Samsung to fight US court ruling in Apple's favour

New Delhi: Samsung is all set for bounce-back. The Korean company has now geared up to contest the US court verdict that found Samsung had copied critical features of the hugely popular iPhone and iPad and awarded Apple, the Cupertino-gaint, $1.051 billion in damages.

"We will move immediately to file post-verdict motions to overturn this decision in this court, and if we are not successful, we will appeal this decision to the court of appeals," said Samsung in a statement, adding, "Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products."

According to Samsung, this is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims.

Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer. The verdict should be viewed "as a loss for the American consumer," opined Samsung.

While the verdict was a big win for Apple, the damages are less than half the $2.5 billion compensation it sought - although that could yet be increased by the judge - and are just 1.5 per cent of annual revenues from Samsung's telecoms business.

That phone and tablet business is the powerhouse behind Samsung's growth, earning around 70 per cent of total profit. The group had net profit of $4.5 billion in April-June.

Samsung could also see its popular Galaxy smartphone banned from sale in the United States. But its skill as a "fast executioner" - quick to match others' innovations - would likely mean tweaked, non-patent infringing devices would be on the market soon after any ban came into place.

"Samsung has already made some design changes to new products since the litigation first started more than a year ago," said Seo Won-seok, an analyst at Korea Investment & Securities. "With the ruling, they are now more likely to make further changes or they could simply decide to raise product prices to cover patent-related payments."

Also, Apple's demands for Samsung to pay it a royalty on its phone sales could hit rival phones using Google's Android operating system more than it hits Samsung. If anything, the blaze of publicity from the high-profile, high-stakes US litigation has made Samsung's brand more recognisable.

Contradicting verdicts

The California jury had only begun deliberating on Wednesday after a complex weeks-long trial. Friday's verdict on seven Apple patent claims and five Samsung patent claims suggests the nine-person panel had little difficulty in concluding that Samsung had copied some features of Apple's iPhone and iPad.

It could lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products, with Apple saying it planned to file for a sales injunction within seven days and the judge in the case setting a hearing on September 20.

Because the jury found "wilful" infringement, Apple could seek triple damages.

The US ruling, read out to a packed federal courtroom in San Jose, just miles from Apple's headquarters, came less than 24 hours after a Seoul court found that while the iPhone and Galaxy look very similar Samsung hadn't violated Apple's design.

Samsung issued a defiant response to the U.S. decision, which it called "a loss for the American consumer", indicating the legal tussle is far from over. "This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims," Samsung said in a statement.

Nomura analyst CW Chung, speaking before the verdict, predicted it could take "many years" for Apple and Samsung to settle the case whatever the result of this round, leaving the two firmly in control of the $200 billion-plus global smartphone market.

"The litigation may end up with both parties entering a cross-licensing agreement, which should enable them to build a higher patent wall in the smartphone market," said Chung. "This would have a positive impact on the share prices of Samsung and Apple, while posing a substantial threat to other competitors."

Based on the damages ruling, Samsung is asked to pay Apple around $10 royalty per phone, a move seen aimed at slowing rival phones that run on Android - which account for more than two-thirds of the global market.

If Apple were to pursue similar legal challenges against other Android manufacturers that could squeeze profit margins as smartphone prices decline in a growing market - reinforcing the dominance of Samsung, one of the few with big enough margins to absorb the extra cost.

Handset competitors using Android include Taiwan's HTC Corp, LG Electronics, Google's Motorola, Sony Corp and some Chinese brands.

Win some, lose some?

Although Samsung had been viewed as the underdog in the U.S. case, the sweeping nature of Apple's victory was something of a surprise, with many analysts having expected a mixed ruling.

Concerns over potential reputational damage, the short-term cash hit and the impact on billions of dollars of business with Apple had knocked as much as 5 percent off Samsung's shares this week in the run-up to the verdict. But the stock is still up nearly 50 percent since Apple filed its accusations.

Samsung has previously been able to move nimbly to release model upgrades by the time courts have ruled certain products infringed Apple patents and retire patent-infringing models from its line-up. It has skirted around those rulings with a few engineering tweaks and has also made some bold design changes to differentiate its devices from Apple's.

"The impact on Samsung will be quite limited, as affected models are mostly legacy products and its new products did make some design changes to avoid potential litigation," said D.J. Jung, representative patent attorney for SU Intellectual Property.

"Still ... it's a sweeping loss in the most important market. It's inevitable that Samsung's brand will be negatively affected - Samsung could be perceived as a copycat."

Even though Samsung's flagship Galaxy S III phone was not involved in the trial, the jury validated Apple's patents on features and design elements that Apple could then try to wield against that product.

It is possible Apple would not have to seek an entirely new trial against the S III, but rather include it in a "contempt proceeding" which moves much faster, said Nick Rodelli, a lawyer and adviser to institutional investors for CFRA Research in Maryland.

Seoul-based Jung predicted further appeals and fresh suits against newer products as the rivals continue to clash in court.

"It's going to be a very drawn-out battle," he said. "They will keep suing each other, appeal against unfavourable verdicts and bring in new products ... because the stakes are too high. They don't want to lose their initiative in the fast-moving smartphone market."

With additional inputs from Reuters