really against Google. Those who have read Steve Isaacson’s biography might remember this scene from the book, (which takes place around the time Apple sued HTC for infringing on 20 of its patents). In that, Jobs says: “I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go to thermonuclear war on this.“
Samsung’s devices run on Android. What hurts Samsung – and Google's other hardware partners such as HTC - will hurt Google too. (Even Amazon runs a version of Android for its Kindle Fire). More importantly, Google’s engagement with hardware got even deeper after it bought Motorola last year.
For Microsoft: If Apple is really going after Google, one winner from the battle could be Microsoft. How? Those who are turned away from Android phones, either because of cost (that is, if the device makers end up paying royalty to Apple and pass on the cost to customers), or because of non-availability (thanks to possible injunctions), might move to Windows phone, benefiting Microsoft, which now seems to be betting big on mobility.
For consumers: Consumers are the losers, according to Samsung. “Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. 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,” it said in an email statement. This is a different territory, and the debate on the costs and benefits of intellectual property and patents is far from over. An alternate view came from Kevin Rivette, founder of 3LP Advisors LLC and former vice president of intellectual property strategy for IBM “It’s a good day for competition,” Rivette told
Bloomberg. “You’re going to force competitors to come into the marketplace with new designs.”
