--- title: "Samsung vs Apple compensation case" subject: "Engineering Professional Practice" chapter: 5 key: "semester_8/engineering_professional_practice:samsung-apple-verdict" source: https://www.bctengineer.com/q/semester_8/engineering_professional_practice/samsung-apple-verdict site: BCT Engineering --- # Samsung vs Apple compensation case Engineering Professional Practice · Chapter 5: Regulatory Environment - Asked in: 2069 Bhadra, 10 marks - Answer checked by Claude Opus 5.5 (high effort) on 2026-10-14 - Page: https://www.bctengineer.com/q/semester_8/engineering_professional_practice/samsung-apple-verdict - Whole chapter: https://www.bctengineer.com/md/semester_8/engineering_professional_practice/chapter-5 ## Question Recently Samsung Korea was asked to pay compensation of billions of dollar to Apple Inc. by an American court. What do you know about this case? Are you satisfied with the verdict? Express your opinion clearly. ## Short answer In 2012, Samsung was ordered to pay $1.05 billion for copying iPhone/iPad features; after appeals, damages were reduced and the case settled in 2018. The verdict is partly justified—innovation must be protected—but some patents were too broad, and the reduction suggests the initial award was excessive. ## Answer #### What the case was In August 2012 a jury in a federal court in San Jose, California (Judge Lucy Koh) ordered Samsung Electronics of South Korea to pay Apple Inc. about **US$1.05 billion** for copying features of the iPhone and iPad. The case, *Apple v. Samsung*, started in 2011 when Apple sued Samsung for infringing its intellectual property in Samsung's Galaxy phones and tablets. #### Claims and findings - **Utility patents:** features such as "pinch-to-zoom", "tap to zoom" and "bounce-back" scrolling. - **Design patents:** the rectangular phone with rounded corners and the grid of icons on the screen. - **Trade dress:** the overall look and feel of the iPhone. The jury found that Samsung had infringed most of these and that the infringement was wilful. It rejected Samsung's counterclaims that Apple had infringed Samsung's patents. Samsung appealed. The judge later cut the award by about US$450 million because the jury had calculated some damages wrongly, and a retrial was held on those amounts. The appeal court then removed the trade dress damages, and in 2016 the US Supreme Court ruled on how damages for design patents should be calculated. In May 2018 a new jury fixed the design patent damages at about US$539 million, and in June 2018 the two companies settled out of court on undisclosed terms (Samsung had already paid Apple about US$548 million in 2015). #### Legal principle Patents, design rights and trade dress are intellectual property. The owner has an exclusive right for a limited period, and an infringer must pay damages and may be stopped from selling the product. The case shows that copying a competitor's product can be very costly. #### My opinion I think the verdict is partly justified and partly too strong. - Justified: Apple invested heavily in design and research, and internal Samsung documents showed that Samsung studied the iPhone closely. Innovators must be protected, otherwise nobody would invest in new products. Respecting intellectual property is also a matter of professional honesty. - Concerns: some patents were on basic features, such as a rounded rectangle, which many say are obvious and should not give a monopoly. The huge amount could reduce competition and consumer choice. Samsung also made many of the parts for the iPhone. The amount was later reduced on appeal, which suggests the first verdict was excessive. A fair rule is to protect true innovation but to avoid granting a monopoly on trivial, general features. For Nepali engineers the lesson is to respect patents, copyrights and software licences, and to produce original work. ## Check yourself The answer's key points as multiple-choice questions, with the correct option and why. 1. In August 2012 the jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple about A. US$1.05 billion B. US$10 million C. US$539 million D. nothing Answer: A. The 2012 jury awarded about US$1.05 billion; the 2018 settlement was about US$539 million. (Key point: Verdict) 2. Which IP types did Apple claim were infringed? A. Utility patents, design patents and trade dress B. Only copyrights C. Only trademarks of Samsung D. Only trade secrets Answer: A. Claims covered utility patents, design patents and trade dress. (Key point: IP claims) 3. What happened to the award afterwards? A. It was increased B. It was reduced by courts and later settled C. It was never contested D. Apple paid Samsung Answer: B. The amount was cut, damages were retried and the parties settled in 2018. (Key point: Later outcome) 4. Which is a concern about the verdict? A. Some patents covered basic, obvious features, risking monopoly B. Apple invested nothing C. Samsung made no phones D. Patents never apply to phones Answer: A. Trivial features like a rounded rectangle should not give a monopoly. (Key point: Opinion concern) ## Related in Engineering Professional Practice - [Role of Nepal Engineers' Association](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Anea-role-golden-jubilee) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 3 - [Contractor asks supervisor to prepare running bill](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Acontractor-running-bill-bribe) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 7 - [Chemical waste leakage; boss asks silence](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Ahazardous-waste-leak-boss-silent) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 7 - [Engineers arrested for fake degrees](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Afake-degree-engineers-case) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 7 - [Tort law; copyright vs patent right](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Atort-reasons-copyright-patent) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 2 - [NEC duties; ethics vs moral behaviour](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Fengineering_professional_practice%3Anec-duties-ethics-vs-moral) — Engineering Professional Practice, chapter 3 ## Related in other subjects - [Constant vs actual dollar; inflation-free rate on loan](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_6%2Fengineering_economics%3Aconstant-actual-dollar-bike-loan) — Engineering Economics, chapter 8, asked 2× - [North American T1 vs European E1 hierarchy](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Ftelecommunications%3At1-e1-hierarchy-compare) — Telecommunications, chapter 3, asked 2× - [American vs European distribution layout in Nepal](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_8%2Ftransmission_and_distribution_system_design%3Aamerican-vs-european-distribution-nepal) — Transmission and Distribution System Design, chapter 5, asked 2× - [Case study: new system vs existing (cost, manpower)](https://www.bctengineer.com/question.md?key=semester_5%2Finstrumentation_ii%3Acs-cost-manpower-automation) — Instrumentation II, chapter 10, asked 4×