New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Calls in Experts to Explain Why Samsung Owes $2B in Damages

In the ongoing Samsung vs. Apple lawsuit, two experts hired by Apple took the stand on Tuesday to explain to the jury why Samsung deserves to pay $2 billion in damages for infringing on Apple's patents.

First up was John Hauser, a professor of marketing at the MIT Sloan School of Management, who argued (via CNET) that the specific features patented by Apple, such as slide to unlock, made Samsung's devices far more appealing to consumers.

apple_samsung_logos
To reach that conclusion, Hauser surveyed 966 Samsung device users (507 phone owners and 459 tablet owners) to measure the percentage of consumers who would buy devices with specific features, including universal search, background syncing, quick links, automatic word correction, and slide-to-unlock, among others.

Those metrics were then used to determine how much people would pay for the Apple-patented features that Samsung included in its devices, with Hauser coming to the conclusion that customers would shell out $32 to $102 for each feature.
"The features that were enabled by the patents at issue in this case have a measurable impact on consumer demand for Samsung devices," Hauser said during his testimony Tuesday.
During cross examination, Samsung objected to Hauser's methodology, which had concluded that Samsung largely sold devices due to the features copied from Apple, and criticized it for overlooking the importance of the Samsung brand and the Android operating system.

Following Hauser's testimony, MIT-trained economist Chris Vellturo took the stand (via Re/code) to explain how Apple arrived at its $2 billion number. The damages, he said, are a mix of lost profits and estimated reasonable royalties on the millions Samsung devices that have been accused of infringing on Apple's patents.
"It's a very large market and Samsung has made a lot of sales into that market," Vellturo said, before getting into the specifics of how he came to his estimate. Samsung's alleged infringement, he said, came at a time of dramatic growth in the market as many people were buying their first smartphone.

"It's a particularly significant period for Samsung to have been infringing," Vellturo said, adding that one's first smartphone purchase is a key determining factor in future phone and tablet purchases. He added that Samsung was behind in ease of use and took Apple's know-how to aid its effort to be more competitive.
In the original Apple vs. Samsung trial, Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $890 million in damages. The latest suit focuses on newer devices, including the Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note II, Galaxy Tab 10.1, the iPhone 4/4s/5, the iPad 2/3/4, the iPad mini, and fourth and fifth generation iPod touch.

Following today's expert testimony, Apple is nearing the end of its case against Samsung. Next week, Samsung will present its infringement case against Apple, where it is asking for $7 million in damages. The entire trial is expected to continue until April 29 or 30, at which point the jury will enter deliberations.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

8 months ago

Apple really has no right to be taking the morale high ground here. Stealing ideas and products is what apple is built on. The only people that lose is these type of cases are the consumers.


It's not about stealing ideas per se. It's about using someone else's patented ideas and not paying for it.

Give me an example of Apple using someone else's patent and refusing to pay for it. They have used patented ideas in their products previously and have paid for it.

Samsung, however, refuses to acknowledge it. That's the difference.
Rating: 23 Votes
8 months ago
Glad my home is Samsung free except for Samsung components inside of my Apple products. Sort of ironic isn't it? :)
Rating: 17 Votes
8 months ago

I posted the phone above. And no, when you are asking for an utterly ridiculous over bloated amount of money, 1000 is no where near enough, is it basing that 2 billion on international sales or American sales?


You want them to do a survey of hundreds of millions of people?

:D Okkk
Rating: 12 Votes
8 months ago
Apple really has no right to be taking the morale high ground here. Stealing ideas and products is what apple is built on. The only people that lose is these type of cases are the consumers.
Rating: 11 Votes
8 months ago

And also, Apple is demanding 2 billion based on what a tiny 1000 people example group state? When it is an Android feature to have slide to unlock is it not? Oh and let's not forget Apple was not the first with the slide to unlock feature.

This seriously smells of desperation


I take it you've never studied statistics and polling methodologies. Assuming the participants were randomly chosen and the survey was conducted scientifically, 1000 people should be more than enough to get an accurate view of things.

Also, what's your source for Apple not being the first with slide-to-unlock? That's the first I've heard it.
Rating: 11 Votes
8 months ago
And also, Apple is demanding 2 billion based on what a tiny 1000 people example group state? When it is an Android feature to have slide to unlock is it not? Oh and let's not forget Apple was not the first with the slide to unlock feature.

This seriously smells of desperation
Rating: 10 Votes
8 months ago

Glad my home is Samsung free except for Samsung components inside of my Apple products. Sort of ironic isn't it? :)


Well, nobody is arguing against Samsung being technically capable. That's why Apple pays them for several components. But those are not consumer-facing, so there's no marketing vector at work. Apple does not say "Buy this iPhone because it has a Samsung display!". It's the finished products and the end-user experience that are on trial here (ie. the marketable stuff). Samsung took key Apple designs and used them in its own products to give them a competitive edge. That's stealing.
Rating: 10 Votes
8 months ago

Glad my home is Samsung free except for Samsung components inside of my Apple products. Sort of ironic isn't it? :)



Nobody cares and neither does Apple. :rolleyes:
Rating: 10 Votes
8 months ago

I posted the phone above. And no, when you are asking for an utterly ridiculous over bloated amount of money, 1000 is no where near enough, is it basing that 2 billion on international sales or American sales?


The Neonode N1m did indeed have a swipe-to-unlock feature but it was implemented in a completely different way--swipe the bottom of the screen. Patents protect specific implementations on specific classes of products. It doesn't mean Apple has to be the first with the idea, just their own implementation of it.
Rating: 9 Votes
8 months ago

Apple's is midway up the screen and uses graphical cues that imitate a hardware switch to work.


Yes, and as recently noted in another thread, that is one reason why a Dutch judge threw out Apple's slide-to-unlock case... because it acted like an onscreen slider switch that industrial touch GUIs had used since the 1980s.

In the meantime, German and UK courts invalidated the patent over obviousness and the Neonode.

About the only major country to let the patent stand, is the US, although Apple had to file modifications for that.

Even Apple stopped using a graphical unlock in iOS7, which proves it's not a critical customer feature.
Rating: 7 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]