Apple and Samsung spar over huge damages claim

As Apple rests its case, Samsung's top lawyer goes on the offensive

The federal court building in San Jose, California, on April 11, 2014

The federal court building in San Jose, California, on April 11, 2014

Apple outlined for the first time on Friday how it came up with the US$2.2 billion in damages that it wants a California jury to award it for Samsung's alleged "massive infringement" of five Apple patents.

Around a quarter of it, some $507 million, is to compensate Apple for the profits it lost as a result of Samsung's infringement, said Chris Vellturo, an economist at Quantitative Economic Solutions who is one of Apple's expert witnesses in the case.

A further $560 million would be compensation for the reduced demand for Apple's products, and the largest portion -- $1.12 billion -- is for the royalties Apple says Samsung would have had to pay if it had licensed the patents.

The calculations were disclosed as the trial reached the end of its second week at the federal court in San Jose, California.

Vellturo arrived at the royalty figure by imagining a "hypothetical negotiation" between the two companies. That doesn't sound very scientific, but it's been a common method for estimating patent damages ever since a 1970 lawsuit between Georgia Pacific and U.S. Plywood.

Because no actual negotiation took place, the jury gets to consider what royalties would have been decided if the two sides had actually talked, taking into account factors like the usefulness of the patent and the impact a license would have had on their competitive positions.

Vellturo said his analysis determined a royalty rate of between $1.61 and $15.03 per patent, per device.

There are nine smartphones and one tablet at issue in the case, though not all are accused of infringing all five patents. For those that are, the total royalty bill for each Samsung device sold would be $40.10, according to Vellturo.

Samsung attorney John Quinn quickly went on the attack and questioned many of Vellturo's assertions.

He started with the figures themselves, which were based on data about lost sales and consumer demand supplied by a previous Apple witness, John Hauser, a professor of marketing from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"If Mr. Hauser's survey was not correct, your figures would not be reliable?" asked Quinn in one exchange.

"That's correct," said Vellturo.

Next Quinn went after Vellturo himself. The expert had disclosed earlier that he was being paid $700 per hour by Apple, and that he had earned $2.3 million from the case so far. Quinn accused him of being "a professional witness for Apple."

"If I was, I wouldn't be working for Microsoft, for Amazon," Vellturo said, keeping his cool. "I work with very direct competitors to Apple."

Quinn also questioned how many people who bought Samsung phones would have really considered an Apple phone instead, something that cuts to its lost profits claim. Apple's own market research, revealed earlier in the case, showed that its falling market share was due in part to shifting consumer preference for features such as larger screens.

With Samsung's cross-examination of Vellturo complete, Apple rested its case. Next, Samsung will begin its defense of the charges.

The case is 12-00630, Apple v. Samsung Electronics et al, at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Martyn Williams covers mobile telecoms, Silicon Valley and general technology breaking news for The IDG News Service. Follow Martyn on Twitter at @martyn_williams. Martyn's e-mail address is martyn_williams@idg.com

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.
Rocket to Success - Your 10 Tips for Smarter ERP System Selection

Tags consumer electronicsintellectual propertysmartphonespatentSamsung ElectronicsCivil lawsuitsiPhonelegalAndroidApple

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Martyn Williams

IDG News Service
Show Comments

Cool Tech

SanDisk MicroSDXC™ for Nintendo® Switch™

Learn more >

Breitling Superocean Heritage Chronographe 44

Learn more >

Toys for Boys

Family Friendly

Panasonic 4K UHD Blu-Ray Player and Full HD Recorder with Netflix - UBT1GL-K

Learn more >

Stocking Stuffer

Razer DeathAdder Expert Ergonomic Gaming Mouse

Learn more >

Christmas Gift Guide

Click for more ›

Most Popular Reviews

Latest Articles

Resources

PCW Evaluation Team

Walid Mikhael

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

It’s easy to set up, it’s compact and quiet when printing and to top if off, the print quality is excellent. This is hands down the best printer I’ve used for printing labels.

Ben Ramsden

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

Brainstorming, innovation, problem solving, and negotiation have all become much more productive and valuable if people can easily collaborate in real time with minimal friction.

Sarah Ieroianni

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

The print quality also does not disappoint, it’s clear, bold, doesn’t smudge and the text is perfectly sized.

Ratchada Dunn

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The Huddle Board’s built in program; Sharp Touch Viewing software allows us to easily manipulate and edit our documents (jpegs and PDFs) all at the same time on the dashboard.

George Khoury

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The biggest perks for me would be that it comes with easy to use and comprehensive programs that make the collaboration process a whole lot more intuitive and organic

David Coyle

Brother PocketJet PJ-773 A4 Portable Thermal Printer

I rate the printer as a 5 out of 5 stars as it has been able to fit seamlessly into my busy and mobile lifestyle.

Featured Content

Product Launch Showcase

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?