or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple seeking damages of $2B in new trial, Samsung says claims are 'gross exaggeration'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple seeking damages of $2B in new trial, Samsung says claims are 'gross exaggeration'

post #1 of 60
Thread Starter 
The second California Apple v. Samsung patent trial kicked off on Tuesday, with both parties offering opening statements to the jury, two of whom were excused just one day after being selected.

Apple vs Samsung


According to in-court reports from Re/code, Apple is seeking $2 billion in damages from Samsung over alleged misuse of five patents, double what the Cupertino, Calif., company won from the first California Apple v. Samsung jury trial in 2012.

"The evidence in this case will be that Samsung copied the iPhone and it also took many other Apple inventions that had not yet appeared in Apple products," said Apple attorney Harold McElhinny. "Samsung did not stop with competitive intelligence," he said. "Copying the iPhone was literally built into the Samsung development process."

McElhinny has promised to show the jury internal Samsung documents he said proves the Korean tech giant knew it was copying Apple's intellectual property. While Samsung fended off the iPhone's growing user base since its debut in 2007, by 2010 the Korean tech giant was forced to copy Apple's handset, a piece of technology in development since 2004.

It is unknown what evidence Apple plans to submit, but the packet could be along the lines of a 2010 Samsung comparison report -- now known as the "copycat documents" -- shown during the first Apple v. Samsung. Those papers illustrated a systematic process that compared and contrasted then-current Samsung handset designs with the iPhone.

Samsung Report
Slide from the "copycat document" presented during the first Apple v. Samsung trial.


According to McIlhinney, Samsung sold 37 million infringing products in the U.S., for which Apple is seeking an average of $33 in damages per phone. The company is also asking for reasonable royalties on phones and tablets.

In his opening statement, Samsung counsel John Quinn said Apple's patent claims are not as broad as the company makes out.

"I'll prove to you that is a gross, gross exaggeration, and an insult to your intelligence," Quinn said.

The attorney cited a sampling of reviews of Samsung products before passing the buck off to Google and its Android operating system. The software features seen on the Galaxy Nexus, one of the main devices in suit, were not built by Samsung, but the "sophisticated and creative minds" at Google.

"It's an attack on Android," Quinn said. "It is trying to gain with you in this courtroom what it has lost in the marketplace."

During the latter part of his opener, Quinn trotted out an email from Apple cofounder Steve Jobs that alluded to a "Holy War" with Google. The company was apparently aware of the danger Samsung posed. In fact, Quinn said a meeting agenda from October 2010 suggested Apple recognized Android was ahead in cloud computing, notifications and voice.

Finally, the original ten-member jury has been whittled down to four men and four women as two jurors were excused. One claimed sickness, while another said serving in the trial would be financially damaging.
post #2 of 60

Pay Samsung! Pay it and shutup!  Come up with Tizen if you can!

post #3 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

It is unknown what evidence Apple plans to submit, but the packet could be along the lines of a 2010 Samsung comparison report -- now known as the "copycat documents" -- shown during the first Apple v. Samsung. Those papers illustrated a systematic process that compared and contrasted then-current Samsung handset designs with the iPhone.
 
Samsung Report
Slide from the "copycat document" presented during the first Apple v. Samsung trial.

 

If you ask me, that "copycat document" is all the jury should need to prove guilt, IMO. When it first came to surface during the first trial, the more I read it, the more disgusted I became.

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply
post #4 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post
 

If you ask me, that "copycat document" is all the jury should need to prove guilt, IMO. When it first came to surface during the first trial, the more I read it, the more disgusted I became.


Well... according to Samsung's new crap they're throwing on the wall in hopes it sticks... apparently it's all Google's fault now.

Uhm... even though graphic shows Samsung was trying to mimic the design... but that's just a technicality. /s

post #5 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post
 

If you ask me, that "copycat document" is all the jury should need to prove guilt, IMO. When it first came to surface during the first trial, the more I read it, the more disgusted I became.

I read that whole document what you called "copycat document".  IMO, that is not a copycat document.  

 

That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.  Basically all companies do this.  

 

Have you seen that Sony inspired iPhone design?  That strikingly resembles later iPhone 4.

post #6 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by tastowe View Post

I am total piss off at the shitty google and samsung. So I am going to hate google and samsung company. The court is bullshit by asshole samsung

Why? Why? and not by Apple?

post #7 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

I read that whole document what you called "copycat document".  IMO, that is not a copycat document.  

That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.  Basically all companies do this.  

Have you seen that Sony inspired iPhone design?  That strikingly resembles
 later iPhone 4.

So what was the Sony phone Apple copied?
post #8 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


So what was the Sony phone Apple copied?

My point was that the 'Copycat document' is not a copycat document and you can not abuse anyone doing what we all do.  We all inspired from everyone.

post #9 of 60
Give 'em hell Apple!
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #10 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post
 

My point was that the 'Copycat document' is not a copycat document and you can not abuse anyone doing what we all do.  We all inspired from everyone.

So what was the Sony phone Apple copied?

post #11 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

I read that whole document what you called "copycat document".  IMO, that is not a copycat document.  

That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.  Basically all companies do this.  

Have you seen that Sony inspired iPhone design?  That strikingly resembles
 later iPhone 4.

Being inspired by prior work is one thing. Systematically copying material that is designated as someone else's intellectual property is stealing. There is just no excuse for it, especially when the theif commits the offense knowingly and in defiance of warnings.
post #12 of 60
So basically, Quinn's strategy is to regurgitate standard Fandroid arguments from the forum wars. Like he did in the first trial.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #13 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcallows View Post

So what was the Sony phone Apple copied?

He's referring to this.


http://theverge.com/2012/7/26/3189309/apple-sony-iphone-design-inspiration-iphone-4-looked-old
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #14 of 60
Quote:

Yes, But what Sony phone is it? Where can I find it?
post #15 of 60

The battle between good (Apple) and evil (Shamesung),... with Tim Cock (Badass Antihero) vs Samsung CEO (Satan), please Apple i beg you take their money and save the planet!

 

 

Reply

 

 

Reply
post #16 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dabe View Post


Being inspired by prior work is one thing. Systematically copying material that is designated as someone else's intellectual property is stealing. There is just no excuse for it, especially when the theif commits the offense knowingly and in defiance of warnings.

Have you read that document?  Well, we all do this sort of analysis ,don't you think so?  Speaking of 'Copying', have you heard about Goophone? 

post #17 of 60
Quote:

Yes but what was the Sony phone Apple copied?

post #18 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Yes, But what Sony phone is it? Where can I find it?


The OP said
Quote:
Have you seen that Sony inspired iPhone design?

How did that turn into 'copied' or a 'Sony phone'? He could of worded it better, but nowhere is it implied that Apple copied the design of a Sony phone.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #19 of 60
Give it a rest hjb. We don't all do this. Stop trying to justify the unjustifiable. Samsung lost the first trial and will lose this one too. Just need to wait and see how many billions are involved.
post #20 of 60
When people actual think they are buying an iPhone but end up with a Samdung phone, there is a very serious problem.
post #21 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

The OP said



How did that turn into 'copied' or a 'Sony phone'? He could of worded it better, but nowhere is it implied that Apple copied the design of a Sony phone.

He's trying to equate inspiration to copying. He says everyone does "competitive analysis". Then brings up the Sony inspired prototype. So my question is what Sony phone did Apple use for its "competitive analysis"?
post #22 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Have you read that document?  Well, we all do this sort of analysis ,don't you think so?  Speaking of 'Copying', have you heard about Goophone? 

Yes, we all do this sort of analysis. It's the post-analysis implementation that determines whether there's been copying or not. If the implementation suggests copying, then it's not unreasonable to look at the process of analysis for supportive evidence, which is what seems to have happened here.
post #23 of 60

Samsung: You reap what you sow.

post #24 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

He's trying to equate inspiration to copying. He says everyone does "competitive analysis". Then brings up the Sony inspired prototype. So my question is what Sony phone did Apple use for its "competitive analysis"?

He said
Quote:
That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.

And used a example of a design. It doesn't need to be a phone, or product that was ever made.
Edited by dasanman69 - 4/1/14 at 5:24pm
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #25 of 60

The courts will never grant Apple that amount of money or anything even close.  The courts are already sick and tired of Apple's whining.  Although I'd like to see Apple run Samsung and Android, it's not going to happen.  Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.

post #26 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dabe View Post
 
 
Yes, we all do this sort of analysis. It's the post-analysis implementation that determines whether there's been copying or not. If the implementation suggests copying, then it's not unreasonable to look at the process of analysis for supportive evidence, which is what seems to have happened here.

So what implementation suggested here copying?  Have you seen or heard of Goophone?  

post #27 of 60

"I'll prove to you that is a gross, gross exaggeration, and an insult to your intelligence," Quinn said.

"It's an attack on Android," Quinn said. "It is trying to gain with you in this courtroom what it has lost in the marketplace."

 

This guy seems like such a fuckface. I recall numerous idiotic statements from him from the 1st trial. 

post #28 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post
 

The courts will never grant Apple that amount of money or anything even close.  The courts are already sick and tired of Apple's whining.  Although I'd like to see Apple run Samsung and Android, it's not going to happen.  Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.

 

Incredible you would bring up Apple's "whining", when whining is literally all you do on this forum. Every single one of your posts is a tiresome, mind-numbing rant, almost a carbon -copy of the one before, and you have the gall to mention "whining"? Unreal.  Apple has never played in the profit-less junk-market, which you're shrieking for them to do,  and in spite of that have become the most successful company in the world. 

 

Oh, and what "game" is already over? Is it the one where Apple has the most successful phone on the planet, or the one where Apple is making the most profits and revenues in the smartphone market, or the one where the iPhone has the most web usage, or the one where it has the largest US marketshare, or is it the one where they have the best reviewed phone in the world? The only thing pitiful is your incessant, obsessive doomsday whining, which seems like some sort of strange mental disease which we all have to suffer through in every fucking thread. 

post #29 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

So what implementation suggested here copying?

A phone that resembles an iPhone so much that consumers are confused...
post #30 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

He said


And used a example of a design. It doesn't need to be a phone, or product that was ever made.

Again, there's a diff between 1 to 1 copying and inspiration.
post #31 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Incredible you would bring up Apple's "whining", when whining is literally all you do on this forum. Every single one of your posts is a tiresome, mind-numbing rant, almost a carbon -copy of the one before, and you have the gall to mention "whining"? Unreal.  Apple has never played in the profit-less junk-market, which you're shrieking for them to do,  and in spite of that have become the most successful company in the world. 

Oh, and what "game" is already over? Is it the one where Apple has the most successful phone on the planet, or the one where Apple is making the most profits and revenues in the smartphone market, or the one where the iPhone has the most web usage, or the one where it has the largest US marketshare, or is it the one where they have the best reviewed phone in the world? The only thing pitiful is your incessant, obsessive doomsday whining, which seems like some sort of strange mental disease which we all have to suffer through in every fucking thread. 

Slurpy, just block him. He isn't worth it.
post #32 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post
 

The courts will never grant Apple that amount of money or anything even close.  The courts are already sick and tired of Apple's whining.  Although I'd like to see Apple run Samsung and Android, it's not going to happen.  Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.

Are u lost? here let me help you www.shamesunginsider.com, i think you forgot the most important thing who earns more money? Apple! but also sells a lot less products than Samsung shamelist

Apple: Macs, iOS Devices, Software and Apple TV's

Shame Shame Shamesung: Smartphones (but lags), non-smartphones, Tablets, Smart WC,  Samsung W2014 (snapdragon 800, flip phone form factor, price $1500), non-smart tv's, smart bulbs, smart dildos, human organs, .....................................the list goes on............

 

 

Reply

 

 

Reply
post #33 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dabe View Post


A phone that resembles an iPhone so much that consumers are confused...

Nope you obviously confused Galaxy with Goophone.  I never seen anyone confused with plastic Galaxy.

post #34 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Again, there's a diff between 1 to 1 copying and inspiration.

Agreed, but I don't see where there's a accusation of copying.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #35 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Agreed, but I don't see where there's a accusation of copying.

Ok. The original post was a bad analogy then.
post #36 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Ok. The original post was a bad analogy then.

Did I not say he worded it badly? lol.gif
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #37 of 60
Stop feeding the trolls.
post #38 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post
 

Nope you obviously confused Galaxy with Goophone.  I never seen anyone confused with plastic Galaxy.

No, I don't even know what a "Goophone" is, but that's irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Samsung infringed on Apple's intellectual property by copying or too closely imitating certain features of the iPhone. Samsung has already admitted this. (Whether or not an experienced consumer such as yourself would ever confuse a plastic Galaxy with an iPhone has no bearing on the issue whatsoever.)

post #39 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post
 

I read that whole document what you called "copycat document".  IMO, that is not a copycat document.  

 

That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.  Basically all companies do this.  

 

Have you seen that Sony inspired iPhone design?  That strikingly resembles later iPhone 4.

Your so-called "Sony design" can also be compared physically to Sony's "Clié" line of Palm OS personal digital assistants that Sony marketed from 2000 to 2005, then dropped. Nothing Sony "designed" at that time ever reached the market in the shape of a phone or came remotely comparable to the iPhone in concept.

 

The Clié models were rectangular. They had touchscreens with apps generally manipulated with a stylus. They played music and they took photos, but data transfer was primarily accomplished by physically connection to a computer with a cable or or cradle or - in a few late models - using Sony Memory Sticks. They didn't have network or wireless capability, but you could say that they had a "candy bar" form factor that later became the preferred shape for smartphones. I loved the capabilities of the Cliés I owned and was pissed off when Sony backed away from the business. In the day, it was the pony that knew a few tricks, but not all. I carried a Clié and also a separate cell phone. Although Treo and BlackBerry  smartphones debuted in 2002 and 2003, I always thought they were kludgy, overlarge and overpriced. It took Apple to pull the form factor and all the other devices'  pony tricks together in early 2007 when Jobs announced the iPhone. Remember what he said at the unveiling?

 

“Today, we’re introducing three revolutionary products of this class. The first one is a widescreen iPod with touch controls. The second is a revolutionary mobile phone. And the third is a breakthrough Internet communications device.” He repeated the list for emphasis, then asked, “Are you getting it? These are not three separate devices, this is one device, and we are calling it iPhone.”

Isaacson, Walter (2011-10-24). Steve Jobs (p. 474). Simon & Schuster, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #40 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Apple's smartphone market share is so pitiful, the game is already over.

Apple is the #2 smartphone manufacturer by unit sales. And as a result... they have the 2nd highest market share out of all manufacturers.

If that's game over... then what hope do #3, #4, #5, #6 and below have?

If being #2 is a failure... god help the DOZENS of companies who sell even fewer phones than Apple.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple seeking damages of $2B in new trial, Samsung says claims are 'gross exaggeration'