The high-profile patent trial between Apple and Samsung wages on, with Apple on Tuesday calling in a damages expert Chris Vellturo to speak to the jury. The MIT-trained economist’s job was to help the company explain why it deserved the damages it’s asking for.

For those who missed it last week, Apple is asking the court to award it $2 billion ($2.19B to be exact) in damages from Samsung for infringing on 5 of its utility patents. And according to Vellturo, that amount is fair based on a mix of lost profits and owed royalty fees…

Recode’s Ina Fried has the report:

“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

“That had a dramatic effect on Apple, and the compensation is therefore substantial,” Vellturo said.

Vellturo noted that he and his firm spent “thousands of hours” studying the market and the patents at issue, and more than “800 hours” personally. Additionally, Apple had MIT professor John Hauser present survey results demonstrating how valuable its patents are.

The testimonies come as Apple is nearing the conclusion of its case against Samsung. The trial, which began last week, is expected to run through the end of the month. You can view all our coverage on the proceedings, and keep up with future trial news, by clicking here.

  • No patent is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. No idea is that important, my opinion of course. Just wish tech patents would be for 5 or less years. Apple will probably win 2-3 billion but does it deserve it?

    • Ben Shares

      Dont pretend that you know better than an EXPERT who has spent 800 hours studying the case personally on top of his thousands of hours and experience in what he does. please.

      • Ben Shares

        im sorry for sounding so condescending but i just got frustrated.

      • Don’t pretend I didn’t clearly write “my opinion of course”. I should be the one who “got frustrated.”

      • Qasim

        Yea man, everyone’s got their pov and opinion.

      • Ben Shares

        saying “No patent is worth hundreds of millions of dollars” isn’t a opinion its stating a fact, except its obviously not true. An expert came up with those numbers, i was just saying you probably shouldn’t say this expert is wrong, because you don’t know better.

    • Rowan09

      If your the one with the idea you might feel a little different. If anyone steals someone’s idea and makes billions from it they deserve compensation. Samsung wasn’t really relevant until after the iPhone.

      • Yes Apple deserves compensation. I don’t agree with Americans who want to give billions. In Korea Samsung and Apple each one millions in their cases. Slide to unlock took how many hours to think up, or minutes. How many hours to program? Is that worth hundreds of millions of USD? My opinion is no. I don’t like patents, they keep tech from us. I don’t benefit from patents so I don’t want them lasting 17 years.

      • Rowan09

        Samsung should have just license the patent like they are with Microsoft. Some patents however can stay in house for competitive advantage. Samsung made billions so Apple deserves proper compensation since they made so much.

      • I agree, it would have been easier on them. It can’t be good for them being known as copiers. And Samsung has copied a lotttt. I wish they would have been able to get the rubber band patent licensed. I really don’t like Android implementation. I wonder why no one came out with a stretch when you hit the bottom of a page. Maybe it has been patented but someone won’t license it out like the rubber band effect?

      • Qasim

        Every idea is unique, and it takes effort to materialize that idea into a tangible form, if u wanna use someone’s idea, get a license from them, pay them their royalty. Every device that comes with a bluetooth feature pays royalty to that company u know, even if its a very very common thing these days.

      • I know that but thanks

      • Qasim

        Exactly, samsung became the today’s samsung after the iPhone

      • Samsung has copied a ton of things from Apple. I personally don’t care as have a better device for that. Take those great ideas and Samsung’s ideas and I really like my phone. Part of me thinks Samsung should pay a great deal “to teach them a lesson” but to be honest I want more copying/borrowing. Imagine if we still didn’t have notification center? Or control center? Etc.

      • Rowan09

        The jailbreak community played a huge part in these additions as well, but it’s ok to copy and wrong to steal.

      • Is that a jab at steve jobs?

    • Nuno Xavier

      If you have an idea that can change the way something is done at the moment, and as soon as you publish it, many others will copy and have profit from it around the world, and you’ll be left without any or small profit, only then you’ll see the point on the big number (Apple does not only sells on the US)…

      • How much should Apple get for slide to unlock?
        1 million? 15million? 400 million? Pretend this company is not Apple. Just be honest. No fanboyism. I’m curious.

      • ✪ aidan harris ✪

        If Apples expert says $2 billion then I agree with them. Assuming they’ve taken their time to factor in everything and $2 billion is the figure they’ve come up with then this is what they deserve as long as Apple can justify why they are asking for so much which for the most part seems to involve the following:

        1. The iPhone was a risk it could have gone horribly wrong
        2. A lot of time and effort was invested
        3. Nothing on the market was as simple and easy to use as the iPhone (the iPhone changed the market for the better) except in terms of some phones it changed the market for worse by copying features X, Y and Z from the iPhone…

      • That was the fanboyism I wanted to avoid.

      • Kash Gummaraju

        Apple’s experts? What you mean paid fanboys? Apple doesn’t deserve a single dollar from this case. Slide to unlock is way too basic to be able to use as argument for the need for $2 billion and sue another company. Slide to unlock and several other software ui, function patents being used by Apple should be industry essential patents. Almost every mobile device uses a method that involves “sliding” in one direction or another. Rubberband is trivial enough that it didn’t matter(so it was ruled invalid). Apple should really try to find an actual 100% only Samsung and Apple used feature that Apple made to sue Samsung, not some trivial UI feature, or some industry wide used feature for unlocking device. Sliding, tapping, and swiping are anything but patentable, they’re everyday gestures we use, that have made their way into smartphones to provide us ease of use.

      • Hyr3m

        Although I agree with you on everything you said, saying these patents should be industry essential patents means Apple would be forced to license them whether they like to or not… Yet the patents could still be infringed upon (if you don’t contact apple to license it and release a product using it, you’re infringing, even if Apple would have had to license it to you if you asked).

        As you said, patents should never be granted unless there is some level of complexity involved :
        – Patenting a square with rounded corners : DENIED
        – Patenting a gesture on a touch screen : DENIED
        – Patenting a very basic interface effect : DENIED

        Anything that can be coded in 2 minutes by a 12 years old should NOT warrant a patent. Any design patent so vague it could describe half of the existing similar devices on earth should NOT warrant a patent…

      • Nuno Xavier

        Given the fact that pretty much all smarphones use the same/similar concept, and that each phone’s price is base on all the features it has, combining all the phones sold with this feature, i don’t know a price tag, but i believe $2 billion is not that much.
        Other way to look at it is if no other company had ever “copy” this feature, then the original company’s products would sell more, because that’s what people want.
        I’m not referring to Apple’s products but to a generic company, if they have the product that everyone wants and no other company will place a threat with their product, they’ll make billions, but if other companies use the same concept, then the original product will not sell that much, as the buying quota will be shared among many companies.
        Resuming: for an individual, $2 billion is too much, for a world wide company, $2 billion is ~3-4 months total wages for the employees…

      • Rowan09

        If it’s only for the slide to unlock feature a couple of million. The issue here though is if Samsung made 10 billion from copying shouldn’t I deserve more based on the circumstances? It goes both ways as well. I remember a when Swizz Beatz a hip hop producer stole a beat from the Triton rack and made millions from it, when he got sued he had to pay back all the money he made from the beat, but he was already a household name. Samsung is now a household name. When I’m anywhere in NY if it’s not an iPhone, it’s a Samsung device.

      • I get that a big company will be sued and will need to pay huge amounts if found guilty. Believe me thats nothing new to me. But I don’t agree with these patents being worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Slide to unlock would not make anyone want to buy a samsung phone. But other aspects they copied from samsung is possible but I’m not sure of any, do you? I know I read about the patents but nothing stuck out to me as important. As a popular American company Apple is awarded many patents it doesnt deserve as they weren’t first or they are trivial. It’s great for Apple and I would try for every patent possible too especially when they are getting the patents. I just think what takes minutes to hours to come up with and implement isn’t worth hundreds of millions of dollars and patents shouldn’t last longer than 5 years in the tech world.

      • Rowan09

        No I don’t know of any. Patents are just crazy but I need a good so I can become rich. After I become rich they can change the patent rules. Lol

      • Hire me, I’ll clean your toilets to a sparkle 😉

      • Rowan09


      • jzack

        i think that samsung should not copy them in the first place..

        apple take their precaution ‘just incase’ if someone copy their thing.. just like what they used to face before in the early age of apple.. i dont care about the price, why samsung did it in the first place if they think its not worth it?

    • Lagax

      If the world was fair, and I Say this without just thinking of apple as a great company, it also has it’s downsides, Apple would get every penny Samsung has made with its smartphones because nobody on this planet would buy samsung phones without Apples technology. Samsung has STOLEN Idears worth ways more than 20, 30 or even 40 billion dollars!

      Apple deserves ways more than it will get.

      • Hyr3m

        Oh my f*cking god that was pathetic trolling.

      • Rowan09

        I don’t usally agree with you, but I would have to agree today.

    • Taf Khan

      Dude it not about Apple deserving it as much as sending a message to Samsung… Stop Copying Apple. The heavier the fine the better, you copy Samsung you pay. Simple.

      Heck Samsung even copy the design of Apple stores. Today they opened Samsung stores in the UK, wish they hadn’t bothered.. Tut tut

      • Samsung should stop copying Apple so much since they don’t get away with it like apple does. I think they do it more obvious and more times perhaps? When they get sued in America they only lose, they dont win on their counter suits and they need to pay huge amounts. In other countries they both lose and both win but they each don’t have to pay so much. This trial will be a huge loss for Samsung I’m sure of it.

  • Apple, staph already.

  • David Gitman


  • Qasim

    Apple is built on innovation, i personally dont see that in samsung, im pretty sure the jury will decide in favor of apple

    • Apple will definitely win. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Samsung gets squat.

    • Hyr3m

      Oh so it’s not about infringing on 5 specific patents anymore?

      • I don’t think it was about that in the last trial either. Samusng is Korean, and this Korean company is and was sued 15 min from Apple head quarters. Why this foreign company didn’t have the venue moved to another courtroom say in Kansas is beyond me. They have no chance of winning. American juries are notorious for making company pay huge, ridiculous amounts of money. I bet Samsung will end up paying even more, and again they won’t win on their patents. Those will be laughed at by the jury. If I was on the jury, I vote with my right-Jury Nullification.

      • Hyr3m

        Well let’s hope one of those on the jury actually has a brain and/or a soul. ^^

  • diggitydang

    “$2 billion ($2.19B to be exact)”

    I love how the $190,000,000 is just ignored when we round it off!! hahahah…

    • Nuno Xavier

      That’s peanuts 😀

  • They don’t deserve anything, ’cause they didn’t invent nothing.

  • Hyr3m

    So the expert came in to basically say “alright, IF there is infringement, Apple deserves that much money because they didn’t get the monopoly they wanted to have”. He said nothing about the alleged infringement(s) being factual or not.
    Nobody knows or says anything about these patents yet everyone (in here) just assumes Samsung will have to pay because they copy sh*t. Apple copies sh*t all the time and gets away with it, they get products banned and get Obama to veto these decisions too… Samsung copied sh*t but that doesn’t mean that they’re infringing on these 5 specific patents (nor does it mean these patents should have been granted to Apple in the first place… After all, Apple does have a tendency to try and patent general and obvious stuff that other people invented…)

    • Apple is an American company. So there’s that

    • Rowan09

      It’s not Apple specific, it’s the American way.