Purchasing new hardware? Read our latest product comparisons

Jury orders Samsung to pay US$1 billion in damages to Apple


August 24, 2012

A jury has ruled that Samsung should pay more than US$1 billion in damages to Apple for patent infringements (Photo: Shutterstock)

A jury has ruled that Samsung should pay more than US$1 billion in damages to Apple for patent infringements (Photo: Shutterstock)

The jury in a landmark intellectual property lawsuit has ruled that Samsung should pay Apple over US$1 billion in damages. After nearly 22 hours of deliberation, the jury found that Samsung willingly infringed upon Apple's patents with a number of its devices. Apple was not found to have infringed upon any of the South Korean firm's patents.

Apple had initially claimed a total of $2.5 billion in damages, with Samsung seeking $519 million. After considering a full 700 questions regarding the claims of the two technology giants, the nine-person jury concluded that Samsung had indeed infringed upon its rival's intellectual property in six patents. The final damages figure agreed upon by the jury is $1,051,855,000.

The time that it took to make a decision on the case came as a surprise to many, with the jury deliberating for just under 22 hours following the three week trial. Not only was Samsung's claim that Apple's intellectual properties were invalid rejected, but it was ruled that the South Korean firm willingly infringed upon Apple's patents. The majority of key decisions went in Apple's favor, with the jury ruling that all but three of the products in question infringed upon Cupertino's pinch-to-zoom technology.

Samsung had also claimed that Apple had infringed upon several of its own patents, and though the iPhone creator was unable prove any of those patents invalid, they were not found to have infringed upon any.

Though not all of the decisions went in Apple's favor, the ruling can be seen as a significant blow to the South Korean firm, a company that is widely regarded as Apple's key competitor in the smartphone and tablet industries. However, based on previous cases, it's likely that Samsung will appeal the ruling, meaning that the ongoing dispute is far from over.

The news comes after a South Korean court ruled yesterday that both Apple and Samsung have infringed upon each others' patents, following which a limited ban was placed upon national sales of the products involved in the country. Similar lawsuits are ongoing in the U.K., Germany and Australia.

Source: BBC, The Verge

About the Author
Chris Wood Chris specializes in mobile technology for Gizmag, but also likes to dabble in the latest gaming gadgets. He has a degree in Politics and Ancient History from the University of Exeter, and lives in Gloucestershire, UK. In his spare time you might find him playing music, following a variety of sports or binge watching Game of Thrones. All articles by Chris Wood


Michael Mantion

great - must have been a pretty strong case for them to reach that conclusion in only 22 hours

Inappropriate Response

My Son predicted this decision, yeah he does IT, he thought any other conclusion would be Wrong

Bill Bennett

Amazing that they could find 9 peers of Samsung to sit in a jury.

In my country we use trained and experienced professionals to judge cases, not random people, but to each his own..

Frank van Schie

As if Apple isn't making enough money by ripping everyone else off with their outdated technology. It is pathetic.

Tim Mincks

So an American court rules to Apples favour and a South Corean one rules to Samsungs favour. Seems like Lady Justitia doesn't have a very effective blindfold but I suppose noone is very surprised. The interesting question though is whether Samsung has to cease selling their smartphoneproducts in US or not.

Conny Söre

What American isn't patriotic? Nobody is surprised by the outcome, but seriously... "pinch to zoom" ? software and business method patents need to die. I've been able to use my mouse to re-size photos on my screen for decades, there is simply no inventive step needed to continue that paradigm when a mouse is replaced by fingertips - it's absolutely blazing obvious to anyone who's ever re-sized a window before...


So what is happening to ALL the other cases between these two companies. It would be better for Samsung just to buy a 51% stake in Apple.

Anyway a billion dollars to the likes of Samsung is like a $100 bill to you and me.

Good Luck Samsung with your other cases and ask for double what you paid back.

Scott :)

Scott Bailey

This case was far too complex and technical for a jury to decide on.

Reaching a decision in only 22 hours just proves they had no idea what they were doing.

It would take weeks for a technical expert to read and understand all the documents and evidence.

But this was in the good ol' USA, so of course they ruled in favour of Apple, like a good ol' American lynch mob.


If Samsung cannot sell smartphone products in US anymore, than the Americans could buy it from the internet. It will be a very good business for some country: the money will then goes to the other country. Interesting...

Márk Kiss

I feel that there has to be more to the ruling that we are not getting. A patent is for a person who “invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent,” (http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/general_info_concerning_patents.jsp#heading-4) I could see the algorithm for pinching the window being patented, but not the action. As christopher stated, it is similar to resizing a window, nothing really new.


I think this ruling is outrageous. And I also agree that there is no way a typical jury could rule fairly on this, and especially not in 22 hours. Most of these patents are embarrassing at best--such as pinch to zoom, and, I believe they somehow got one for the shape of the phone? Geez.


I seriously agree with Robo. This case was done and dusted before it started ... noose already tied!

Post a Comment

Login with your Gizmag account:

Related Articles
Looking for something? Search our articles