While the verdict, announced on Friday, could make sure that Samsung's famed Galaxy smartphone series is banned in the US, it has, at the same time, highlighted the capability of Samsung to copy Apple products with speedy execution. And this stealth capability has cost the South Korean manufacturer $1.05 billion in damages, which could even triple in the next hearing as the jury found the Samsung acting wilfully.

Not only has the verdict given credence to the Apple's accusations against the Samsung but it has, at the same time, an important demand of innovators – the patent protection so that there is no scope for copying. And now Apple would be allowed to claim patent protection on design elements like the rectangle shape and the front flat surface embodied on its famed iPhone.

Samsung will appeal against the verdict but does that mean there is no need for patent protection, especially when there is so much competition in the smartphone sector? One would argue that there is certainly a need for protection as only that would guarantee innovation, otherwise consumers would be only deceived to buy brands that basically are the same, even though bigger brands would ask you to pay more.

To make sure that there is a scope of competition in the market, rather than illegal copying and infringement, the judgement is seen as a landmark achievement. Florian Mueller, a consultant who follows patent and copyright issues found the Friday's court ruling "a huge breakthrough." "The jury essentially concluded that Samsung is a reckless copycat and, since some of the infringement is Google's responsibility, basically agreed with Steve Jobs's claim that Android is a stolen product," he wrote on his blog, according to AFP.

Although Samsung sold nearly the double the number of smartphones in March-April this year than Apple, yet the damages of this verdict would be far-reaching, especially in its lucrative US market. But what many analysts call it a blessing in disguise for the Korean company, the verdict has made Samsung brand more recognisable. Obviously, consumers would buy its products, considering them as a better execution of Apple products. That wouldn't be the case only if buyers reject it as a copycat, which normally they won't mind till they buy a better product on a comparatively cheaper price.