Originally Posted by Andrew H.
IOW, they thought that Apple's damages were too high, which is why they only awarded 1/3 of those damages, much closer to what Samsung recommended. It's clear that they were not trying to punish Samsung.
(Coverage of these issues has been pretty bad, with most blogs just repeating headlines from other blogs, without looking at the actual sources).
Damages are supposed to compensate Apple for what they'd have earned had Samsung licensed the patents in question aren't they? If that's the case, then "high enough to be painful" shouldn't come into it. That imo sounds more like a punishment than damages. Also saying "slap on the wrist" suggests they saw the damages as a punishment and not simply payment that was due.
That's imho though, maybe I'm reading too much into what was said and I've no idea if any of what is been said could cause the judge to retry the case or if it's just extra ammo for Samsung to use in an appeal.