[Editorial] Now That Samsung Was Found Liable, What are the Potential Ramifications?

[dgstorm]

Apple vs. Samsung in the U.S. Court System: It was one of the most titanic trials of the decade. A fight between two juggernauts of the mobile industry. Similar battles where being waged around the world, with various outcomes, some of which are still to be determined. In the end, (although the appeals process is just beginning), Samsung lost to Apple. The verdict was paradoxically both shocking and unsurprising. Most of us realized that there was some copying going on (by both sides), but few of us expected the defeat to be so utterly lopsided in Apple's favor. But, what does this defeat mean going forward, for the companies involved, the consumers, and the legal system in general? Here's a brief analysis below culled from multiple sources around the web. Before that here is a defiant statement issued by Samsung in response to the outcome:

Samsung said in a statement, "[This was] a loss for the American consumer. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims."

Regardless, now that Samsung has been defeated by Apple in a U.S. court, we have several things to consider throughout this trial. We will attempt to list just a few of the most important ones (please keep in mind, much of this is simply speculation):

• There is now a long appeals process coming, and it is possible we could see some reversals.
• During this trial, the publicity of the case actually helped Samsung in world-wide market acceptance and consumer knowledge.
• Because of all of this publicity Samsung is now considered an equal to Apple; however, after the verdict, their reputation could go either way. It could bolster their position, or they could be perceived as a copycat.
• Even if Samsung is hurt by this, it may not be much. They are still way ahead of Apple in the emerging markets of China, by a factor of over 2 to 1. Plus, this could rally Android fans even further.
• Apple will likely now ask for a ban on several Samsung products.
• Because the infringement was found to be "willful," Apple could seek Treble damages. That would turn the $1 Billion dollar verdict into $3 Billion. That's almost half the profit they made over the past year.
• This could lead to some sort of cross-licensing agreement between Apple and Samsung, in which Samsung pays Apple to make Android phones. Apple could then go after other Android OEMs for the same thing. This would hurt Android in the long run.
• Conversely, if Apple decides to pursue bans only, they can now use this case as precedent to go after other Android OEMs, which might hurt Android more (or could force change in the current U.S. Patent system).
• If Apple does seek a cross-licensing agreement, it will likely cause the price of all mobile devices to go up, which only hurts the consumer and market competition.
• Emboldened by their success, Apple could try to go after the Galaxy S III now.
• In the long run, this could actually hurt Apple more than it helps them, because they have effectively forced their competitors to think even further out of the box to remain competitive. Because of this, their competition is likely to change the rules of the game by creating a more disruptive technology. There are signs that this has already happened. Apple is now likely to release an iPad Mini, and an iPhone with a larger display. Both of these are reactive moves designed to keep up with the changes in the market brought on by Android.

As you can see, there are a ton of ways to look at this situation, and we have only covered just a few. There are obviously other factors to consider, and other perspectives on this complex issue. Share some of your ideas in the thread!

[Ads]

[twowheelz]

Disregard

[rayhodge02]

Only time will tell

~~4GIVEN~~

[frankiez]

just makes me hate CRAPPLE even more as well as their fan boys!

[Sardo Numspa]

here is an interesting article: Apple v. Samsung juror: we “wanted to send a message” | Ars Technica

it basically tells how the jury foreman had experience with patents, so all the other 8 jury members looked to him. then, if you keep reading the comments, the readers find out that the jury foremans patent was for a dvr device years after TIVO started production on their device. there are other good points brought up in the comments as you sort through them, like how the jury foreman said "We felt like we were 100 percent fair, but we wanted something more than a slap on the wrist." which seems to go in direct opposition to the judges final jury orders that states " You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer".

there will be a big appeals process here.

[Ultraman1966]

Erm, let's be honest, in any other court (non US) this would've ended with the judge slapping both Apple and Samsung for being childish. But to be fair, the Samsung lawyers were pretty poor with the late evidence submissions etc. Add to the fact that they had a patent troll for a jury who shouldn't have been there... well I can't wait for the appeals.

[chrisonline]

Disregard

EXCEPT . . that it was announced this morning that the Galaxy S3, and a few other more recent devices, have been added to the new suit. A long way to go, and a lot of ups and downs, I'm sure . . but the outcome is important and it should not be disregarded.

I don't touch Apple products (except for an old style iPod which I use to play music on the hot tub music system!) but I am an investor in Apple, because I realize that so many *do* obsess over their products.

[thymeless]

It's time for the manufacturers to stop with the overlay crap. That is what was found to infringe. Give me stock Android!