That's Apple's argument for trade dress damages, which are set in an equitable process in accord with damages suffered by Apple. And those damages will now probably be set in a retrial and Samsung will still have to pay them—as a minimum.
This appeal was about design patents. The old interpretation of the design patent law required the entire profits earned by the infringer be automatically turned over to the patentee, no matter how small the patented design was in relation to the product. Entire profits is a lot more than anyone gets from trade dress copying damages.
The trial judge had not separated different damages calculations before because total profits encompassed all the other damages Samsung owed and was easiest to judge.
This appeal was about design patents. The old interpretation of the design patent law required the entire profits earned by the infringer be automatically turned over to the patentee, no matter how small the patented design was in relation to the product. Entire profits is a lot more than anyone gets from trade dress copying damages.
The trial judge had not separated different damages calculations before because total profits encompassed all the other damages Samsung owed and was easiest to judge.