They are claiming they could have market a polished turd and call it a smart phone and because they spent so much money on marketing they would have sold more turds and Apple Iphone.
Yes Marketing had everything to do about it, however, without a product to market to consumer then all the money spent would have done nothing for them. Let put this way, if they copied the iPhone and did nothing, spent no money showing off the product what would have been the end result.
I personally think this is bad strategy, it really does not matter who put the feature into the phone, Samsung is the one who placed it on the market and made the money of the stolen idea. Now if Samsung loose and they had some sort of agreement in place with Google saying if they get sued over the Android software infringing on someone else's IP they Google would have to pay Samsung legal bills. But I suspect Samsung did not get a get out of jail free card from Google since they would giving the software aware and probably made no warranties about it. It got back to you get what you paid for.
I am not sure this defense will work, I think the jury will be instructed they Samsung is the one who choose to use Android as is and placed it on the market so they have the responsibility.
Edited by Maestro64 - 4/15/14 at 7:59am