We did not copy iPhone says Samsung opening statement

We did not copy iPhone says Samsung opening statement
Earlier on Tuesday, we told you how Apple's lead attorney in its patent trial against Samsung, said the latter would put the blame for its actions on the Devil. Once Apple had its turn (about 90 minutes, by the way) it was time for Samsung's attorneys to plead its case. In its opening statement, Samsung attorney Charles Verhoeven told the 9 member jury (one member has been dismissed) that Apple did not tell the whole story. Verhoeven said that Samsung is a company that prides itself on giving consumers what they want. If consumers want a touchscreen handset, that's what Samsung gives them. The attorney added that "Samsung is a major technology company that develops its own innovations."

The fight is on

The fight is on

During its opening statement, Samsung also described some differences in the design of its handsets from the Apple iPhone, including the home screen and the way the phones work when turned on. According to Verhoeven, Apple did not invent the rectangular design with rounded corners. "Samsung is not some copyist, some Johnny come lately doing knockoffs," said Samsung's counsel. He also went through Apple's list of patents and tossed them aside one by one, knocking them aside as if he were Superman deflecting bullets with his hand. For each patent, Verhoeven had a reason why it should be excluded. For some the reason was prior art and for others it was a previous patent that covered the same technology.

And because Sammy has some cross-claims against Apple, its attorney down played the alleged touchscreen patent infringements Apple claims Samsung is guilty of, saying that the 3G patents belonging to Samsung that the Korean manufacturer claims that Apple infringed on are much more important to the workings of a smartphone.

source: AndroidandMe

FEATURED VIDEO

61 Comments

1. JcHnd

Posts: 266; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

LOL! Loved the samsung part... pretty funny, I really expect they win this, I can only imagine the sarcasm during their part!

4. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

One thing that Samung doesn't have that Apple has are the patents. Those patents prove Apple is the innovator working on solving problems in taking a blueprint or prototype to the consumer market. Samsung can have all the sarcasm they want, they need patents and that is the HUGE hole in their defense.

5. Aeires unregistered

Many are vague patents. The scroll overbounce will likely stand up, but a ton of the other claims made by Apple are far too vague and general in scope. Patents have been thrown out before, just because you own one doesn't mean it's the be all end all to whatever it's for. Samsung's 3G patent isn't vague, and it's worth more than the half cent that Apple is claiming. And likely Apple won't get the $24 for their trade dress patents. A settlement will be reached, but it won't be any where near the $2.5 billion being asked for. That's how it works, you ask for the moon, hoping to get a handful when the dust settles.

6. Pdubb

Posts: 249; Member since: Aug 08, 2011

They have the significant patents. The 3g tech patents that Apple is trying to diminish the value. Patents that cannot be disputed or invalidated. What will be interesting is how Apple's patents hold up in court and whether Samsung gets to have the full asking price for their license.

12. Angkor

Posts: 108; Member since: Jul 05, 2012

Is Apple owned a patent on "Looks and Feels" ? Apple copied iPhone and iPad from the Star Trek movie.

41. willard12 unregistered

Prior Art = Invalid Patent. The "prior" portion of prior art means they are not innovating anything. Any judge in the world (other than Lucy Koh) can tell you that. Maybe all of us should go buy some patents so we can all be innovators. According to you, that's all it takes.

61. iami67

Posts: 330; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

Is this Taco did you make a new name you can have all the patents you want i rather have the better product and less greedy company

14. Y_S_L

Posts: 22; Member since: Jul 30, 2012

SAMSUNG TO WIN. THUMBS UP. APPLE TO WIN. THUMBS DOWN.

45. Y_S_L

Posts: 22; Member since: Jul 30, 2012

Thank-you.....

2. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Whether you are an Apple fan or a Samsung fan, this is going to be a good trial. For months, we have been waiting for it. This will be an important test case for IP. As an inventor, I support Apple (this should not be a shock to many) -- because if the courts do not protect IP, then there is no IP left to protect. What made America prosperous and having one of the highest standards of living in the world based on the metric GDP per capita is that in America, (a) we have very strong property rights, (b) the rule of law, and (c) we encourage entrepreneurship. Absent the native Americans, America was founded by immigrant who took risks and were rewarded for its hard work. IP falls under the strong property rights.

10. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

You forgot to mention slavery. That was an important factor in the founding of America.

22. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

america was founded by asians who crossed the landbridge to later become native americans. Oh.. then there was the vikings like a thousand years before the europeans... then there was the spanish genocide for gold campaign.. oh yea.. THEN america was founded. Did I forget anything? I actually like your ABC answers as they are very true. however, you are a supremely biased troll with a bad attitude. There is also a difference between "protecting IP", and doubling down on a broken patent system. When the world's richest tech company whines that their yearly record braking sales are just not enough and that their only real competitor's profits belong to Apple. Because according to Apple's opening arguements CLEARLY "anyone who bought a samsung really wanted an iPhone and was just duped by samsung". yea, they obviously had no interest in an android phone, a bigger screen, Super Amoled beauty, more features, and all of that... Basically Apple just called every samsung customer since 2007 STUPID since they "accidentally" bought a samsung instead of an apple.. which is obviously what they wanted... u should smell whats really going on. Its not about IP, its about market domination through litigation on the back of a broken patent system. Apple has lost it in the realm of direct competition, so they are "competing" in the only space they have left.. unlimited litigation and mass filing of broad empty patents that should not be awarded to anyone.

42. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

Was 22 in response to 2? Seems like it was.

50. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

yea, it was a reply to ardent.

24. paulyyd

Posts: 340; Member since: Jan 08, 2011

Lol you sound like a liberal. Wouldn't be surprised if you were. Go somewhere with yourself

26. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

If a liberal is someone who actually knows a little bit about American history, then yes, I am a liberal. It's not my fault I actually paid attention in social studies class.

46. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

If Apple doesnt go after the folks behind the Meizu phones again..... It isnt about patents or IP. Its about not being the BMOC anymore...and Apple cant take it. SO really, lets forget this case.....the one to watch for is the Meizu case..

56. Tux4g63

Posts: 121; Member since: Oct 21, 2011

You must have legitimate IP before it should need to be protected.

3. SonyFTW2020

Posts: 311; Member since: May 03, 2012

"He also went through Apple's list of patents and tossed them aside one by one, knocking them aside as if he were Superman deflecting bullets with his hand. For each patent, Verhoeven had a reason why it should be excluded" Hahahaha.....

7. Jay_F

Posts: 236; Member since: Nov 29, 2011

One can only hope after this and all subsequent appeals, which are inevitable regardless of the victor, this feud will be over and both will prosper on their own.

8. SonyFTW2020

Posts: 311; Member since: May 03, 2012

One can only hope that the customers will some how prosper as well from this fued..

9. Aeires unregistered

http://www.quinnemanuel.com/attorneys/verhoeven-charles-k.aspx Looks like Samsung's lawyer isn't a slacker when it comes to IP. Should be a good case, wish I could be in the courtroom to hear the case unfold.

16. tedkord

Posts: 17181; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

I just checked out his recent victories. He smacked down Rambus. Anyone remember them? They produced what was supposed to be the next form of ram for computers. But it was expensive, and had to be installed in pairs and had high latency. Then double data rate ram came along. The market choose, DDR took off, Rambus was left behind as a footnote. They then took what today is known as the Apple stratagem - try to apply your patents to stop all competition. The tried to apply overly broad patents in ways they were never intended. They've been beaten back at every turn.

34. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

"I just checked out his recent victories." Sammy has a top notch legal team representing them. Apple's patents are going to get put through a tighter scrutiny than they ever got from the USPTO. Don't be surprised if there are some invalidations of patents that never should have been issued.

11. tedkord

Posts: 17181; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

There will be one clear winner at the end of this. Lawyers.

15. Y_S_L

Posts: 22; Member since: Jul 30, 2012

Apple will win.....?

13. Ohrules

Posts: 327; Member since: Jun 11, 2012

i have a confusion regarding patents. Android first developed the pull-down notification center. now ios has it too. If it is not patented by google right now, and apple does patent it at this point, can apple say that their patent's been violated?

18. tedkord

Posts: 17181; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Google has a patent pending on the notification, so no, Apple can't patent it as is. Regardless, as the system is supposed to work, a patent requires uniqueness, no prior art, so Apple should not be able to obtain a patent on the notification dropdown. Unfortunately, Apple has figured out that the patent office is extremely understaffed and under skilled, and they can slip through pretty much any patent the want. They know it's not likely they'll discover that Neonode had swipe to unlock well before the iPhone. Our that multitouch existed for many years prior to 2007. Or that the LG Prada was a black rectangle with rounded corners a year before the iPhone.

20. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

stop.. making very valid.. points.. your going to hurt our resident trolls' feelings.

39. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

It will be a real hard lift for Apple to invalidate the Google Notification function application if it issues as a patent. That is why the application has the Apple people scared sh*tless. Can you imagine if Apple were forced to strip out the notifications from iOS and go back to the beep when a message was received? Apple got pilloried in the market for that dumb-ass approach to notifications.

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

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.