Patents and Damages in the USA: Jury Award in Apple v. Samsung Vastly Overstates Real Worth of Patents Involved According to Professor Love

Almost all Europeans in the legal profession raise their eyebrows in disbelief when they read about the ridiculously high damage awards issued in American courts. The Apple v. Samsung case in Cupertino is no exception.

Professor Brian J. Love of the Santa Clara University School of Law, who teaches courses in patent law and remedies, writes at the Los Angeles Times that the $1 billion jury award in the Apple Samsung trial is ludicrous by any standard of measure.

See Apple-Samsung patent fight: Fuzzy math - Los Angeles Times.

In other words, not only is patent law totally out of tune with the times, but damage awards are completely out of line with realities. After all, it is someone else's money, and that is way the money is handled in court -- without any sign of expected prudence. But in the end, WE, the consumers have to pay for these insanities, whether it be patents or credit derivatives. The result is that OUR money is being reshuffled into the pockets of monopolists and banks.

The only way for the broken patent system to be corrected is by Congressional legislation and/or a Supreme Court decision requiring or holding that anything that derives normally from the state of the art is OBVIOUS, and that damage awards for any patent infringement must consider awards in light of the total number of patents residing in any tech gadget, thus reducing patents to the actual value of the invention as it is incorporated into a tech gadget.