Imagine if this was Microsoft with this victory? People would be crying about an overbearing Microsoft. When Apple wins, it's not thought in the same light?

since the jury found samsung willfully infringed, doesn't that mean triple damages?

The one upside I saw was that many of the 'No' phones were the newer models, so apparently not all rounded corners are out...just ones that are too rounded...or something. Actually there didn't seem to be too much rhyme or reason. Should have never been up to a jury anyways.

Yes, Samsung will appeal. . . silly question really. Cost of appeal is maybe $75K-$125K - only because they have so many attorneys working on the case (versus agreeing to pay $1B). The math is easy.

As a consumer I am terrified of the implications of this verdict.

I guess the reason that Samsung didn't won a single of their own claims is that their claims were way more technical, to technical for such a jury.

In all it's ridiculous result. If Samsung would have to pay for the stuff they did with copying the icons and such things....fine....for them this money is nothing. Something is one of the companies who spend most into R&D, just this year over 14 Billion $ - way more than Apple.

Time to send the $1.05 Billion though the double Irish to the Caribbean tax haven where Americans won't see a dime of it. Apple should sue Mitt Romney for infringing on their tax dodging tactics, they mastered it first.

Samsung does not care about $2.4 million it is the findings here that are important. The entire total of $1.05 billion is small change in this battle. It actually should be much higher. This encourages patent infringement. Unless products in violation are banned this is no big deal.

I think your reporting that "Jury found Samsung violated antitrust law by monopolizing markets related to the UMTS standard" is incorrect. That was question 31, which was answered with a No.

@Adam Multi-touch and Pinch to zoom existed even before Apple designed iPhone. Remember Palm & Microsoft. Palm had tiling, Multitouch and pinch to Zoom. Microsoft had Surface Table and it had pinch to zoom. Then the Diamond Technologies product had most of these features!

@Adam um.. actually I believe that there was a slide locker on samsung mp3 players long before the ipod came out, and on sony cd players even before mp3s.. the slide to unlock was simply a touch screen recreation.
Though multi touch and pinch to zoom didn't exsist on a phone, it did exsist.. apple just happened to perfect the concept before anyone else..

Samsung are of course right, this is a sad day for consumers... how are they now going to buy cheap knockoffs that look to all intent like an iPhone? How ironic that the company that years ago ripped off their desktop OS now proves that it IS possible to develop a phone/tablet OS that isn't a copy of iOS. Were it not for Microsoft, all the naysayers claiming that this verdict will make smartphone development impossible might have got listened to.

It sure would be nice if more people understood exactly what a U.S. Patent was, and how it functioned. It gives the holder an "Exclusive" right, protected by the Laws of the United States, to produce and profit from the conceptual ideas within the scope of a Patent, for up to 16 years. Patent is different from country to country. In the United States, we Patent ideas (which become intellectual property). In Japan (for instance), they Patent the finished product only (which means that another producer can make the same product and paint it another color and its' legal). THAT is what this case is about. Apple goes to companies and licenses dozens of concepts for inclusion in their products, because others own them. Samsung had every right to do the same thing, voluntarily; dealing with products and systems that Apple patented, and did not. The judgement in this case will result in more companies paying Apple for licenses to use Apple patented ideas. Nothing more. In the mean time, Samsung will review which is more profitable, licensing or theft.

@Unbelievable I think both companies have done wrong but the jury has not given a fair judgement esp for Samsung. Both companies should be penalised.

There are many phones and devices that DON'T copy Apple to this extent, so we know it's possible. There are other options than taking your competition's product and putting your name on it with a few minor alterations. Not all computer stores are stark with geeks dressed in blue. Does Samsung really think they are fooling anyone. It's Apple-envy!
Apple has not stiffled competition, they've just said, make your own stuff, do your own innovation. Have some pride.