Samsung posts internal statement regarding jury’s decision
With all the statements we’ve been hearing about lately we’d be foolish to pass up on the opportunity to read Samsung’s take. They took to the Samsung Tomorrow blog to post an “internal” statement (we’re not sure how that works with this being out in the public and all) and it basically comes down to this: we’re disappointed this happened, and we’re going to be trying to appeal to the courts and go through the legal motions that come with such a significant case.
They mentioned their legal success against Apple in countries like Germany, Korea, and the United Kingdom in efforts to show that, despite today’s United States ruling, there are many other countries that think Samsung’s actions were harmless and that Apple’s cases were a bit frivolous.
Regardless, Samsung has a lot more to do than just release a statement so they’ll likely be getting the appeals process in motion while we’ll be at the edge of our seats waiting for the next major development in one of the most important lawsuits in all of technology. Read the statement in full below.
On Friday, August 24, 2012, the jury verdict in our trial against Apple was announced at the US District Court for the Northern District of California. The following is an internal memo that reflects Samsung’s position regarding the verdict:
We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers. However, Apple pressed on with a lawsuit, and we have had little choice but to counter-sue, so that we can protect our company.
Certainly, we are very disappointed by the verdict at the US District Court for the Northern District of California (NDCA), and it is regrettable that the verdict has caused concern amongst our employees, as well as our loyal customers.
However, the judge’s final ruling remains, along with a number of other procedures. We will continue to do our utmost until our arguments have been accepted.
The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple’s designs. These courts also recognized our arguments concerning our standards patents.
History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.
We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritize innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt.