U.S. "How patents work" video for jurors contains Apple devices; Samsung objects

U.S.
Samsung is objecting to a video created by the Federal Judicial Center called "How patents work," which is designed to help jurors wrap their heads around the often-complex and confusing U.S. patent system. But as Samsung's legal team noted, "at the 2:55 mark, a series of Apple products are shown, including an iPad, a newer model of a laptop computer, and an iPhone. The narration during this portion of the video addresses how the disclosure of a patent may 'inspire new inventions.'"

Samsung's lawyers not only noted a few more places where an Apple product showed up on the video, they included screenshots from it where a product being shown was obviously created by Apple. Samsung stated in its complaint that "at a minimum, the video strongly suggests that Apple's products are innovative and patentable." That is the basis of the filing by the Korean manufacturer.


Both Apple and Samsung are to square off in court at the end of this month for their second epic patent trial.



source: USCourt

FEATURED VIDEO

65 Comments

1. DEATHSTROKE9

Posts: 399; Member since: Nov 09, 2013

They should say- "A production by federal judicial Center - An apple company"

43. Ashoaib

Posts: 3297; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Is this an apple advertisement or a video by the court? I think its apple sponsored video... it show like only apple is innovating or only apple has patents... title of the video should be: US "how patent works, if apple apply for anything then its patent"...

2. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

Wow, that is blatant Apple propaganda, why would they make it this obvious?

7. Augustine

Posts: 1043; Member since: Sep 28, 2013

They can't help it. The PTO was converted to the Cult of Jobs.

20. Arte-8800

Posts: 4562; Member since: Mar 13, 2014

After all that what a very bad company Apple the pathetic patent troll company I still buy there products, as well as many other millions do,,,,,? Sucks!

47. Ashoaib

Posts: 3297; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

I dont buy any more... one time experience is enough... I dont want to pay premium price for inferior product

63. Sauce unregistered

Maybe you should buy a superior dictionary and thesaurus.

3. MartyK

Posts: 1043; Member since: Apr 11, 2012

Oh Dang, can they get more bias?!..hahaha for real an Apple laptop?..come on!!..why not show Motorola (who invent Mobile phone)?...lol

5. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

They pretty much showed Apple's entire line up, including an Apple logo on the back of a macbook pro, the front of said laptop, an iPhone and an iPad. The rest are light bulbs and generic devices without labels. If there was ever any evidence of bias in the US courts, this video is it.

12. Martin_Cooper

Posts: 1774; Member since: Jul 30, 2013

9/10 hollywood movies have macbooks in them, apple would never afford that kind of marketing, its cause they look nice, people recognise them better and they are considered premium products, with that in mind this video isnt something weird or propaganda its just another video with another macbook or whatever. get over it.. P.S. Apple pays the most amount of taxes in USA than any other company, you think USA wouldn't slightly favor them?

14. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Wrong. Product placement is a paid service. A lot of times a product is blurred out because the creator of that product didn't pay for the advertising.

15. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Exactly. If you see a product in a movie or TV show...its on purpose.

17. Martin_Cooper

Posts: 1774; Member since: Jul 30, 2013

Its not allways on purpose. Thats why I said its impossible for apple to pay for the thousands of movies that come each year from hollywood with their products. Your logic fails miserably. Yes in some shows, especially live ones they blur logos etc cause that channel advertises opponent products etc. In movies and videos like this its different. With your logic in a movie every single product is advertised by someone, so in a movie shot with 500 cars on the streets they advertise 50 brands and what so ever. If company wants they pay and they include them, if not the production uses what they can and want. And usually its apple products.

19. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

But you will see the staff of the movie using a specific brand of vehicle. Yes, it's too difficult to have every vehicle in a show or movie from one brand, but background vehicles differ from the ones directly being used. And if you read through the credits of the movie, you'll see that brand mentioned. It's not random like you make it out to be. The last Mission Impossible movie is well known for advertising Apple products. In comparison, the last 007 movie, Skyfall, Sony computers were predominately displayed. It's not random chance, it's product placement.

23. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Thank you....cuz the last time I checked..Sony mobile and computer products werent as popular as Samsung's or Apple's.

24. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

"And if you read through the credits of the movie, you'll see that brand mentioned. It's not random like you make it out to be." Enough said...even if Apple doesnt know it will be used before hand...they know before the movie is finished. And they might have say so over their product being in the movie, show. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_placement#Product_placement_in_movies "With the 2002 film Die Another Day, Smirnoff withdrew from its long association with James Bond, which started with Sean Connery in the 1962 film Dr No. The drinks company wanted to pursue a younger age-group than that deemed to be that which followed Bond films. As a result, Finlandia Vodka became the brand used in the Pierce Brosnan film. As Ford had supplied models of their cars for the 2004 film Thunderbirds, their logo on the cars appears many times in the film, even up close." http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-other-cult-in-hollywood http://www.showbiz411.com/2013/10/29/apple-invades-new-holocaust-film-with-jarring-imac-product-placement http://www.imore.com/apple-product-placement-exec-leaves-jawbone "Lindbergh had been at Apple for 25 years. In her role, she was responsible for making Apple products available to film and television studios. If you've ever wondered why you see Apple products in television shows and movies, Lindbergh's been behind it."

21. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

What fails miserably is you think when making a movie....all this isnt already thought out. http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Gets+Free+Product+Placement+in+TV+Shows+Movies/article24679.htm "Apple won't pay to have their products featured, but they are more than willing to hand out an endless amount of computers, iPads and iPhones," said Gavin Polone, producer of HBO's Curb Your Enthusiasm. "It's kind of a graft situation." http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-product-placements-in-tv-and-movies-2012-8?op=1 Bloomberg reports that Apple's marketing chief, Phil Schiller, said that "One of Apple's employees works closely with Hollywood on so-called product placement so its gadgets are used in movies and television shows." A quick search woulda told anyone this. But me and a few on here already knew this.

26. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Exactly. It doesn't cost much for a company like Ford to donate vehicles for a production movie, but the amount of exposure they get is overwhelming if it's an internationally seen movie. Movie companies love it because they don't have to spend the time and money buying all those cars and trucks. Music videos are even worse, don't even get me started on how much product placement goes on there.

27. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Now that we are on the subject of product placement....Samsung definitely has every right to object to this. Product placement is done to advertize a product, keep it in people's mind after the show, movie is over. I wonder how much did Apple pay to have their stuff in this clip? Either that or they donated products for it. Either way...that would be some type of conflict of interest IMO. If Apple had made the clip....I could understand.

25. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Out of all those 500 cars on the street...which ones do you clearly see the brand logo on? Do you clearly see the logo on each and every brand of car? Exactly. And like my post said... its on purpose...not that they have to pay for it. Loaning a Toyota to a movie can be product placement if its in a pivotal scene. Or gets enough screen time to see the logo.

28. iushnt

Posts: 3122; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

U have no idea of apples marketing I guess. Apple has a different department which handles the promotions through Hollywood. Its not that they pay for all but they have strategically maintained a unique relationship with with many movie making companies so that their products are shown in the movie and they(apple) don't need to pay. Apple have started this trend since early 90s and even today apple seek for free media promotions as much as possible. I am a markwetng student and I have been well informed regarding many marketing tactics that major companies are following.

40. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

I realized what happened here....you just didnt know. I kinda knew but searching tonight confirmed what I thought. And to those that dont know...one message it sends is what you posted. Some ppl like you think its in all the movies, shows because its a premium product...add to that the public looks at it like that too....and its an easy thing for the movie and Apple to want it to be placed. Many have said it before...Apple are master marketers.

44. Ashoaib

Posts: 3297; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Master marketers, master cheaters(high prices) and master illusioners(they invent everything), master trollers, master lobist(all US courts are their lobby)

49. Martin_Cooper

Posts: 1774; Member since: Jul 30, 2013

Please tell me how that cheap plasticky S5 costs 600-700$. At least with an iphone, HTC, SONY you pay 600-800$ for a phone that LOOKS and FEELS expensive and is build with great detail. Last time I checked there isnt a cheap looking cheap feeling ferrari sold in nowadays. Its like you are paying 300.000$ for a toyota when it comes with sammy phones.

51. The-Sailor-Man

Posts: 1095; Member since: Mar 25, 2014

I'll tell you how, iboy. The "cheap plasticky" S4 and even old S3 cost MUCH MORE to produce(BOM), than the "premium tin-can" iphone 5.. Check it out-google. You are just another brainwashed victim of the Apple's propaganda. LOL

53. Arte-8800

Posts: 4562; Member since: Mar 13, 2014

We'll said How is it premium with old screen less ppi , charging $100 dollars extra for 16gb memory, no Bluetooth, feautureles subpar phone with high price to pay providing midrange specs? The aluminium used on the ip5 is the most cheap recycled aluminium available,,,,, o the battery which has only 1500mah cost Apple so less than to buy tham s4 and Htc ones 2400mah. See how much profit there sucking out on the ip5' no wonder Apple is the only tech company rinsing so much money from the public just by stamping a logo on there devices..

54. Slammer

Posts: 1515; Member since: Jun 03, 2010

There have been countless articles written across many tech sites that claim tye metal vs plastic is a marketing ploy. There is no advantage over the other. There are pros and cons that offset each other, but the bottom line is for marketing. If you want to shop for build quality and looks, then please be advised that inner component expense has been sacrificed to accommodate a more premium feel. If you purchase on more future proof technology function and internal component size, we purchase on the most technology possible for adapting to fast paced technological advancements or upcoming trends. With Apple always falling short on what is current trend, HTC has elected to follow Apple's path with hardware offerings in hopes to sway people towards build quality rather than functionality. That is why so many Apple consumers always purchase new iterations of Apple products at launch. To keep up with trend. I am not in a financial position to purchase new phones every year. I count on my current phone to last me until end of contract. Perhaps there is nothing I can do to change a marketing gimmick that Steve Jobs placed in consumer minds, but as person that has owned cellphones since '84, I can assure you that plastic is not as bas as everyone tries to prop up as evil. It has a purpose that Nokia, Samsung, Sony, LG and others feel are more pertinent to phone design than just looks. John B.

61. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

I agree. After having a Galaxy Nexus...that many complained was cheap feeling... I didnt agree it was cheap, plasticky. . Plastic vs metal has pros n cons, Amoled vs LCD has pros n cons. Physical keyboard vs all touch screen has pros n cons. Most things in life has pros n cons. Some people dont realize this tho.

60. AstronautJones

Posts: 305; Member since: Aug 01, 2012

I would think the U.S. Government SHOULD favor, oh I don't know, .....truth, justice, and fairness? Who am I kidding, I have not expected that from my government in a long time

4. JMartin22

Posts: 2372; Member since: Apr 30, 2013

Now if these battles that Apple kept winning in court consisted of 4 iOS users, 1 Feature Phone user and 4 Android users, instead of just random, technologically inept people off the street selected to serve a federal duty; I might have some faith in the courts here lol.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.