[NewsPoster]

Despite having asked for extra time to deliberate after business hours earlier today, the jury in the Apple versus Samsung case reached a verdict on Friday. Apple came out the clear victor in the battle, being awarded $1.051 billion dollars in damages by the jury.

In the first half of the verdict readings, all of Apple's patents were found to be valid, and most of Samsung's accused devices were found to be infringing on all of Apple's patents. Apple's trade dress has been found to be protectable in the iPhone and iPhone 3G, and diluted by Samsung on six of its accused devices. Apple was awarded $1.051 billion dollars, lower than its request of around $2.5 billion. Samsung was also found to be willful in its infringement, which could lead to a tripling of awarded damages. None of Apple's devices were found to infringe on any of Samsung's patents. None of the claims against Samsung in regards to antitrust legislation regarding 3G patents were found to be valid, but neither was Samsung been found to be in violation of fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) patent licensing agreements. As expected, the convoluted jury instructions and verdict form complicated the final verdict. The jury was briefly recalled and did a bit of further deliberation on approximately $2 million worth of awards over the Galaxy Tab 10.1, since it awarded damages to Apple without marking the device as infringing on the form. The damages were struck, saving Samsung the contested $2 million and clearing the Galaxy Tab 10.1 of alleged infringement. The jury coming to the decision so quickly came as a surprise, given that over 700 individual decisions would have been made in less than 48 hours in order for the jury to come to a verdict. The nine men and women deciding the case never asked Judge Lucy Koh any questions or requested any clarifications during the deliberations. The case was brought by Apple after Samsung ignored warnings in 2010 from both the iPhone maker and its rival Google that Samsung's products were too derivative of Apple's designs in both trade dress and software. Apple has accused the company of "slavishly" copying from its innovations, down to the particular shade of green used in the identical "phone" icon. Samsung's public habit of making its retail stores, promotional videos and signage resemble Apple's as closely as possible, coupled with the sharp change in designs following the iPhone and iPad's introductions, may not meet the legal standard of infringement -- but have left the public with the strong impression of the South Korean company as being prone to copying. The sentiment was picked up on and spoofed in a video produced by talk show host Conan O'Brien's staff that aired nationally in the middle of the trial and has since gone viral. Samsung countersued Apple, claiming it had in fact infringed on two of Samsung's patents, for which it asked for $400 million in compensation and was awarded nothing. Samsung is expected to file an appeal on the case.

[Geoduck]

Despite?
Seems more like the extra time was WHY they were able to reach a verdict

[SegNerd]

"Despite" makes sense if the extra time was not granted/not used. Or maybe they did use a word that doesn't make sense, because they are scrambling to write a breaking news story.

I don't really want to argue about vocabulary right now. I want to know what the verdict was!!

[Malcolm Owen]

As far as I understand, the time was requested but not used. It may still be used if they are sent back into deliberations, such as if something is missed in the verdict form.

[chefpastry]

Huge win for Apple. Where are fruedling and wrenchy?

[BLAZE_MkIV]

I'm glad i bought "more" in the dip wednesday.

[testudo]

Wow, so quick. Seems like the judge and jury was paid off by some large multi-billion dollar company.

No, they were just being lazy and not wanting to do more work. Yeah, that's it!

Oh, wait, are those only things you say when Apple doesn't have a decision go their way?

[Stogieman]

Here's a video of the jury reading the verdict:

<img _huddler_custom="http-youtube-ejizOV-IQEM" height="355px" width="425px" />

[SockRolid]

$1 billion won't affect either company much in the long run. But the real damage to Samsung has already been done. One look at the brand new Galaxy Note 10.1 and it's crystal clear that it was designed by some nightmarish mix of lawyers and bean counters.

Consumers win. There will be real diversity in UI, industrial design, and user experience now. Would-be Apple cloners are finally free to hire their own designers. Let's hope they do a better job than Samsung's unholy offspring of lawyers and accountants did.

[besson3c]

So if Samsung loses their appeal do they have to take some of their products off the market?

[Stuke]

Chefpastry...I guess their following their mother's advice...if you have nothing nice to say...

This is fantastic for Apple (and my stock bought in 2002)!

Greetings. I am unable to delete my posts, and apparently you moderators are on some kind of a strike.

Therefore, I have removed the content of the original post by hand.

I am asking for this post to be deleted, since I don't seem to have the option to do that myself.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So if Samsung loses their appeal do they have to take some of their products off the market?

I haven't heard of any injunctions relating to this case, I assume they will be required to pay some percentage of future sales of infringing devices.

To whoever was asking, Freudling got banned a few days back.

[chefpastry]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

To whoever was asking, Freudling got banned a few days back.

This news is almost as good as news of today's verdict... Almost...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by chefpastry 

This news is almost as good as news of today's verdict... Almost...

Why is this good news? I think he had difficulty separating his emotions from his logic, but that doesn't mean I'm happy to see him gone just because he feels differently about things than I. Do you really want MacNN to be a Mac fanboy's club where Apple can do no wrong?

[Mike Wuerthele]

Freudling didn't get banned for his preference of computing platform. He got banned for not playing nice with others.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by EstaNightshift 

Freudling didn't get banned for his preference of computing platform. He got banned for not playing nice with others.

I guess I missed those threads then. All I remember was him being anti-Tim Cook, not really anti-Apple.

[lpkmckenna]

Congrats to Apple. A well-deserved victory.

[fractaledge]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why is this good news? I think he had difficulty separating his emotions from his logic, but that doesn't mean I'm happy to see him gone just because he feels differently about things than I. Do you really want MacNN to be a Mac fanboy's club where Apple can do no wrong?

I welcome anyone who can rationally argue any point of view. In fact this community, and every other community i general, needs people who see things differently and do not conform to the established groupthink. This is what keeps these forums from becoming a fanboy club.

However, as far as I could see, freudling displayed complete and utter inability to rationally defend his point of view and complete lack of respect for anyone's point of view but his own. And any argument that doesn't contain at least a grain of rationality is useless, amounting to nothing more than abuse and name calling. Good riddance.

[chefpastry]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why is this good news? I think he had difficulty separating his emotions from his logic, but that doesn't mean I'm happy to see him gone just because he feels differently about things than I. Do you really want MacNN to be a Mac fanboy's club where Apple can do no wrong?

fractaledge said it nicely. I'd like to add that his insistence on quoting everything, relevant or not, was extremely annoying. In my opinion, he seemed like a paid shill who was here for the sole purpose of spewing nonsense and trying to get on people's nerves. When confronted with logical explanations for things, he would just repeat with the same nonsense. I will not miss him.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by fractaledge 

I welcome anyone who can rationally argue any point of view. In fact this community, and every other community i general, needs people who see things differently and do not conform to the established groupthink. This is what keeps these forums from becoming a fanboy club.
However, as far as I could see, freudling displayed complete and utter inability to rationally defend his point of view and complete lack of respect for anyone's point of view but his own. And any argument that doesn't contain at least a grain of rationality is useless, amounting to nothing more than abuse and name calling. Good riddance.

I agree, although I'd say that if he could contain the abuse that he'd be welcome to continue making attempts at rational viewpoints. Like I said, I wasn't aware of or didn't notice the abuse, although of course I'm not claiming that it didn't exist because I was oblivious to it

[ASathin8R]

This is excellent news and has made my day. It just defies belief that Samsung can make statements here that this decision stifles innovation. It will actually force thieves like them to actually develop original products, not just copy whoever happens to be the market leader. The jury came to the only conclusion that could be drawn from the evidence. Justice has been served and now Samsesung needs to pay up.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I guess I missed those threads then. All I remember was him being anti-Tim Cook, not really anti-Apple.

He claimed he was an Apple lover, but every post he made in recent weeks or months was complaining about Apple doing something wrong or generally being doomed.

I did read earlier that Apple now has some time to request sales injunctions against Samsung products that have been judged to be infringing. One assumes they will do exactly that.

I also saw that the $1 Billion could yet triple.