News & Analysis
Comment
Aurora45
Youre so cool! I dont suppose Ive read anything like this before. So nice to ...
selinz
The Palm Pilot came out in 1996ish. It had rounded corners. It had a touch ...
Apple v. Samsung kicks off innovation debates
Rick Merritt
7/31/2012 3:53 PM EDT
SAN JOSE – The Apple v. Samsung case now starting here has already raised two broad questions: What’s the line between aggressive benchmarking and copying of a competitor’s product? And what’s the line between filing patents that are relevant to evolving standards and ones that are intentional submarines?
In opening statements this morning, Apple attorneys showed detailed Samsung reports extending over more than 100 pages. They compared existing Samsung handsets to the iPhone on a feature-by-feature basis making recommendations on each page suggesting Samsung adopt iPhone techniques.
“The evidence will show Samsung has taken our property,” said Harold McElhinny, Apple’s lead attorney.
“Samsung will say we didn’t copy, we benchmarked and everybody in electronics benchmarks--even Apple benchmarks, but benchmarking had a very special meaning at Samsung,” McElhinny said.
“Samsung sold more than 22 million infringing phones and tablets in the U.S. using Apple’s inventions,” he claimed. “Samsung has taken sales away from Apple and will generate more than $2 billion in profit for Samsung that they made using our intellectual property,” he added.
Specifically Apple will seek $2.5 billion in damages, said to be a new watermark in infringement cases. It claims Samsung infringed utility and design patents on the user interface and product look and feel of both the iPhone and the iPad.
Separately, Apple also contends Samsung broke rules in industry standards groups by not declaring patents covering standards work until after the standard was completed. Specifically it claims two Samsung 3G patents were filed before ETSI standards were frozen, then not disclosed until two years later.
For its part, Samsung showed Apple’s detailed internal teardowns of Samsung S1 and Galaxy Tab products. In addition, it showed an email to Apple’s lead designer, Jonathan Ive, suggesting changes to the look of the iPhone before it was released based on the look and feel of a Sony handset.
“Being inspired by competing products and trying to develop better ones is not copying its competition and everybody does it,” said Charles Verhoeven, Samsung's lead attorney.
Samsung showed examples of handsets and tablets released before the first iPhones and iPads but having a roughly similar look and feel.
“If you make something popular it doesn’t mean you can exclude other people from doing it,” Verhoeven said. “Apple didn’t invent the rectangular form factor you see, it didn’t invent the large touch screen,” he added.
He claimed as much as 26 percent of some iPad and iPhone bill of materials are for Samsung components. That includes the Retina display Apple heavily markets and is made exclusively by Samsung. “Who’s the innovator,” he asked.
Samsung’s opening statements conclude this afternoon.
Apple’s head of marketing, Phil Schiller, and its head of mobile operating systems, Scott Forstall, are both expected to testify.
In opening statements this morning, Apple attorneys showed detailed Samsung reports extending over more than 100 pages. They compared existing Samsung handsets to the iPhone on a feature-by-feature basis making recommendations on each page suggesting Samsung adopt iPhone techniques.
“The evidence will show Samsung has taken our property,” said Harold McElhinny, Apple’s lead attorney.
“Samsung will say we didn’t copy, we benchmarked and everybody in electronics benchmarks--even Apple benchmarks, but benchmarking had a very special meaning at Samsung,” McElhinny said.
“Samsung sold more than 22 million infringing phones and tablets in the U.S. using Apple’s inventions,” he claimed. “Samsung has taken sales away from Apple and will generate more than $2 billion in profit for Samsung that they made using our intellectual property,” he added.
Specifically Apple will seek $2.5 billion in damages, said to be a new watermark in infringement cases. It claims Samsung infringed utility and design patents on the user interface and product look and feel of both the iPhone and the iPad.
Separately, Apple also contends Samsung broke rules in industry standards groups by not declaring patents covering standards work until after the standard was completed. Specifically it claims two Samsung 3G patents were filed before ETSI standards were frozen, then not disclosed until two years later.
For its part, Samsung showed Apple’s detailed internal teardowns of Samsung S1 and Galaxy Tab products. In addition, it showed an email to Apple’s lead designer, Jonathan Ive, suggesting changes to the look of the iPhone before it was released based on the look and feel of a Sony handset.
“Being inspired by competing products and trying to develop better ones is not copying its competition and everybody does it,” said Charles Verhoeven, Samsung's lead attorney.
Samsung showed examples of handsets and tablets released before the first iPhones and iPads but having a roughly similar look and feel.
“If you make something popular it doesn’t mean you can exclude other people from doing it,” Verhoeven said. “Apple didn’t invent the rectangular form factor you see, it didn’t invent the large touch screen,” he added.
He claimed as much as 26 percent of some iPad and iPhone bill of materials are for Samsung components. That includes the Retina display Apple heavily markets and is made exclusively by Samsung. “Who’s the innovator,” he asked.
Samsung’s opening statements conclude this afternoon.
Apple’s head of marketing, Phil Schiller, and its head of mobile operating systems, Scott Forstall, are both expected to testify.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
rick.merritt
7/31/2012 7:58 PM EDT
How do you draw the line between investigating and "being inspired" by competing products and..um...er...copying them?
Sign in to Reply
hm
7/31/2012 9:05 PM EDT
This will be interesting case. Samsung should be punished for their acts.
Sign in to Reply
m00nshine
7/31/2012 9:39 PM EDT
And HTC, and motorola, and , nokia, and amazon, and google! There can be no other rectangular, touchscreen smartphone or tablet, only apple, forever. They own it (you).
Sign in to Reply
dvk
8/1/2012 12:43 AM EDT
ha..ha..ha..they are making fun. Only thing the world is not started fighting is the air because it has no shape.
Sign in to Reply
dylan.mcgrath
8/1/2012 12:46 AM EDT
I have no doubt that there is plenty of more evidence to be presented. But it doesn't surprise me that Samsung (or anyone else) would conduct a detailed analysis of the iPhone's features etc. in the course of creating a product to compete with it. Sounds like a standard practice.
Sign in to Reply
HS_SemiPro
8/1/2012 1:42 AM EDT
Why don't Samsung come up with its own design and not copy Apple's.
Why infringe on Apple's design.
Apple has every right to sue them.
Sign in to Reply
Pablo.Cassani
8/1/2012 8:35 AM EDT
C'mon guys... Apple won a patent for a, please hear this: "A system and method causes a computer to detect and perform actions on structures identified in computer data"... it is the troll jargon for a web search. How on earth they granted that?
Patents are supposed to protect the development, not kill it.
And then... copy what: the aspect ratio? or the touch screen? or a higher screen definition? or the BOM? So, I would not be able to use an ARM?
This is getting ridiculous...
Sign in to Reply
eewiz
8/1/2012 9:38 AM EDT
Guys,
Its not patent on a rectangle. Its a "DESIGN" patent of a tablet device. Its a valid form of patent which is used to protect ornamental designs, Aesthetic appearances of devices etc. Samsung is just downplaying the value by calling it a rectangle patent, even when they cant even come up with their own design. And again, as all patents, design patents can be invalidated if there is a prior art. If its just rectangle, why cant samsung bring a prior art and invalidate the patent?? A typical eg of a design patent is a coke bottle. You cant go and copy a coke bottle and fill it with xyz cola and say this is just a cylinder to the jury.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent
Sign in to Reply
SiliconAsia
8/1/2012 3:13 PM EDT
A retangle with rounded corners is a design!! Give me a break! If you look at all the latest samsung or anyone's LCD/LED TVs, they are a rectangle with rounded corners. IS this natural shape. Why would you have sharp corners in rectangle consumer products!!!
Sign in to Reply
tpfj
8/1/2012 1:13 PM EDT
@eewiz I think the big fat button on the iPad and iPhone invalidate your argument, so clearly they did not copy the front. Same goes for sides and back. Design covers the whole device (positions, connections, keys), not just the bit you choose to look at. A patent is granted if it has a clear novel element to it, something a lay person could not dream up. I just don't see it in the design of Apple's products. Sure there is a ton of novelty in their manufacturing and how it is all held together, but then Samsung went entirely their own way by making the back cover removable (hint: useful). How can you call that a copy?
Sign in to Reply
Duane Benson
8/1/2012 1:51 PM EDT
Samsung may have designed and manufactured the Retina display to specifications given by Apple. If that's the case, then Apple isn't copying anything by using it. The processor is manufactured by Samsung to Apple's specifications. Again, that's not copying by Apple. Those are normal customer / supplier arrangements.
Sign in to Reply
BrainiacV
8/1/2012 3:00 PM EDT
For prior art, watch 2001: A Space Odyssey and see a flat rectangular device in action. Or Star Trek TNG. Anyone remember the menu wars for spreadsheets or computer desktops? How about Bally/Midway's argument that any game character that consumed (erased after passing over) dots was a PAC-MAN ripoff? I think they would have tried for turning on and off as patent-able idea, if they could have gotten away with it.
Sign in to Reply
timemerchant
8/2/2012 3:48 AM EDT
If you can't innovate, litigate. I can't remember when portable phones were not rectangular. Maybe a bit fatter, but battery technology improved as well as display technology. The patent system is broken; choose an area and then look at Google Patents or Free Patents Online. Try contact wetting - well known, but patents still being awarded in the face of massive prior art. How about Amazon's one-click! This will be an interesting case like the Oracle Google Java circus before it.
Sign in to Reply
nyh20028319
8/2/2012 3:52 AM EDT
Apple ipad and iphone is the same thing.
With the same processor of A5 or A6.
The same ios system those two device.
Industry Design of Apple is great.
Sign in to Reply
chipmonk
8/2/2012 11:29 AM EDT
Branding & industrial design ( Apple ) vs. EE and semiconductor physics ( Samsung ). You take your pick.
Sign in to Reply
selinz
8/2/2012 8:07 PM EDT
The Palm Pilot came out in 1996ish. It had rounded corners. It had a touch screen. It didn't have a keyboard. And today's iPhone software looks, acts, and behaves like that original software. That's 16 years ago...GMAB.
Sign in to Reply
Aurora45
8/3/2012 2:26 AM EDT
Youre so cool! I dont suppose Ive read anything like this before. So nice to find somebody with some original thoughts on this subject. realy thank you for starting this up. this website is something that is needed on the web, someone with a little originality. useful job for bringing something new to the internet!
cool ipad cases wholesale online http://www.binnbox.com/
Sign in to Reply