SAN JOSE, Calif. — Claims and counterclaims were played out in the courtroom theater of the Apple-Samsung trial here Monday. Samsung rested its defense in the infringement complaint Apple brought against it and immediately dove into its own complaint against Apple. US District Judge Lucy Koh expects witness examination to conclude Friday morning.
Samsung's last witness in defense was Judith Chevalier, a finance and economics professor at Yale University's School of Management. Her testimony was for the most part designed to discredit once more the monetary damages John Hauser of MIT calculated for Apple and last week's testimony of Christopher Vellturo, Apple's expert on damages.
Under the assumption Samsung will be found to have broken patent laws, Chevalier estimated Apple's damages to be approximately $38 million, a mere nuisance for Samsung in comparison with the $2.2 billion Apple is seeking. It was disclosed that Chevalier has also testified for Apple in other court cases about damage remedy.
Chevalier broke her calculations into three categories: Apple's lost profits due to diminished demand for products; lost profits because of Samsung's faster time to market by way of patent infringement; and reasonable Apple royalties payable by Samsung. She described several approaches and methods to calculate damages for each category, all of which produce results in a fairly tight range of zero to less than 50 cents per each infringed patent in every unit sold. She then used guideline precedents from other court cases to arrive at her own number of 35 cents.
Apple attorney William Lee attempted to discredit some of Chevalier's methods as unorthodox and not having been written up in academic studies or used in earlier court cases. Samsung has sold 38 million units, he said, and was therefore particularly skeptical of Chevalier's result of zero profits as a result of lost sales. Chevalier responded that she compensated for it in estimation of lost royalties and that the 35 cent number was reasonable on all counts.
Lee followed a similar strategy in a continuing cross examination of Tülin Erdem earlier in the day. He sought to have her concede that the eye tracking technology applied to survey consumer choice of smartphones had never been used in any court case, but Erdem appeared to take that as a compliment and indicated she was flattered by being a pioneer.
Samsung's infringement complaint against Apple centers on smartphone technology for image storage as well as for video capture, compression, and transmission across devices. The parties stipulated in court today that Samsung owns the last patent, which covers the use of cellular technology for these capabilities.
Dr. Dan Schonfeld, professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Illinois, provided evidence to demonstrate the Facetime video call feature and attachment of video to email in iPhone 4, iPhone 4s, and iPhone 5 all infringe on Samsung's patent. He described his review of depositions of Apple employees, user manuals, and source code. He also showed the judge and the jury confidential Apple presentation documents court watchers were not allowed to see but Schonfeld claimed indicate that Apple benchmarked the Facetime feature against a Samsung device.
The examination of the image storage patent violation is likely to conclude on Tuesday with a former Kodak expert on digital photography, cameras, and image processing on the stand.
— Magnus Thordarson is an IT consultant and freelance writer based in San Jose, Calif. With a background in industry and academia, he is a veteran of Kaiser Permanente IT and writes about all aspects of information technology and management of information systems.
Trial 2: Related content
Trial 1: Related content
- 4/2/14, Apple v. Samsung Case Tackles Stealing, Scapegoating
- 4/7/14, Apple, Samsung Allege Copying
- 4/7/14, Steve Jobs's Email Revealed
- 4/8/14, Phones Irk Apple v. Samsung Judge
- 4/9/14, Apple Lays Out Case for $2B Penalty
- 4/11/14, Samsung Grills Apple Expert
- 4/14/14, Google Takes Stand Against Apple
- 4/15/14, PC Prior Art Cited on iPhone
- 4/18/14, Patent Lessons From Apple v. Samsung
- 4/19/14, Samsung Defense: Marketing Guru vs. Marketing Guru
- 4/21/14, Samsung Attacks: Case Against Apple Begins
- 4/22/14, Apple v. Samsung: Google Agreed to Indemnify Samsung
- 4/24/14, Apple's Quick-Links May Lessen Samsung Damages