ITC judge invokes 'Cheech and Chong' test in Apple-Samsung case

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
An International Trade Commission judge said on Thursday that Apple's ongoing patent infringement case may come down to what he calls a "Cheech and Chong" test, alluding to a bit by the comedy duo that involved dog feces.

According to Bloomberg, Judge Thomas Pender said that the patent design case may boil down to the "Cheech and Chong" test, which identifies an object using the following no-nonsense qualifications: ?Does it look like it, feel like it, smell like it??

For those unfamiliar with the 1970's routine, found here (warning: coarse language), Cheech forces Chong to feel, smell and taste a substance they believe to be dog feces before finally deciding that it was, indeed, excrement and that they were glad not to have stepped in it.

The humorous quip doesn't lessen the gravity of Apple's allegations, which assert that Samsung's Galaxy Tab and smartphone lineups copied the look and feel of the original iPad and iPhone. The Cupertino-based company first leveled accusations of patent infringement in an April 2011 suit that has ballooned into a worldwide dispute spanning multiple continents.

Judge Pender
U.S. Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender. | Source: USITC


The statement was part of the case's opening arguments which saw Apple reiterate its long-held stance that Samsung flagrantly copied the design of the iPad and iPhone.

?Not content to copy the overall design and interface, Samsung has copied the smallest detail of the iPhone,? said Apple lawyer Harold McElhinny of Morrison & Foerster. ?Samsung copied our original and iconic design.?

Samsung claims that it arrived at the designs after spending decades and $3.5 billion on research.

?Samsung has been in this industry, building and innovating to the point where Apple could enter the market,? said Samsung lawyer Charles Verhoeven of Quinn Emanuel. ?We are anything but an also-ran trying to copy Apple?s technology.?

Verhoeven goes on to say that Samsung is "also known for its designs" and the company has been "recognized worldwide and compared favorably? to Apple.

Judge Pender will hear the Apple v. Samsung case through June 6 and is expected to deliver a ruling on Oct. 5.

The South Korean company has an ITC patent case of its own against Apple that is scheduled to be held from June 4 through June 15. Judge James Gildea, who previously handed down an unfavorable ruling against Apple in an HTC complaint that was later overturned, will be overseeing the case. A determination is expected to be reached by Sept. 14.

Apple recently filed for a U.S. injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab after it won an appeal against opposing findings from a California court.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 92
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member


    Good thing it wasn't the 'Cheech, Chong, and Chewbacca' test.


     


    This quote cracks me up:


     


    Samsung claims that it arrived at the designs after spending decades and $3.5 billion on research.

  • Reply 2 of 92
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GTR View Post


    Good thing it wasn't the 'Cheech, Chong, and Chewbacca' test.


     


    This quote cracks me up:


     


    Samsung claims that it arrived at the designs after spending decades and $3.5 billion on research.



     


    Similarly, this quote is quite humorous.


     


    Verhoeven goes on to say that Samsung is "also known for its designs" and the company has been "recognized worldwide and compared favorably" to Apple.

  • Reply 3 of 92
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Samsung-Apple-Cable-Copy.jpg


     


    "Decades. Literally DECADES, your honor."

  • Reply 4 of 92
    mrstepmrstep Posts: 446member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    ...


     


    "Decades. Literally DECADES, your honor."



     


    "Samsung has been in this industry, building and innovating to the point where Apple could enter the market"


     


    Uh, wha...? No really, what? It's great that they do memory, screens, CPUs, and really without the overall advances in the components it's unlikely that Jobs would have been able to get a device in the form factor he wanted with the functionality that he wanted, but that's industry wide advancements - and in what way does that mean they didn't totally copy Apple in design and interface/usability? They used the iOS knockoff and then copied the hardware as well.


     


    Apple isn't suing other screen makers or chip makers, they're suing Samsung for ripping off their phone and tablet designs. And to think people say Apple has a reality distortion field.

  • Reply 5 of 92
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

    And to think people say Apple has a reality distortion field.


     


    They copied that, too.

  • Reply 6 of 92
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,432member


    “We are anything but an also-ran trying to copy Apple’s technology.”


     


    Do or do not. There is no try.

  • Reply 7 of 92
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,569member
    Samsung copied design, not technology.
  • Reply 8 of 92
    tooltalktooltalk Posts: 766member


    Are you saying that Apple's iPad's rectangular tablet design isn't part of the larger industry trend ? - whereas Samsung's is?

  • Reply 9 of 92
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

    Are you saying that Apple's iPad's rectangular tablet design isn't part of the larger industry trend ? - whereas Samsung's is?


     


    Well, let's see, there were no tablets on the market that anyone actually wanted… and then the iPad came out.


     


    So yeah, there was no "industry trend". It's laughable that you'd even say that.

  • Reply 10 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,905member
    Seems to me to show he favors Apple. I think the judge is asking, rhetorically, does he really have to feel, smell and taste a Sumsung device to know it's dog shit.

    Sorry using an iPad so no chance of any emoticons.
  • Reply 11 of 92
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member


    Hey look it's a new Mac Mini:-


     


    http://www.engadget.com/photos/samsung-chromebox-2012-review/#5051182


     


    Samsung imitating, nah I just don't see it.


     


    LOL

  • Reply 12 of 92
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,432member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post



    Samsung copied design, not technology.


    I can see where a simple mind might come to that conclusion from reading just this article, but this article covers merely a tiny fraction of the areas in dispute between the two companies--areas that include patented designs and patented technologies.

  • Reply 13 of 92
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Samsung claims that it arrived at the designs after spending decades and $3.5 billion on research.

    They need to ask for a refund because they got ripped off.
  • Reply 14 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,905member
    hill60 wrote: »
    Hey look it's a new Mac Mini:-

    http://www.engadget.com/photos/samsung-chromebox-2012-review/#5051182

    Samsung imitating, nah I just don't see it.

    LOL

    Dead ringer for an Apple AE too.
  • Reply 15 of 92
    patranuspatranus Posts: 366member


    Wasn't it Samsung's lawyer who couldn't identify the Samsung product at a short distance???

  • Reply 16 of 92
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    Hey look it's a new Mac Mini:-


     


    http://www.engadget.com/photos/samsung-chromebox-2012-review/#5051182


     


    Samsung imitating, nah I just don't see it.


     


    LOL



    They really just keep on blatantly copying Apple product designs! I do hope Apple wins on some of these points, but even if they don’t, they’re smart to push the matter as far as possible. Apple needs to send all competitors the message that they won’t roll over and make it easy for you if you want to steal their designs so blatantly and repeatedly. (And steal their patented innovations as well, as the case may be.)

  • Reply 17 of 92
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,748member
    jragosta wrote: »
    They need to ask for a refund because they got ripped off.
    Sounds like the advice was good, just a little pricey.
    "After an exhaustive, $3.5 billion survey of existing consumer tech, it is clear that Apple is the company to copy..."
  • Reply 18 of 92
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    "Dave's not here, man."

    gtr wrote: »
    Good thing it wasn't the 'Cheech, Chong, and Chewbacca' test.

    This quote cracks me up:

    Samsung claims that it arrived at the designs after spending decades and $3.5 billion on research.
    Technically speaking corporate espionage is research. :D
  • Reply 19 of 92
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,200member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post



    Samsung copied design, not technology.


     


    Design and Technology are interwoven.

  • Reply 20 of 92
    penchantedpenchanted Posts: 1,070member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrstep View Post


     


    "Samsung has been in this industry, building and innovating to the point where Apple could enter the market"


     


    Uh, wha...? No really, what? It's great that they do memory, screens, CPUs, and really without the overall advances in the components it's unlikely that Jobs would have been able to get a device in the form factor he wanted with the functionality that he wanted, but that's industry wide advancements - and in what way does that mean they didn't totally copy Apple in design and interface/usability? They used the iOS knockoff and then copied the hardware as well.


     


    Apple isn't suing other screen makers or chip makers, they're suing Samsung for ripping off their phone and tablet designs. And to think people say Apple has a reality distortion field.



    This seems a particularly reckless claim for a component supplier like Samsung. They seem to be deliberately blurring the line between the component and handset businesses. As a supplier, they should be assuring everyone that a firewall between these two units means that their component customers' designs are safe. Instead, they try to make it sound like they have provided design leadership in both these areas which then allowed Apple to make the iPhone.

Sign In or Register to comment.