x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Week two roundup of the Apple v. Samsung patent trial

Week two roundup of the Apple v. Samsung patent trial

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags:

Week two roundup of the Apple v. Samsung patent trial
Week two of the Apple v. Samsung patent trial is in the books and it brought out some very interesting information. On Friday, it was revealed that as a favor to Samsung for being one of Apple's top suppliers, the Cupertino based firm offered Samsung a deal to license Apple's patents. Apple wanted $30 for each smartphone the Korean manufacturer produces using Apple's patents and $40 for each tablet. If Samsung was willing to cross-license its patents to Apple, the latter would give Sammy a 20% discount. Samsung, of course, never took Apple up on its deal. Had both sides signed off on the arrangement, it would have cost Samsung $250 million in 2010, less than what it was realizing in one year selling parts to the Cupertino based firm.

Samsung comparing its Samsung Galaxy S and the Apple iPhone

Samsung comparing its Samsung Galaxy S and the Apple iPhone

Thursday saw both firms release a breakdown of U.S. sales of specific models. The best selling smartphone for the Korean based manufacturer in the U.S. between June 2010 and June 2012 was the Samsung Galaxy Prevail with 2.25 million units sold. Had the Samsung Galaxy S II been considered one phone in the U.S., it would have been on top with 4.1 million sold. We also learned that Apple sold 85 million units of the Apple iPhone from 2007 through Q2 of this year. At the same time, 46 million Apple iPod touches were purchased. Since its launch, 34 million Apple iPads were rung up according to Apple's document, but Apple's domination of the tablet industry was made clear by an amazing statistic: Samsung sold fewer tablets in the entire 7 quarter period covered by the data than Apple sold in its worst quarter. Samsung said it sold $644 million of the Samsung GALAXY Tab and the Samsung GALAXY Tab 10.1 in the States during the time in question as compared to the $15 billion worth of iPads it sold during the same time.

An interesting document brought up to the jury revealed that of those watching an ad for the Samsung Galaxy Tab, half thought that the commercial was for an Apple product and only 16% knew that it was a Samsung made device. Apple executive Philip Schiller testified that Apple had spent $149.5 million in 2010 alone to promote the iPad and said that when a competitor steals Apple;s designs and marketing, it is like "stealing all the value we've created."

$75,000 richer, Apple expert witness Peter Bressler

$75,000 richer, Apple expert witness Peter Bressler

Apple also had a 2010 Samsung document entered as evidence that could really hurt Samsung. The document laid out a feature-by-feature comparison of the Samsung Galaxy S and the Apple iPhone and in each comparison of features like the browser, connectivity, messaging, multimedia and basic function, the Samsung Galaxy S was found wanting while the Apple iPhone received positive comments. The bottom line said that the Samsung Galaxy S1 wold be a better phone if it were more like the Apple iPhone and if it had a similar user experience, and those thoughts came from Samsung itself.

Apple started parading its expert witnesses in front of the jury last week, and in the case of MIT professor John Hauser, a study was produced showing that customers would be willing to spend an extra $100 per smartphone and $90 per tablet for a device that incorporated all three of Apple's design patents at issue in the case. Samsung's cross-examination said that since the professor failed to ask if those surveyed would pay those extra fees in light of real-life expenses they might have, the numbers produced by the professor were not indicative of real-life responses.

Internal Apple sales document

Internal Apple sales document

Speaking about expert witnesses, we found out this past week that it is a very lucrative field when design expert Peter Bressler revealed on the stand that Apple had paid him $75,000 so far to testify. Bressler's testimony simply told the jury that the Samsung Galaxy S was black in color, rectangular in shape, had a display in the front of the device, and had a lozenge-shaped speaker. By the way, this design expert's web site is still under construction. Bressler testified that Samsung infringed on a pair of Apple's design patents which means he could end u being worth the check that Apple cut for him.

Apple is expected to wrap up it's case this coming week with Samsung to begin calling it's witnesses.

28 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 11 Aug 2012, 18:10 15

1. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5279; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


Don't read too much into expert witness testimony. 'Experts' are basically a high-paid ho. I imagine Sammy has at least one of its own 'experts' lined up to rebut each of the Apple 'experts'. And this guy can't even get a website up.... Sheesh.

posted on 11 Aug 2012, 19:19 2

4. networkdood (Posts: 5505; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


....as a favor...

That gave me a good chuckle.

posted on 11 Aug 2012, 19:40 4

7. rudlie (Posts: 182; Member since: 13 Mar 2012)


it seems samsung cheating the amount of sales units. I rad some news that samsung tops apple on smartphone sales in US but the report said differently. may be samsung feels choked and try to reduce the damages with manipulating sales report

posted on 11 Aug 2012, 20:49 6

8. TylerGrunter (Posts: 780; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Samsung is the top smartphone vendor in the world, but not in the US, where Apple is the top vendor.
You probably got confused by Alan F. in these articles:
http://goo.gl/tz0qM
http://goo.gl/1Wqoq
Where he confused "mobile subscribers" (smart and non-smart phones) with smartphone sales.
Samsung is the top PHONE vendor in the US, not the top smartphone vendor.
If you look into any of the Nielsen reports you´ll realize easily that Apple doubles in sells Samsung in the US
http://goo.gl/yZbNV

posted on 11 Aug 2012, 21:19 3

10. kew01 (Posts: 15; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)


That's what you get from bias articles. People getting mislead and forming wrong opinions based on those misleading words, and end up hating someone or something without knowing the whole truth.

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 04:31 4

18. TylerGrunter (Posts: 780; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


I think in this case is just an honest mistake: I have been reading this site for quite some time already and Alan always favours Apple in his articles.
Check how he covers the trial and you´ll be able to see two things: he always gives the view that favours Apple more and suggest that Samsung is copying.
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence" (Hanlon´s Razor)

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 12:35 1

27. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4598; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


Agree.

posted on 11 Aug 2012, 21:07 3

9. 09wbd03516 (banned) (Posts: 140; Member since: 30 May 2012)


I wanna 75k richer!

posted on 11 Aug 2012, 21:34 5

11. SEUL8TR (banned) (Posts: 30; Member since: 24 Jul 2012)


I wonder who will win?
Hope Samsung does!

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 00:45 5

15. MARKSPEAR77 (Posts: 40; Member since: 24 Nov 2011)


Time for samsung to stop all contracts with apple.

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 08:17 4

20. RapidCat (Posts: 351; Member since: 12 Jun 2012)


Stop contract that hurts both company. 8% samsung profit from apple.
For apple no company can make A processor. Even snapdragon have contract with samsung to create new 28nm processor.

But it hurts apple more

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 00:49 3

16. JunkCreek (Posts: 379; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)


yeah, hopes it us at least a draw. we are as a consumers are absolutly in a great loss if apple won because of just its DESIGN not FUNCTIONS patents.

I also found so many user friendly functions on Android device while on Apple it is a pain in the ap(pl)e and a universal connection such us usb cable, earphone/handsfree/headphones, bluetooth connection etc.

no offense, it us just IMHO. Me just a humble anyway. heheheh.

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 03:19 2

17. poddey (Posts: 75; Member since: 22 Mar 2012)


The irony about all this is that while Samsung has been running ads calling Apple iPhone owners sheep, the evidence presented in the trial (so far) demonstrate that Samsung themselves tried to imitate the iPhone when designing the Galaxy S phones and their Touchwiz UI.

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 15:05

28. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Samsung did what any business does when a competitor is beating it. They studied the competing product and company, and tried to figure out what made the other product popular, and how to overcome that.

Trust me, when Apple falls from grace, they will be studying the product that's most popular.

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 07:52

19. som (Posts: 768; Member since: 10 Nov 2009)


Samsung did imitated iPhone and iPad copied the look but not the feel. Samsung must clarify with Apple about "the feel" it is a crime accused the thing that you couldn't invented "the feel" or the air you breath.

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 08:54 2

21. AppleRoyally (banned) (Posts: 7; Member since: 12 Aug 2012)


We are all awaiting for the outcome! Apple should win®

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 11:47

23. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


The best outcome would be a total loss for Apple, and them covering Samsung's court costs. The most likely outcome is a split decision, with Samsung found infringing some of the closer call patents. But neither

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 11:47

24. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


The best outcome would be a total loss for Apple, and them covering Samsung's court costs. The most likely outcome is a split decision, with Samsung found infringing some of the closer call patents. But neither

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 11:47

25. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


The best outcome would be a total loss for Apple, and them covering Samsung's court costs. The most likely outcome is a split decision, with Samsung found infringing some of the closer call patents. But neither

posted on 12 Aug 2012, 11:50

26. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Oops. Hit send.

But nowhere near $2 billion. And there is a very good chance that some of Apple's sillier and more blatantly stolen patents will be invalidated.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories