Men pose with Samsung Galaxy S3 and iPhone 4 smartphones in photo illustration in Zenica

During closing arguments in the second Apple vs Samsung patent trial, Samsung’s lawyers repeated its claims that it doesn’t “owe Apple a nickel,” and suggested that “they’ll be dancing in the streets of Cupertino if you give them $100 million” of the $2.2B Apple is claiming.

Samsung is attempting a multi-pronged defence essentially amounting to ‘our phones didn’t infringe the patents, and even if they did, that’s down to Google, and even if we are responsible, the patents are not worth nearly as much as Apple says they are’ … 

Apple, in contrast, says that Samsung had nothing resembling today’s smartphones before the iPhone, and that it blatantly copied patented features as a shortcut to developing its own solutions, reports the WSJ.

Apple lawyer Harold McElhinny, who kicked off its closing arguments, said the iPhone was a revolutionary product and it caught the industry off-guard.

“Where was Samsung before the iPhone? You know the answer to that one. They didn’t even have a smartphone,” said McElhinny.

On the amount claimed, Apple argues that it tried without success to stop Samsung copying its features, that it would have been free to charge any amount it wanted had it chosen to license patents to Samsung, and that without a significant financial penalty, companies like Samsung will continue to copy its work.

One fly in the ointment had been a ruling in a separate case between Apple and Motorola, where the exact definition of a patent term had been debated. Apple’s patent for detecting and hyperlinking things like dates and phone numbers in messages and emails described the use of an “analyzer server.” Samsung argued that as its handsets didn’t rely on a server to identify linkable data, instead relying on the phone’s own software to do it, the patent didn’t apply.

In the end, the court has left that point for the jury to decide. The jury will now have to complete a highly detailed, multi-page form to determine what devices infringed which patents, and the amount of damages that should be awarded.

In the previous patent case between the two companies, Apple was initially awarded $1B in damages before $450M was cut, with a retrial ordered to look again at the damages awarded for some of the patents. The retrial awarded Apple $290M instead for that portion of the case, giving Apple a revised total award of $930M.

In this case, Google has already agreed to partially or fully meet the costs of any award against Samsung on the basis that most of the alleged infringements relate to Android rather than specifically to Samsung handsets.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

38 Responses to “Samsung says Apple will be “dancing in the streets of Cupertino” if awarded even $100M”

  1. Boy this is exciting


  2. gerrytemple says:

    I truly believe in innovation – and companies like Samsung (and Google in that respect) heavily damage innovative companies like Apple. Maybe not now, maybe not tomorrow. But over a few years this adds up to serious damage, and I believe even 2 billion $ are not enough.


    • ikir says:

      Totally agree


    • Where’s the innovation? It’s all the same bland updates and releases across the board. The rush to release a shiny new phone every five minutes with no significant changes compared to the previous model is what’s killing innovation.

      Meanwhile, Apple STILL doesn’t have a 4k monitor/TV offering (and trust me I’m waiting patiently). I guess that’s Samsung’s fault too?


      • scumbolt2014 says:

        New phone relaeases every 5 minutes with no significant updates. You lie and over exaggerate much?


      • You’re not taking my sarcasm to be literal, are you? And please, tell me exactly what it is that I’m lying about.


      • Rania Amine says:

        You know, there’s trolls, then there’s the trolls that spout such mind-numbing stupidity that you wonder if there’s an actual human being behind that keyboard.

        There’s nothing wrong with a bit of exaggeration, as long as its based on a shred of truth. Apple refreshes it’s phone lineup ONCE a year. You know, every twelve months. By far, the slowest release cycle of any OEM out there. Why don’t you name a single company thats on a SLOWER schedule? Do you know how many phone models companies like Samsung, HTC, Sony, LG, etc have, and how many they release a year? Dozens and dozens. Yet, Apple releasing a new phone once a year is defined as “rushing to release a shiny new phone every 5 minutes”- ignoring the obvious exaggeration, you’re suggesting that Apple is on a facster release schedule than the rest of the industry. See, that’s an example of “mind-numbing stupidity”, a statement so inherently contradictory to the facts that its stunning.

        As for “no significant changes”, I guess that’s a matter of definition, but based on your previous statement something tells me you’re not the most objective arbitrer of that. But let’s see what the iPhone 5S added compared to the previous generation:

        – The first consumer level 64 bit chip in a mobile phone, that “stunned’ experts on the topic and longtime CPU companies like Qalcomm, etc. In many benchmarks, the performance destroys Samsung’s just released S5- and this is a 6 month old phone. Ars technica describes the chip as beyond anything else in the industry, and “desktop class”. Something like this takes just a BIT of engineering effort, dont you think?

        – The first useable, reliable fingerprint sensor in any mobile device. I use it dozens of times a day and it works 99% of the time, on the first try. It’s pretty game-changing, and does not even alter the process you would use to wake your phone. Meanwhile, read some of the review of Samsung’s just released fingerprint sensor in the S5- every single impression Ive read defines it as “impossible to use in one hand”, “poorly thought out”, “unreliable”, and requires a perfect swipe in the middle of the sensor with a difficult to do motion. But hey- they got the bullet point, which is all they care about. The fact that they couldn’t even APPROACH the quality of the 5S reader shows you how difficult this stuff is.

        – The M7 motion chip, first of its kind in any smartphone, with a multitude of benefits to battery life and fitness applications, etc.

        – Duo-Tone flash- the first of its kind on a smartphone (and maybe even any camera?) and dramatically increases the quality and accuracy of shots taken with flash.

        The aboe are significant, major technological advances that have not been matched by anyone else- I’m not even including software, and the fact that iOS was also completely redesigned. Yet, you would define these as “bland” with “no significant change”. I would ask what you WOULD consider significant change, but then I’d be met with even more stupidity.

        I’m not sure why I took the time to respond to your brainless post. I guess I feel the need to respond to pure garbage once every hundreds of posts of stupidity or so that I read. I often wonder what motivates people like you to basically lie through their teeth, and twist facts in such an extreme fashion because of your pure hatred of a technology company.


      • Rania,

        Although I appreciate your post (unnecessary mud slinging aside), the point I was making was not about Apple… It was about smartphone makers in general. Sorry to burst your bubble.

        My comment about the lack of a 4k monitor was about Apple. I mentioned Samsung sarcastically.

        But, I do want to thank you for taking the time out of your obviously busy schedule to write a mini novel about smartphone technology and how it’s changing the world through subtle innovation. You seem very enthusiastic. You should use that enthusiasm to do something positive with your life rather than belittle people on the internet. It’s ugly.

        Next time you respond to a post you should take the time to read it correctly as to not look “mind-numbing stupid”.

        Enjoy your day.


      • I agree with your observation about frequent updates with little innovation between, but if you stick to a two year upgrade cycle (i.e. phone contract), I think you would find a significant improvement in size, battery life, and/or processing performance. However, you can’t reasonable expect revolutionary changes in a smart phone. It still needs to fit in your pocket, it still needs to run on a 10 hour battery charge, there is only so much bandwidth available on LTE networks, etc.

        As for the 4K display business, Apple never said they were going to sell a TV. So don’t hold off on a TV purchase waiting for Apple. In fact, if you have an Apple TV like I do, then why would you even want an Apple branded display? You know you’ll pay a premium for it when it won’t offer anything that you can’t get with a third party display plus an Apple TV.


      • Actually, if you really want innovation in a smart phone, look into getting a Project Tango phone from Google. Its two to three times larger than an iPhone and will probably only give you two hours of battery life, but it is innovative.


    • desksaver says:

      Kind of a funny comment given Apple was probably one of the LAST companies to make a smartphone. Apple acted like they invented the smartphone, and people who don’t know better believe them.

      Is iPhone a well designed product? Absolutely yes. Is iPhone an original idea? Absolutely not.

      Nokia, HTC, Samsung, Treo, Microsoft plus a dozen other companies have been making smartphone before Apple has any idea what a smartphone is.


      • Apple didn’t invent the smartphone. It just revolutionized it.


      • True. Apple did not invent the smartphone as it was at that time. But has your definintion of a smartphone not changed since then? The old smartphone definition and requirements were to easily access mail, the internet, and still function as a phone. Samsung and lots of other companies made smartphones before Apple did, but non of them succeeded at making any of the features usable, because the interface wasn’t thought through. Here’s where Apple comes in, they set the bar and they reinvented the defintion of a smartphone. Now it’s about a big display, few buttons, and features while maintaining a simple interface.

        I wouldn’t say the iPhone was original for a smartphone. I would say it was original for a new kind of smartphone.

        It would have been so succesful if there wasn’t anything special to it, after all.


  3. aeronperyton says:

    Apple will be too busy conducting actual R&D. The best we can hope for is Eddy Cue doing a butt-dance in his chair while working.


  4. I do agree with the lawyers that most (if not all) of these patent infringements should be against Google, not Samsung. I think that most people tend to forget that Google was the original source for Android.


    • Dave Huntley says:

      this was debated to the n-th degree a long time ago – it’s is more of a threat to go after Google’s customers – Samsung can choke publically and lose sales (and hopefully Apple’s lawyer will say damages too) – and Google will have unhappy clients and others shaking in their boots wondering if next.

      It does seem to work – Samsung admits copying and stock price lies publically, Google has to idemnify to keep them happy, HTC forced to do a deal with Apple…
      Microsoft seems to have had the best success threatening and suing, usually grabbing little headlines but they did get some cash. Odd in that they are now promoting droid phones too. Samsung has more Lawsuits against the world than any other phone company, don’t forget that. It must be difficult for them though, if you go to Korea it is full of ripoffs and fakes, google Lotte World in Seoul and tell me what it looks like or the design cues of korean cars… copying is ingrained there, free thought is not something they are used to.


    • If you recall, Apple has questioned a Google patent lawyer on the stand about the agreement Google has with Samsung, and that agreement says that Google will pay Apple for any infringements made by Samsung related to Android. In other words, Google may not be listed as a defendant, but its very much Google’s money that will being paying the tab. So rest assured that your concerns have been addressed.


  5. As far as an “analyzer server”, that doesn’t have to refer to a separate server machine and Samsung knows that. It refers to client-server architecture, which can co-exist within one machine. There may well be a data detector server process that serves client processes such as and They are ridiculous.


  6. jrox16 says:

    “Dancing in the streets of Cupertino…” What a stupid comment from a stupid company.


    • Jubei says:

      Agree, but the Haters, Google Apologist and Samsung Trolls/Brainwashed Americans that love this South Korean S of a company will love that quote.


      • What is even more amazing, is that people actually BUY the Samsung crap! And Samsung smartphones are not “cheap” per se, sometimes the prices is almost as high as Apples prices (but lacking the quality of build and not least innovation)
        I’ll never support Samsung anymore, sadly I have one of their TV’s but that was before all this took place.

        Anyway, it amazes me that so many people think Samsung as a company is ok. I mean how can you not see how easily the designs are copied.


  7. Tallest Skil says:

    Ban them from selling ALL products in the United States.

    Can’t wait for Kim to go insane and try to retake the south.


  8. b9bot says:

    Samsung is a bunch of lying, cheating, low life, no morales, poor products, copycat, thieves. Boycott Samsung.


  9. ashtraywasp says:

    “Samsung is attempting a multi-pronged defence essentially amounting to ‘our phones didn’t infringe the patents, and even if they did, that’s down to Google, and even if we are responsible, the patents are not worth nearly as much as Apple says they are’ … ”

    Very well put.


  10. ashtraywasp says:

    Your articles have made this trial very understandable and clear to digest Ben. You’ve done some really good journalism.


  11. rlowhit says:

    Samsungs recent multi-pronged defense feels very much like a panicked cat in a corner. Their attorneys have brought up anything they can grab at to make stick.


  12. alanol says:

    Popularly known as “the three dog defense” – 1. You didn’t get bit by a dog, and 2. if you did get bit, it wasn’t my dog, and 3. if you did get bit, and it was my dog, you didn’t get hurt.” Common courtroom gamesmanship, used by the guilty – exposed again.


  13. Jab King says:

    this is a sad case of stealing, finger pointing and it wasn’t us. anytime a defense team say’s (and even if we are responsible)that says they’re guilty. this is like having your time you spent at work working and some one else come and take credit for what you did and they get all the glory for it. and you don’t even get a thank you. sadly to say i have a samsung galaxy note 2 [terrible] and iPhone 5S [love it] and yes they did steal apple’s patents from the { slide to unlock to the red and green buttons when using the phone feature} i do believe that apple will win this case.

    but the best was to deal with bugs like [Samsung] is to go after the hive [Google] since they’re footing the bill
    and have no innovation or new ideas


  14. herb02135go says:

    It is a great quote and probably true- “buying drinks at BJ’s on DeAnza Blvd.” might be too detailed for this jury.

    Yes, shame on Samsung for defending itself. It should stay focused on making shiny products. Unless crApple has patented shiny.

    Face it: I’ve not read comments from ANY poster who has used the Samsung product they are bashing.

    The coverage on this site has hardly been fair but who herebexpects anything but bowing to the ghost of Jobs? I don’t.


  15. scumbolt2014 says:

    Even if Apple gets 10 bucks, they’ll be dancing on ScamSum’s grave soon enough.


  16. chrisims12 says:

    I love Apple but I think this whole thing is so stupid. I mean the fact that they are claiming things like slide to unlock is sooooo stupid. How do they expect android to work if that were not around?


    • thats not the point. Its not that Android isn’t allowed to use any of the patents that Apple has, Apple is arguing that they would have licensed these innovations to Google and therefore would have received a small portion of the profit from each phone sold running android. And to be honest, they do deserve something. Had they licensed their patents to Google and other phone manufacturers, they would be receiving a profit from every android phone ever sold, and there are a lot. Though I don’t believe that it is fair to put the blame on Samsung, these phone companies definitely owe Apple some money, because although slide to unlock seems like a simple idea now along with many others, Steve Jobs did say at the first iPhone introduction “we filed for over 200 patents for all the inventions in iPhone, and we intend to protect them”.


  17. Imagine all the dancing when they win the full 2.2 Billion!


  18. I think that yes samsung should innovate, but should create their own ideas.Samsung does have some different features on its devices that apple does not have but the other half of their features come from apple, that’s why I respect other companies such as Microsoft who don’t copy but create their different style even though it might not be as great as others they have a new start of innovation.In my opinion i do believe that copying someone does affect them and that samsung should receive a punishment to prevent other companies from doing the same.


  19. Gollum says:

    Apple deserves $100 Billion.