• Testimony Wraps Up in the Apple vs. Samsung Trial

    According to All Things D, after a number of Apple witnesses had been called to the stand to rebut testimony from Samsung’s experts Judge Lucy Koh said, “We are done,” putting an end to nearly fifty hours of testimony heard by the jury. Both parties rested their case in the Apple vs. Samsung trial on Friday bringing an end to the testimony portion of the proceedings. Next up are closing arguments with jury deliberation set to take place next week.

    Apple used its witness testimony time to call New York University professor and former assistant Attorney General for the antitrust division Janusz Ordover to the stand. In his testimony, Ordover said Samsung’s declared standards-essential patents have allowed the company to gain a near monopoly in the industry as far as wireless technologies are concerned. The Cupertino California company continued to bring repeat witnesses back to the stand when rebutting Samsung’s claims of patent infringement. Peter Bressler was called upon to dispute Samsung’s claims that the 1994 Fidler tablet concept invalidated Apple’s own design patents, a point that the South Korean company tried to point out multiple times throughout the trial. Bressler went on to refute invalidation claims based on several Japanese and Korean designs as well as the LG Prada smartphone. This was after Samsung witness Itay Sherman presented the evidence in court on Wednesday saying that Apple’s designs were functional and not ornamental.

    When it came to the user interface, Apple called Karan Singh back to the stand who went on to explain Samsung’s assertion of previous art against the Cupertino California company’s UI zooming patents were not valid claims. Singh pointed out that Samsung witness Ben Bederson’s LaunchTile property didn’t actually enlarge any on-screen assets but instead launches certain applications. This was after Bederson demoed LaunchTile, a program that allows users to easily navigate a screen of 36 applications with one hand by “zooming in” on specific apps. Ravi Balakrishnan came next as he testified in support of Apple’s ‘915 “pinch-to-zoom” and ‘381 “rubber-banding” patents, stating Samsung’s claims of prior art don’t cover the specifics of Apple’s property. This was in regards to Samsung calling upon Adam Bogue, creator of Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratory’s DiamondTouch display table. Bogue went on to argue the device’s FractalZoom feature, which supports a single touch for scrolling and two fingers for pinch and zoom, predates Apple’s patent. It was also revealed during his testimony that the technology was demoed to Apple hardware engineers back in 2003. He then showcased a follow-up invention named TableCloth, which incorporates a “bounce back” animation when images are dragged offscreen.

    Apple rested the case leading Samsung to bring up two final witnesses, which were David Teece and Woodward Yang. Teece testified that Samsung’s disclosure of patents was timely, showing a study offering examples from other companies. Here, Teece went on to say that the company’s FRAND licensing offer to Apple was reasonable, but Apple did not agree to the terms. Teece and another Samsung witness, Vincent O’Brien went on to estimate Apple owing roughly $421.8 million in royalties based on five patents held by Samsung.

    With the testimonies being completed, both Apple and Samsung need to finalize jury instructions with a discussion on the matter scheduled for Monday. This upcoming Wednesday, jury deliberations should begin after the parties get two hours each for closing arguments on Tuesday. We’ll have to wait and see what the jury’s verdict for the Apple vs. Samsung trial will be as it is considered to be one of the most important patent cases of all time.

    Source: AllThingsD
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Testimony Wraps Up in the Apple vs. Samsung Trial started by Akshay Masand View original post
    Comments 4 Comments
    1. lkailburn's Avatar
      lkailburn -
      Will be interesting times ahead
    1. NakedFaerie's Avatar
      NakedFaerie -
      From what is said above it all sounds like Apple is in the wrong and need to pay Samsung.
    1. Skunkie-71's Avatar
      Skunkie-71 -
      Quote Originally Posted by NakedFaerie View Post
      From what is said above it all sounds like Apple is in the wrong and need to pay Samsung.
      Thats exactly how it sounds to me from reading that.
      I wonder what the result of all this will be.
    1. wiipro's Avatar
      wiipro -
  • Connect With Us

  • Twitter Box

  • Facebook