Seeking Alpha

Apple (AAPL) will ask Judge Koh to impose treble damages (over $3B) on Samsung (SSNLF.PK) in...

Apple (AAPL) will ask Judge Koh to impose treble damages (over $3B) on Samsung (SSNLF.PK) in response to last month's huge jury win, "legal sources" (Samsung lawyers?) tell the Korea Times. A hearing regarding Apple's request could took place on Friday - Judge Koh has proven willing to grant many of Apple's requests before, during, and after the trial.
Comments (68)
  • That is obscene.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • Apple and the people who buy their products should be ashamed of themselves. A jury was fooled into the verdict and now apple will continue to bribe the judge.


    How can people support a bully like them? Evil is the nicest word for apple I can come up with.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • You can't handle the truth .... Design your own stuff loser.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:01 AM Reply Like
  • Amen. Quit stealing technology and stand on your own two feet. Apple just needs to pull production out of that wretched China to the U.S. They can afford it. Of course, they'd have the crap regulated out of them and no one would really be able to afford their products. Gotta love it.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:55 AM Reply Like
  • Why exactly should buyers of apple products be ashamed of themselves?


    Why aren't you mad at Samsung for not taking the licensing offer given them a long time ago? It would have saved Samsung, its customers and shareholders money.To the whole world it is apparent that Samsung stold Apple's IP. You're mad about the apple win because you are of a subset of people that want IP theft to be legal.


    Hangers on who leach off others will always throw epithets at others. Buy some apple stock and you'll feel better in a couple months.
    19 Sep 2012, 11:20 AM Reply Like
  • mschauber, people should be ashamed are who bought stole, copycat phones because they are illegal. You are not in USA, are you?
    19 Sep 2012, 11:38 AM Reply Like
  • Except that the "whole world" ruled differently than a court in California
    19 Sep 2012, 11:55 AM Reply Like
  • The law permits triple damages but I would be surprised if she granted 3x damages but it could be more than $1B.


    Apple is the most sued high tech company partially due to "deep pockets" so why should Apple not be able to protect its intellectual property.


    I do think the whole patent system needs to be reformed. Patent trolls should not be able to buy patents they did not develop and then sue companies based on that. Google even gave patents to HTC to sue Apple. Hardly fair! Companies should also be required to market a product incorporating their patents within a certain period of time or lose the patent. Just some ideas that should be considered.
    19 Sep 2012, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • How would you react if someone stole something very valuable from you. Do you have a security system? That would be so evil.


    Theft is theft!
    19 Sep 2012, 02:32 PM Reply Like
  • People who post weak opinions on something they don't know and don't understand should be banned from SA. You should be ashamed for such dribble.


    And as for your unfounded accusation of bribery, that's slander and you could find yourself in court and LOSE like Samsung.


    Dullard is the nicest word I can up with for you.
    19 Sep 2012, 11:26 PM Reply Like
  • The Apple Logo looks more and more like a tye-dyed Death Star.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:48 AM Reply Like
  • The legal remedy for an intentional tort to willfully violate another's rights and property is treble damage plus costs. This is true whether a thief steals a donut from a bakery or Samsung steals intellectual properties. The dollar amount may shock you, but that further points to the grossly overt disregard of others' rights by the defendant.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:51 AM Reply Like
  • The old anti-racketeering law has been abused into oblivion with the "treble damage"+costs. It should be reformed.


    Don't know what to say about this case being in Cali. Anyone really believe they were going to lose with a Cali jury?
    19 Sep 2012, 10:04 AM Reply Like
  • Not sure about the California procedure but the jury may be out of it at this point. I think it is Judge Koh who will decide whether or not to impose punitive damages. The jury found that grounds for imposition of punitive damages exists. I think it is up to the judge to use her discretion to apply punitive damages and set the amount (up to triple original award).
    19 Sep 2012, 11:22 AM Reply Like
  • Can say anything you want but read the 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which is also in the Bill of Rights that provides the right to a jury of ones peers in, this case, the State, in which the offense occurred. If it was illegal to pursue the claim in Cali, then it would have not been there. Impossible to win this argument due to the above unless another amendment to U.S. Constitution.
    19 Sep 2012, 04:46 PM Reply Like
  • A strong message needs to be sent to the copycats of Apple's innovations by awarding treble damages to Apple.That is the only thing that will get its competitors to stop infringing upon Apple innovations. It is just good business for Apple to defend its innovations. Samsung would be doing the same, it the tables were turned.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:55 AM Reply Like
  • According to a biased set of US jurors and judge? Check out the case outcomes worldwide if you want to get a better sense of what's happened.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • You mean like this part of the world?


    German court backs Apple in patent fight with Motorola


    FRANKFURT, Sept 13 | Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:59pm EDT


    (Reuters) - A court in Munich ruled on Thursday that Motorola Mobility, owned by Google Inc, had infringed an Apple Inc patent and ordered that all tablets and smartphones containing the technology be recalled.


    Judge Peter Guntz said Motorola had infringed Apple's "overscroll bounce" technology, which enables users to move documents over the screen of their device and let them bounce back to the centre after releasing their fingers.


    A spokeswoman for the court said the ruling was not likely to have an immediate impact as Apple would have to specifically request a ban on the product and Motorola could also appeal against the ruling.


    Apple and Google did not immediately reply to requests for a comment on the ruling.


    Google bought lossmaking Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion last year, in its largest acquisition ever, aiming to use the company's patents to fend off legal attacks on its Android mobile platform and expand beyond its software business.


    Other technology companies have also invested billions of dollars in buying up patent portfolios that they can use against rivals and have also ploughed money into litigation in the United States and Europe.


    Last month Apple scored a landmark legal victory over Samsung Electronics Co Ltd when a U.S. jury found the Korean company had copied critical features of the iPhone and iPad and awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages.


    Germany has become a major battleground in the global patent war between makers of mobile phones, tablet computer devices and their operating software, as court actions there have proved to be relatively cheap and speedier than in other jurisdictions.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:25 PM Reply Like
  • Samsung suffers German court setback in Apple battle


    (Reuters) - A German court ruled against Samsung Electronics Co in a patent suit versus Apple, another leg in a long legal battle as the two technology giants jostle for top spot in the booming smartphone and tablet markets.


    Samsung, which passed Apple in the third quarter as the world's top maker of smartphones, is locked in a bruising patent tussle with the U.S. firm in some 10 countries from the United States to Australia, France and Japan.


    "This ruling related to only one of 13 patents that are currently in suit between those parties in Germany, and of dozens of patents on a worldwide basis," said independent patent expert Florian Mueller.


    "It's not the first rejection of a complaint involving these two players, and barring a major surprise, it won't be the last." .....
    19 Sep 2012, 10:28 PM Reply Like
  • Stupid patent wars cut both ways


    Apple gets kicked in the teeth by German patent lawsuit decisions



    Motorola wins Apple wireless patent fight in Germany

    19 Sep 2012, 10:36 PM Reply Like
  • This basically lead to a permanent ban of iCloud in Germany

    19 Sep 2012, 10:41 PM Reply Like
  • Read through the end of the story. Do you see a permanent ban in place? Perhaps you didn't read the update.




    Update: Apple temporarily pulled all of its iPhone smartphones from the German market, with the exception of the latest iPhone 4S, which is still on sale. 3G-enabled iPads were also pulled from the store.


    But Apple has won a temporary suspension of the enforcement of the injunction, meaning Apple can continue to sell the patent infringing devices in its online store until a later date.


    The ruling comes from a December hearing in which Motorola won an injunction against Apple, on the grounds that its 3G-technology infringes on Motorola's European-held patents.


    An Apple spokesperson said: "While iPad and iPhone models are currently unavailable in our [German] online store, our customers will still be able to find these devices in stores or at authorised retailers."




    Getting an injunction against enforcement of the ban is hardly indicating that the injunction is a lock.


    Yes, there is a mix of wins/losses around the globe between AAPL, Samsung, HTC and Motorola. Some are consistent, some aren't. In Korea, Samsung and Apple took a draw and each were fined some ridiculously low amount of penalties that probably were under the amount of money the attorneys spent in airfare and hotels.


    So where are we in Germany, Apple is selling it's products at authorized retailers and Motorola has been ordered to recall all it's offending products and presumably can't sell them.


    Who is ahead so far in Germany? Motorola or Apple?
    20 Sep 2012, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • For now, Apple because of their oh-so-strong "rubber band" patent. Seriously, the stupidest thing I've ever heard. iCloud is still under a perma ban



    Apple sued Google-owned Motorola Mobility for infringing on its "list scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touchscreen display" patent, said Stefanie Ruhwinkel, spokeswoman for the Munich court. The patent is also known as the "overscroll bounce" or "rubber band" patent and allows pages, documents or photos on touchscreen devices to scroll past their boundaries and bounce back when users release their fingers from the screen.
    20 Sep 2012, 09:42 AM Reply Like
  • The iCloud is NOT under a permanent ban in Germany. Push e-mail service is banned, not the iCloud. Push e-mail service was an earth shattering innovation of biblical proportion patented by Motorola.


    Your opinion on the validity of the bounce patent carries zero legal weight. It's been upheld in multiple courts. Live with it.


    You can call any patent you want silly or stupid or ridiculous. When you start issuing patents let us all know.
    21 Sep 2012, 09:50 AM Reply Like
  • Sounds like I touched a nerve. Shouldn't you be waiting in line for the new IPhone that still doesn't have expandable memory and now doesn't even have a halfway competent map app?
    21 Sep 2012, 10:32 AM Reply Like
  • Not really. You shouldn't make false claims. Nor should you pretend that your opinion on patents is meaningful.


    Before the patent fight over push e-mail I would have thought that AOL had patented it. Those famous commercials "You have mail." - ding


    Maybe you think the "one click to buy" was an awesome innovation that Amazon patented.


    Now we know it was a Motorola patent.


    I don't wait in lines. After I returned that Galaxy S3 POS that I got for my wife I put in an order for an iPhone 5. 2-3 weeks, big deal. But having an iPhone 5 over an S3 will save me many hours of time.


    I actually thought that S3 would be acceptable. And other than the cheap plastic feel to it, which you could conceal with a case, the hardware is pretty good. Android is the problem. Even the Android play store sucks.


    I have no problem at all whether people get a S3 or a Nokia or an HTC phone.


    I really don't care whether I have expandable memory. I can use Apple's maps or Google maps on iOS 6.


    In an ideal world I might have preferred that Google would have permitted turn by turn on iOS devices, but they wouldn't.
    22 Sep 2012, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • We're gonna find out now who owns 4G LTE



    Apple started this... and its going to go on for awhile I think
    22 Sep 2012, 09:56 AM Reply Like
  • It seems to me that if Apple buys the Qualcomm chip that handles 4g, then the chip comes with all the necessary licensing. It is ridiculous to think that with all of these 4g phones running around that Apple has any problem that all the others don't have. Is it HTC that owns it? If so Samsung is in trouble. If it belongs to Samsung, then everyone else -- including Nokia -- is in trouble. This is silliness. Qualcomm is making a chip that they have the license to use. This license applies to whatever product it is used in. This will get press and may be the subject of some legal posturing, but this has all the hallmarks of a non-issue to me.
    22 Sep 2012, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • Which of the 26 versions of 4G LTE are you talking about?
    23 Sep 2012, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • Samsung is about to get the ban on the Tab overturned FYI

    26 Sep 2012, 11:56 AM Reply Like
  • You were also the one that predicted that Apple was about to lose in the ITC case ... except Apple won.


    How come you never answered that rather straightforward question of which of the 26 versions of 4G LTE were you talking about?
    27 Sep 2012, 09:14 AM Reply Like
  • Because it's minutiae best left to patent attorneys. Are you one or are you just trying to focus on minutiae?
    27 Sep 2012, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks chopchop0 for acknowledging you have no idea what you're talking about.


    The important point to take away is that your predictions are worthless and your knowledge of 4G LTE is less than worthless.


    Since you think all this minutiae is best left to patent attorneys [and the courts] why don't you keep your fingers off the keyboard.
    28 Sep 2012, 08:36 AM Reply Like
  • Pot.... meet kettle. Are you a patent attorney or a friday arm-chair quarterback?


    Me thinks the later ;)
    28 Sep 2012, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • Something is wrong with the way Judge Koh seems to be in favor of creating a monoply. I keep looking at Apple and Samsung products and no one confuses them. They are not the same in looks and many features of the Samsung products are much better than the Apple. I will be buying the Samsung soon unless Judge Koh stops my right to free choice. I have some idea that she was unduly influenced as was the jury who did not really deliberate and came to a quick conclusion that was false.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:55 AM Reply Like
  • You hit it spot on. This judge is a shakedown artist if there ever was one... Fair and biased? In California? Please.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:57 AM Reply Like
  • I should've said unbiased. I apologize.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • Cut the "right to free choice" crap. Is it my "right to free choice" to walk into your house and steal your TV? If I did, would it be someone else's "right to free choice" to buy that from me as stolen property?


    I will feel so sorry for you jblau if mean ol'judge Koh keeps you from buying your knock-off smart phone. Maybe you should head down to the flea market for some knock off purses or knock off Nikes to make yourself feel better.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:51 AM Reply Like
  • Mm. She's got the double H-bomb going on. Harvard undergrad and Harvard Law. You don't go from H-undergrad to H-Law unless insanely brilliant or a real Yes-Sir! grade grubbing monkey. H-Law was very much Borg cubicles at that time. Scratch the "insanely brilliant". H-Law didn't like the rebelliousness that comes with it, and I cannot think of a single free thinker from the undergrad classes admitted. Mostly just govt-jock Muppets in training.


    Not sure about her case history since then, but you have a Korean American judge appointed by a rather softserve socialist president and the case in the Apple homecourt of Cali. Don't tell me the picking of a Korean American judge over a Korean company wasn't a PR element. But otherwise this looks an awful lot like a stage production and she is a piece of seemingly real furniture on the stage, but it is still a stage whether she knows it or not. She won the casting call, and I wonder if she knows she was even in the casting call. Probably she does and is on some level gaming it career-wise with this in mind. Harvard Muppets eventually become Muppeters...
    19 Sep 2012, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • If anything one might think a Korean American might favor a Korean company. Your post is nonsense and doesn't contain a single coherent thought. So now people who succeed and do well in school are "grade grubbing monkeys"? Your words betray your soul of a collectivist redistributionist who thinks they deserve to receive everything for nothing.
    19 Sep 2012, 11:27 AM Reply Like
  • Wow. You really should read slower. You sort of stepped on the rake there attempting to insult me and my fellow Harvard Korean American graduates from the same time as Judge Koh. I wouldn't have called it if I wasn't right there as a classmate and understood the race issue with razor precision.


    My, "soul as a collectivist redistribitionist who thinks they deserve to receive everything for nothing"? Good that you can fertilizer your garden from your own brain bucket. I shouldn't write that, but you are rather stunningly ignorant.
    19 Sep 2012, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • Samsung was sanctioned a number of times during the legal process and could have been sanctioned more by judge Koh. If you make the judge mad by your court behavior that was not a good move.


    Look at the court room graphics which clearly showed that until the iPhone came out Samsung phones had many different looks. After the iPhone came out, all of Samsung's phones looked like the iPhone. As long as patents can be issued for design features, don't criticize Apple for protecting its patents. I don't hear you telling other companies to not sue Apple.


    Google even told Samsung to redesign its phones because they looked like the iPhone and Samsung ignored them. They brought this on themselves.
    19 Sep 2012, 01:01 PM Reply Like
  • I read up on her court history a bit more. She was a very logical choice. Still feels she is being moved around a bit like a chess piece. Belief in free will is a very old topic, and she is in an environment of considerable influence.


    Did I criticize Apple for protecting its patents? I did not. I had not followed the case, having no financial interest in it. Reading now for the sake of curiosity, I do appreciate the orchestration.


    As if I didn't think a Chaebol was underhanded...
    19 Sep 2012, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • Judge Koh just sent a tweet on her new iPhone 5 (pre-released, thanks Tim ! :)
    19 Sep 2012, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • Get a grip. Patents are legal monopolies. That's the whole point of patents. The origin of patents goes back to ancient Greece.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:31 PM Reply Like
  • Tell it Evan! I hate a thief and samsung is a Thief. People forget that before the Iphone there was nothing like it and now there are so many like it that it is accepted as a standard for a smart phone and anything like it is accepted as "original" when it is nothing but a copy of apple. I hope the judge will protect my 105 shares.
    20 Sep 2012, 02:51 AM Reply Like
  • What a shame that a good product is being restricted and that the American people again are being punished by a system that did an injustice to a company that really makes some of the best tech products in the world.
    19 Sep 2012, 09:57 AM Reply Like
  • I don't understand some of you people. I just wrote a song called Hey Jude and a book called the Da Vinci Code. Think I can just publish that under my name and suffer no consequences. Samsung is a complete rip-off of the iPhone and they should be put in stocks. Its not a shame in the least that stealing intellectual property is a civil violation punishable by law. Jesus Christ!
    19 Sep 2012, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • Samsung is no worse than HTC or Motorola. You have to wonder though why Apple hasn't gone after Google and Android if they feel that way.


    The answer is probably something akin to MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) if Apple tried to go after Google/MMI Instead, Samsung becomes the scapegoat, even though they are the ones who manufacture the screens and chips that supply the IPhone and IPad.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • They hate Apple. It's not a logical opinion, it's their religion. Treble damages is a common outcome when the judge, who heard the same trial as the jury, agrees and wants to send a message, but to them it's simply a reminder that their beliefs are false.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:41 AM Reply Like
  • Apple has gone after HTC and Motorola. And HTC, Samsung and Motorola have gone after Apple. So let's not pretend Apple is the only one doing the filings. In Germany Apple just won a suit where Motorola has to recall all the products they sold that infringe on Apple's IP. Some of the same IP that was in the CA case.


    Are you people going to claim the German courts were bribed also?


    Apple has a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to defend their IP.


    As far as suing Google , Apple could not sue Google until recently because they were giving away Android for free; hence not profiting from Apple's IP.
    19 Sep 2012, 08:48 PM Reply Like
  • The judge went to extremes to try to get the two parties to settle before the case went to the jury. She wasn't going to be sympathetic to whoever lost. The jury determined that Samsung was knowingly and willfully violating Apple's IP. I would be surprised if she doesn't treble damages.
    19 Sep 2012, 08:53 PM Reply Like
  • You obviously didnt hear about all of the german court decisions




    iCloud IPad and any IPhone before 4S was banned in Germany earlier this year because Apple violated Motorola patents
    19 Sep 2012, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • BFD. And is no longer banned.
    20 Sep 2012, 09:08 AM Reply Like
  • Chopchop0,
    "Samsung is no worse than HTC or Motorola. You have to wonder though why Apple hasn't gone after Google and Android if they feel that way"
    Apple has not sued HTC, motorola & Google yet. It does not mean it will NOT. It is also easier to take one by off.
    27 Sep 2012, 03:42 PM Reply Like
  • I look forward to Apple picking on Google/Motorola and then they'll find out why starting a patent war was a bad idea..... MAD (Mutually assured destruction)
    27 Sep 2012, 05:45 PM Reply Like
  • Apple invested BIllions of dollars and huge number of engineering, design and tests hours. They developed a whole new class of products that has provided mankind with heretofore unimaged capabilities integrated into one product. They patented many unique features of the device. Why should Samsung and others be able to blatantly copy these innovation without paying? The $3 Billion is money that Samsung should have been using to develop there unique products (which they obviously did not have the vision or capability to do). Instead they will need to pay for Apples work! And in the future not copy others intellectual property.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • if someone stole your property, something you own, something you developed, it's ok? Wake up! Samsung copied and STOLE Apple property! Apple is protecting what is rightly theirs. If Samsung actually developed their own products without copying Apple's then Apple wouldn't have sued them. Samsung is a joke.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:34 AM Reply Like
  • I don't recall this amount of hubris from the Apple cultists after they lost a $100 million judgment to Creative in 2006 for infringing on their patents to make the iPod. The fact that Apple's attorneys can argue with a straight face that a touch is a "zero length swipe" is proof of how far the legal profession has fallen. Apple's features have perpetually lagged the industry, and now that Steve is no longer with us, their only hope is to continue to stifle competition as other makers innovate.
    19 Sep 2012, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • And Samsung lawyers couldn't identify the Samsung tablet from the iPad when the judge held both up and asked which one was which.


    Oh no, they didn't copy the iPad, they just couldn't tell the difference between the two.


    Samsung's own documentation indicated they were intentionally copying Apple.
    19 Sep 2012, 10:36 PM Reply Like
  • Outright stealing is stealing. IP Theft is no different. Only wish jail sentences were also involved. Executives would self police in that case.
    19 Sep 2012, 01:26 PM Reply Like
  • I bet if you replace Samsung by Microsoft or another known tech focused US compagny, we would never have reached this point. This is really getting beyond ridiculous.
    19 Sep 2012, 01:37 PM Reply Like
  • Of course, judge Koh was also willing to grant many of Samsung's requests too during the trial phase. This judge is not biased or friendly to one part or the other, as the article insinuates.


    It's just that Apple won the suit. So naturally when Apple makes requests related to the judgement, and are within their legal rights, there is no reason for the judge NOT to grant those requests.
    19 Sep 2012, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • So many just don't get it! To those who like to buy knockoffs at lower prices, I have a truckload of Rolex watches to sell you. Any style you would like for only $100 each. Now, that should be legal?? Many of you feel it is perfectly all right.
    19 Sep 2012, 05:04 PM Reply Like
  • The difference is, Rolex is not patenting anything with a dial and two it?
    19 Sep 2012, 08:03 PM Reply Like
  • No. It is called "trade dress". And that is one of the legal points that Apple won. The jury understood that, you don't.


    Maybe there is something to be said for sitting through the entire trial and then making a decision. What exactly have you reviewed of the entire trial?
    19 Sep 2012, 09:03 PM Reply Like
  • I hear crickets.
    22 Sep 2012, 09:33 AM Reply Like
  • The verdict is in from the UK, at least on tablets

    18 Oct 2012, 02:12 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)