Separately, Apple showed a video deposition with Samsung’s lead
licensing executive, Seungho Ahn. In the video Ahn generally answered
all questions with a "no" or "I don’t know," perhaps in an effort to
give Apple no traction with his testimony. But the net impression the
video left with the jury could be damaging.
For example, when
asked if he had made any specific efforts to make sure Samsung
understood and practiced FRAND licensing as required by standards groups
such as ETSI, he said, “I am the head of the IP center, and I have
Later, asked if Samsung made important contributions to telecommunications he answered, “I do not know.”
today, a former patent counsel from Texas Instruments testified for
Apple that Samsung’s proposal to license the two patents for 2.4 percent
of the cost of an iPhone--or about $14--violated FRAND terms set by
Richard Donaldson suggested Samsung should charge about
2.4 percent of the price of the baseband controller that executes the
functions—or about $2.40.
“Samsung has about five percent of
2,000 patents on 3G,” the former TI lawyer said. “If other companies
took the same approach as Samsung the total royalty of an iPhone would
be about 50 percent [of its market price]—that’s not fair or reasonable
because you could not be successful in the market,” he said.
In the concluding minutes of testimony Friday, Samsung called an expert witness who disputed the points Apple argued, saying Samsung's practices regarding ETSI and FRAND licensing are in line with industry norms.