Apple wants Samsung logo on court televisions obscured from jurors in trial

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
In its forthcoming patent infringement suit with Samsung, Apple will ask the court to conceal Samsung's logo from video displays in the courtroom, so that jurors will not see it.

In a filing with the U.S. district court, Apple revealed it will bring a motion for "obscuring the 'Samsung' logo on the court's video display for jurors," as noted on Tuesday by Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents. Samsung displays are used in the courtroom in the Northern District of California, but Apple doesn't want the company's logo to be constantly shown to jurors.

"At first sight, this may seem very funny, but I actually understand why Apple would make this request: act a conscious level, it can show to jurors that Samsung actually contributes technology to the U.S. government, and at a subconscious level, it creates the impression of the court being Samsung territory," Mueller wrote.

Apple has also asked the court that any quotes from company co-founder Steve Jobs to biographer Walter Isaacson to be excluded from the trial. In Isaacson's biography of Jobs released last year, the late former Apple CEO went on an "expletive-laced rant" about the Android mobile operating system, and said he was "willing to go thermonuclear war" to "destroy" the product.

Apple also asked the court to prevent "any reference to working conditions in China" to be presented in the trial. The company has recently come under fire for its partnership with Foxconn for assembling devices in China, though Apple has also worked to improve conditions at overseas factories with independent audits conducted by the Fair Labor Association.

Samsung, too, presented a list of requests for the court. The company has asked that any "Apple related blogs, and articles by non-expert newspaper reporters" regarding Apple and Samsung products be excluded.



Samsung also asked that the court strike the opinions of Henry Urbach, who testified on Apple's cultural significance, and Sanjay Sood, who is Apple's expert on consumer decision making.

The trial between Apple and Samsung is scheduled to begin on July 30, 2012, though Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Gee-Sung Choi will meet in San Francisco later this month in an effort to resolve their dispute. Each company has accused the other of patent infringement in complaints that now span 50 lawsuits across 10 countries.

The legal battle began in April of 2011, when Apple sued Samsung for allegedly copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad. Samsung has shot back with its own patent infringement complaints against Apple, though it has not found any success in such litigation thus far, while Apple has managed to win some temporary injunctions on certain Samsung products.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43
    haarhaar Posts: 563member
    now that is attention to detail..
    . why not just replace them with SONY... LOL!
    i know why!... just joking.
  • Reply 2 of 43
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    Gotta love the attention to detail within Apple, and that it's not only limited to their hard- and software. Just like they asked Samsung to do their homework more thoroughly because they misspelled their name (Apple, Inc. instead of Apple Inc.)
  • Reply 3 of 43
    phasorncphasornc Posts: 46member


    I don't think any corporate logo should be a fixture in a courtroom.  No furniture, lighting or technology should advertise its brand in a courtroom.

     

  • Reply 4 of 43
    kkqd1337kkqd1337 Posts: 441member
    I think apple insider should pay the same level of attention to their spelling

    [quote]The trial between Apple nad Samsung is scheduled to begin on July 30, 2012, though Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Gee-Sung Choi will meet in San Francisco later this month in an effort to resolve their dispute. Each company has accused the other of patent infringement in complaints that now span 50 lawsuits across 10 countries.[\quote]
  • Reply 5 of 43
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member


    Nice move Apple, obscure Samsung's logo to make the products look more alike.  Very smooth.

  • Reply 6 of 43
    popnfreshpopnfresh Posts: 139member


    A ridiculous request that only serves to illustrate how arrogant Apple has become. The lawsuit isn't about brand names and no juror is going to feel a sudden rush of sympathy for Samsung because they happen to see a logo on a courtroom TV. Hey, maybe they should also insist that no juror can own anything made by Samsung. And while they're at it they should prohibit anyone named "Sam" or "Samantha" from sitting on the jury. I hope the judge laughs this request right out of court.

  • Reply 7 of 43
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


    Nice move Apple, obscure Samsung's logo to make the products look more alike.  Very smooth.



     


     


    Funny how the Apple haters always manage to come up with such ridiculous arguments. A TV looks nothing like an iPad. The Samsung Tab, though, does - at least according to the Samsung attorney who couldn't tell the difference.


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by popnfresh View Post


    A ridiculous request that only serves to illustrate how arrogant Apple has become. The lawsuit isn't about brand names and no juror is going to feel a sudden rush of sympathy for Samsung because they happen to see a logo on a courtroom TV. Hey, maybe they should also insist that no juror can own anything made by Samsung too. And while they're at it they should prohibit anyone named "Sam" or "Samantha" from sitting on the jury. I hope the judge laughs this request right out of court.



     


    OK, so we've now established that you've never dealt with any legal matters and/or public opinion. Apple has every right to be concerned that the jury will see Samsung logos around the room and think that Samsung has more sway with the court than Apple. Similarly, if the court were using Apple computers, Samsung would be well within its rights to have the logos hidden.



    There's nothing arrogant about it. The court may decide that it's unnecessary, so Apple may lose the request, but the only arrogance is in the mind of all the Apple haters.

  • Reply 8 of 43
    core2core2 Posts: 49member


    This is part of normal court proceedings, that is why there would be no samsung or apple employees or for that matter people who are related to someone who works at either company if there was a jury.  The courtroom is supposed to be neutral territory so I am sure that either company wants no brand of the other shown in the courtroom but because its Apple, its front page news.  I am sure Samsung has asked this request in every court proceeding they have had to date, if not they are stupid not to have requested it.


     

  • Reply 9 of 43
    cogitodextercogitodexter Posts: 196member


    Isn't it possible that seeing dozens of LCD screens and other equipment with duck tape over logos (including the backs of screens, which typically for Samsung have large moulded logos) only draw even more attention to the jurors of the issue of who makes the equipment? I know if I saw such a thing I'd be immediately curious and if nobody explained it to me it would represent a distraction when using the device.


     


    They'd be better off replacing the screens with maybe even a range of different makes, so no single maker was dominant in the eye line of the jurors.

  • Reply 10 of 43


     


    Quote:



    "At first sight, this may seem very funny, but I actually understand why Apple would make this request: act a conscious level, it can show to jurors that Samsung actually contributes technology to the U.S. government, and at a subconscious level, it creates the impression of the court being Samsung territory," Mueller wrote.

     


    At first sight, it seems very funny.


     


    After Mueller's "explanation", it seems even funnier.

  • Reply 11 of 43
    myapplelovemyapplelove Posts: 1,515member


    What nonsense, someone should alarm apple's legal team of what an embarrassment they are becoming to the company with such antics...


     


     


    And what about them MacBook pros and iMacs already?

  • Reply 12 of 43
    jmkazajmkaza Posts: 10member


    I'd think that this is Apple's intent. The obviousness to the Jurors that the court is trying to hide their preference for Samsung could develop sympathy for Apple.

  • Reply 13 of 43
    jmkazajmkaza Posts: 10member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CogitoDexter View Post


    Isn't it possible that seeing dozens of LCD screens and other equipment with duck tape over logos (including the backs of screens, which typically for Samsung have large moulded logos) only draw even more attention to the jurors of the issue of who makes the equipment? 



     


     


    I'd think that this is Apple's intent. The obviousness to the Jurors that the court is trying to hide their preference for Samsung could develop sympathy for Apple.

  • Reply 14 of 43
    sandyfsandyf Posts: 42member


    I believe the goal is simply to demonstrate that "the look" is indeed a copy of the iPhone.


    Perhaps better than duck tape obscuring logos, just a simple digital image of both phones with any reference to brand, photoshopped out. Keep it simple...and a good image can hit it home. 

  • Reply 15 of 43
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    phasornc wrote: »
    <p> I don't think any corporate logo should be a fixture in a courtroom.  No furniture, lighting or technology should advertise its brand in a courtroom.<br />  </p>

    I agree with the thought but it's not practical. Unless you want to ban televisions, computers, tablets etc.

    Both sides are making very reasonable requests. No logos from either side should be visible in regards to the court and its staff. No logo on the court tv, no bailiffs with cellphones of any kind hanging off their belts, no judge using a tablet up on the bench.

    Also Foxconn has nothing to do with the issues of the case so it should be off the issues even hinted at.

    And so on
  • Reply 16 of 43
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    <p> What nonsense, someone should alarm apple's legal team of what an embarrassment they are becoming to the company with such antics...</p>

    This is standard game play done in every case of every kind. Moto will do it, Samsung has and will do it etc.


  • Reply 17 of 43
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    neo42 wrote: »
    <p> Nice move Apple, obscure Samsung's logo to make the products look more alike.  Very smooth.</p>

    Clearly someone so wanting to get his snark on that he didn't actually read the article. Nice move, very smooth
  • Reply 18 of 43
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    [quote] I believe the goal is simply to demonstrate that "the look" is indeed a copy of the iPhone.
    Perhaps better than duck tape obscuring logos, just a simple digital image of both phones with any reference to brand, photoshopped out.[/quote]
    I believe a few people did not understand this article.
    Apple wants the court to cover up the Samsung logo on equipment used in the courtroom by the court, not the items/evidence being discussed in the trial.
  • Reply 19 of 43
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    [quote] I believe the goal is simply to demonstrate that "the look" is indeed a copy of the iPhone.
    Perhaps better than duck tape obscuring logos, just a simple digital image of both phones with any reference to brand, photoshopped out.[/quote]
    I believe a few people did not understand this article.
    Apple wants the court to cover up the Samsung logo on equipment used in the courtroom by the court, not remove the logo from the items/evidence being discussed in the trial.
  • Reply 20 of 43
    platanasplatanas Posts: 10member


    Apple's motion is absolutely correct and traceable. A Samsung device in the courtroom suggests the courts trust in this product and so indirectly in the manufacturers brand. Its a minimum prerequisite for fair justice to hide this products completely, better to dismantle and replace them with unbranded screens . When the televisions brand names will be only taped, they still bring too much to the mind of the jury -  it could also be misinterpreted as "censoring Samsung", which is definitely not the case.


     


     

Sign In or Register to comment.