Apple Explains Why Samsung Should Pay $2.19 Billion in Damages
Another new week and that means another day in court for the Apple vs Samsung patent trial, part deux.
Ina Fried from Re/code who has been attending the trial explains how an Apple-hired damages expert told the jury why Samsung should pay $2.19 billion for its 37 million sales of devices infringing on five patents during the period of August 2011 to December 2014:
MIT-trained economist Chris Vellturo said the damages are a mix of Apple’s lost profits during the time as well as a reasonable royalty for Samsung’s use of Apple’s technology on the remainder of the more than 37 million phones and tablets that are accused of infringing Apple 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.
Apple's damages expert, Christopher Vellturo, bills $700 an hour. #appsung
— Julia Love (@SFjlove) April 8, 2014
Vellturo supported his argument by referring to internal Samsung documents which detailed how the South Korean’s phones were difficult to use compared to the iPhone and the number one priority was to compete with Apple.
The trial is set to last for at least three more weeks and both Apple and Samsung will have 25 hours in court to argue their case.
#appsung time update: Apple has used 11 hours, 14 mins; Samsung has used 3 hours, 22 mins; Both get 25 hours.
— Shara Tibken (@sharatibken) April 8, 2014
As for the $2 billion in damages number, Samsung lawyer John Quinn noted a week ago it was too high of a number in his opening statement: “I’ll prove to you that is a gross, gross exaggeration, and an insult to your intelligence.”