Analysis: The Apple-Samsung verdict in quotes

The best analysis from around the web into the Apple-Samsung intellectual property case

"It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners... Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. 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

"The jury foreman, who is a patent holder himself, told court officials that the jury didn't need the answer to its question to reach a verdict: the foreman told a court representative that the jurors had reached a decision without needing the instructions. That's why I don't think this jury's ruling will stand, among other reasons."
Groklaw

"We owe a debt of gratitude to the jury who invested their time in listening to our story. We were thrilled to finally have the opportunity to tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung's copying went far deeper than we knew."
Tim Cook, CEO, Apple

"Patents in mobile design will now be even more valuable than before. We have already seen Google buying Motorola Mobility for just that reason. I suspect both Nokia (shares up 10 per cent on the court case news) and RIM will be the subject of increased attention for the same reasons. Microsoft should also gain. Windows 8/Mobile is pretty distinctive, which could well boost its appeal to OEMs."
Richard Holway, TechMarketView

"The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don't relate to the core Android operating system and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office. The mobile industry is moving fast and all players – including newcomers – are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don't want anything to limit that."
Google

Analysis: The Apple-Samsung verdict in quotes

The best analysis from around the web into the Apple-Samsung intellectual property case

"The ability to get a design patent on a user interface implies that design patent law is broken. This, to me, is the Supreme Court issue in this case. We can dicker about the 'facts'... but whether you can stop all people from having square icons in rows of four with a dock is something that I thought we settled in Lotus versus Borland 15 years ago. I commend Apple for finding a way around basic user interface law, but this type of ruling cannot stand."
Michael Risch, Madisonian.net

"The emails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, [Apple] showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea – I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn't answer one of them. They didn't help their cause."
Juror Manuel Ilagan, quoted on CNet

"On December 14, 2007, Apple laid claim to the supposed novel invention of 'list scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display,' the formal title of United States Patent 7,469,381 B2, with a patent application granted after a year-long review by the patent office that apparently didn't include watching this scene from 2002's Minority Report, where Tom Cruise does all of those things and more with a spiffy 3D interface.
Maxwell S. Kennerly, The Beasley Firm

"The $1bn+ win by Apple will now be used as a precedent against any of the other Android licensees in the US and likely be used as a core factor in the ITC decision to block Android products in the US. This should not only improve Apple's competitive position (effectively they will now profit from every conforming Android product sold going forward) but it will make Microsoft a far better source for a competitive licence than Google."
Rob Enderle, The Enderle Group

"The Samsung trial recalls the interesting peace agreement that Apple and Microsoft forged in 1997, when Microsoft 'invested' $150m in Apple as a fig-leaf for an IP settlement... The interesting part of the accord is the provision in which the companies agree that they won't 'clone' each other's products... Microsoft and Apple saw that an armed peace was a better solution than constant intellectual property conflicts. Can Samsung and Apple decide to do something similar and feed engineers rather than platoons of high-priced lawyers (the real winners in these battles)?"
Jean-Louis Gassee, The Guardian

Analysis: The Apple-Samsung verdict in quotes

The best analysis from around the web into the Apple-Samsung intellectual property case

"The US court ruling reflects the interests of Apple. It's a patriotic ruling in favor of the company from its own country. But the Korean court was not much different from the American one in that it supported Samsung."
Kim Neung-ho, The Korea Times

"With a sense of impending doom, Google has already begun attempting to distance itself from the defeat. It knows that with this major victory against Samsung under its belt, Apple's next step will be to take on the Android OS and the company it regards as a traitorous ex-ally, Google. You could say that while the last 18 months has been characterized as Apple versus Samsung, the coming weeks will see the story change to one in which we see Apple take on Google."
Jonny Evans, 'Apple holic', Computerworld

"When it came to the trial, Samsung's lawyers miscalculated in arguing that a verdict for Apple would harm competition in the marketplace. The jurors, led by a foreman who holds his own patent, were more persuaded by Apple's pleas to protect innovation. For them, it ultimately wasn't even a close call."
Dan Levine and Poornima Gupta, Reuters

"Wireless carriers, who already pay hefty subsidies to Apple, have voiced concern that their investment in faster networks could be threatened if devices are taken off the market or innovation is stalled by patent disputes. They have been silent on the impact of Friday's verdict. But they have long sought to promote the development of iPhone competitors to gain more leverage in dealings with Apple."
Jessica E. Vascellaro and Don Clark, Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

"In recent years, I have become even less a fan of Apple. It is now the uber-bully of the technology industry, and is using its surging authority – and vast amounts of cash – in ways that are designed to lock down our future computing and communications in the newest frontier of smartphones and tablets."
Dan Gillmor, The Guardian