Supreme Court: Lower Court Should Reconsider What Samsung Owes Apple -- 2nd Update
December 06 2016 - 1:50PM
Dow Jones News
By Brent Kendall
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled a lower court
should reconsider how much money Samsung Electronics Co. owes rival
Apple Inc. for infringing patents on the iPhone's design.
Samsung has been challenging a $399 million award to Apple after
jurors in 2012 found that 11 smartphone models from the South
Korean electronics giant infringed Apple's design patents.
The high court agreed to hear the case to clarify how courts
should compute monetary damages for design-patent infringement.
Apple argued it was entitled to the total profits on Samsung's
infringing products. Samsung argued that it shouldn't have to hand
over all of its profits on the phones because the design was only
one component of those complex devices.
The Supreme Court said an appeals court used the wrong analysis
when it ruled for Apple.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for a unanimous court, said the
holder of a design patent isn't always entitled to the total
profits on an infringing product sold to consumers. In
multicomponent products, sometimes a patent holder will only be
entitled to the infringer's total profits on the specific component
that infringed the patent, she said.
The decision, however, didn't resolve the dispute between the
smartphone makers. The court declined to apply its legal rules to
the specifics of the case, so it didn't determine whether Samsung
must pay its total profits on the 11 phones or just its profits
attributable to the screen and case design of those products.
The justices said a lower court should sort out that issue.
Neither Apple nor Samsung immediately responded to requests for
comment.
The case had been closely watched in tech circles. An array of
companies including Dell Inc., Facebook Inc., and Google Inc. had
filed a court brief in support of Samsung. They argued it would be
absurd to require companies to fork over their total profits on
complex modern technological products when one component among
thousands in a device infringed another company's design.
A group of design professionals and companies including Crocs
Inc., Tiffany & Co. and Adidas AG supported Apple, saying a
total-profits remedy was important for protecting valuable and
innovative designs that drive consumer demand and are the lifeblood
of many businesses.
The smartphone makers have been locked in a variety of patent
battles. The case before the high court involved the highest
profile litigation, which dates back to 2011.
The $399 million was part of a $930 million award Samsung was
ordered to pay by a trial court. The rest of the money stemmed from
other Apple claims not before the Supreme Court. Part of the
overall damages award already was scheduled to be revisited in the
lower courts.
For all the money involved, the case isn't expected to have much
impact on smartphone consumers. Despite losing past rulings to
Apple, Samsung has been able to continue selling phones and has
moved on to newer models.
Write to Brent Kendall at brent.kendall@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
December 06, 2016 13:35 ET (18:35 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2016 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL)
Historical Stock Chart
From Aug 2024 to Sep 2024
Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL)
Historical Stock Chart
From Sep 2023 to Sep 2024