With the Apple versus Samsung legal “war” (arguably one of the biggest between two rival companies in modern history) coming to a close, it’s interesting to to see the outcome. After what consisted of three days of lengthy and methodical debate, the jury finally reached a verdict.
The jury was largely in favor of Apple, passing down the judgement that Samsung had knowingly and purposefully infringed on both patents and mimicked various aspects of the iPhone’s visual appearance. Interestingly enough though, the jury found that Samsung was exemplary in the building of their tablets and didn’t duplicate the physical aspects Apple’s iPad.
The jury concluded the proceedings by ruling that Samsung is required to pay Apple over $1.05 billion dollars in damages for intentionally infringing on the company’s intellectual properties related to the iPhone. Consequently, during the after-hours stock trading following the verdict, Apple’s stock reached an all-time high at more than $675 per share!
Before a conclusion amongst the nine-person jury was reached, they were required to complete a twenty page form that consisted of over 700 questions from 33 different categories. Both Reuters and CNet interviewed a handful of members from of the jury that handled the case and their answers were concise and intriguing. When interviewing Manuel Ilagan, CNet reported that it was “clear there was infringement [on Samsung’s behalf]” – when asked to clarify, Ilagan said the following:
Well, there were several. The e-mails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, they showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea — I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn’t answer one of them. They didn’t help their cause.
Furthermore, Reuters spoke with jury foreman Velvin Hogan who conveyed that they simply found Apple’s arguments about needing to protect their innovations compelling and persuasive. While Hogan noted that the jury was unanimous in the sense that Apple’s demands of $2.75 billion was “extraordinarily high”, he also informed Reuters that they wanted to send a message:
‘We didn’t want to give carte blanche to a company, by any name, to infringe someone else’s intellectual property,’ Hogan told Reuters a day after the verdict.
Both of the jurors mentioned above claim that the mutual decision wasn’t rushed and carefully thought out. According to Ilgan, the entire process was expedited due to the fact that the jury members had experience handling similar situations. The foreman, Hogan, holds a patent of his own and previously worked as an engineer – he was undoubtedly one of, if not the most, versed among the jury. Moreover, other members were said to also have engineering and legal experience of their own.
Even though Samsung wasn’t required to pay Apple’s initial demands and wasn’t found guilty for any of Apple’s accusations related to their tablets, it’s obvious that Apple was victorious and the clear winner of this lengthy and intense legal dispute. Stay tuned for additional coverage on both Samsung and Apple.