Tags Posts tagged with "California"



New laws in the states of California and Illinois beef up protection of privacy for social media accounts.

The new laws come in the wake of a new law signed in Michigan that also intend to keep access to social media accounts only to their owners.

In California, two laws will take effect tomorrow that prevent companies and schools from requiring social media account access information such as usernames and passwords from their applicants, employees and students.

Social media accounts protected by the two laws include those on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and LinkedIn. Furthermore, the laws also protect access credentials to personal email addresses.

social media, privacy, law, legal, California, Illinois,

The first of the two California laws is Senate Bill 1249 authored by San Francisco Democrat Senator Leland Yee.

“The practice of employers or colleges demanding social media passwords is entirely unnecessary and completely unrelated to someone’s performance or abilities,” said Senator Yee in a statement.

“California has declared that this is an unacceptable invasion of personal privacy,” he added.

The second law is Assembly Bill 1844 authored by San Jose Democrat Assemblywoman Nora Campos.

The assemblywoman has also filed another bill which is essentially the same as Assembly Bill 1844 but for government employees of California.

Senate Bill 1349 protects social media accounts in the public and private education sector while Assembly Bill 1844 protects social media accounts in the private business sector.

“The Golden State is pioneering the social media revolution and these laws will protect all Californians from unwarranted invasions of their personal social media accounts,” Governor Jerry Brown, who signed both laws in September, said in a statement.

social media, privacy, law, legal, California, Illinois,

Illinois also has a new law that protects social media account access from being required by employers from their applicants and current employees.

The Illinois law takes effect January 1.

The law was previously House Bill 3782 which became Public Act 097-0875.

Essentially, Public Act 097-0875 is the same as the Maruland social media privacy law which was the first law to be signed in the US protecting social media accounts.

“Members of the workforce should not be punished for information their employers don’t legally have the right to have,” Illinois Governor Quinn said in a statement after he signed the law.

“As use of social media continues to expand, this new law will protect workers and their right to personal privacy,” he added.

The Illinois law bans businesses to:

  • request or require any employee or prospective employee to provide any password or other related account information in order to gain access to the employee’s or prospective employee’s account or profile on a social networking website or
  • demand access in any manner to an employee’s or prospective employee’s account or profile on a social networking website.

The new laws comes as the issue of social media privacy protection heats up in the US.

 social media, privacy, law, legal, California, Illinois,

Images from tornatore, Phil Dragash & jnn1776 on Flickr (CC)


Apple is being forced to reveal to the world one if not its biggest secret: how much profit the company makes on each iPhone.

Judge Lucy Koh of the US District Court of San Jose has ordered Apple to bare product-specific (read: iPhone-specific, iPad-specific, etc.) information including profit margin.

That’s telling the company to say exactly how profitable the iPhone is per unit.

In a filing on Wednesday, Judge Koh denied Apple’s motion to seal or redact certain information from its Damages motion.

Apple, Samsung, iPhone, profitability, profit margin, Judge Lucy Koh, legal, lawsuit, California, San Jose,

Just as before, Apple argued that this set of information is considered a “trade secret” which, if revealed, will harm them because competitors will get an advantage.

Below is the significant part of the filing made by the judge. You can look at the highlighted parts but we enjoin you to read it in full:

C. Confidential Financial Information

Finally, Apple seeks to redact product-specific unit sales, revenue, profit, profit margin, and cost data from its Damages Motion, as well as from the Robinson Declaration and Exhibit 8 to the Robinson Declaration. As this Court explained in the August 9 Order, Apple has not established that public availability of its product-specific unit sales, revenue, profit, profit margin, and cost data would actually provide its competitors with an advantage, as would be required to find the information sealable under the “compelling reasons” standard. August 9 Order at 5-6.

In seeking the very large damages award it sought at trial, Apple stipulated to the introduction of JX1500, a partial summary of its damages calculations, which contains some product-specific unit sales and revenue information. See ECF No. 1597. As Apple appears to have realized in introducing that exhibit, it cannot both use its financial data to seek multi-billion dollar damages and insist on keeping it secret.

Further, this Court previously found that the financial information was essential to Apple’s damages calculations, thus increasing the public’s interest in access. August 9 Order at 6. Apple’s present Damages Motion also requires detailed financial analysis, and the public’s interest in accessing Apple’s financial information is now perhaps even greater than it was at trial. Apple’s motion seeks to permanently enjoin the sale of 26 Samsung products that have already been on the market for varying lengths of time, and seeks an enhancement of $535 million on top of the $1.05 billion in damages awarded by the jury. Such remedies would have a profound effect on the smartphone industry, consumers, and the public. As the extensive media coverage indicates, this is a truly extraordinary case of exceptional interest to the public. Apple’s reasons would have to be very compelling indeed to overcome the unusually robust public interest in access.

Beyond continuing to assert that its financial data are ‘trade secrets,’ Apple has not provided any new arguments for why this information should be protected. Accordingly, consistent with the August 9 Order, this Court finds that Apple’s unit sales, revenue, profit, profit margin, and cost data do not meet the ‘compelling reasons’ standard. Apple’s motion to seal is DENIED as to the proposed redactions on page 27 of the Damages Motion, page 9 of the Robinson Declaration, and Exhibit 8 to the Robinson Declaration. For the reasons explained below, this denial is without prejudice.” [Emphasis added.]

Apple, Samsung, iPhone, profitability, profit margin, Judge Lucy Koh, legal, lawsuit, California, San Jose,

Apple won a landmark $1.05-billion damages award in August as the jury sided against Samsung in their court battle in California.

After the verdict, Apple filed for more damages wanting $3 billion from Samsung because of the jury’s decision.

However, Apple has not been as successful in other courts. For example, a judge in the UK ruled that Samsung tablets do not infringe on patents on the iPad.

Nonetheless, that judge said that the Samsung tablets were not infringing because they are not as cool as the iPad.

Apple, however, was ordered to run ads in magazines and newspapers essentially to tell people that Samsung did not copy from us.

Source: Filing (PDF) via ZDNet

Images from Travis Nicholson! & ak37 on Flickr (CC)


Samsung has filed a motion on Monday adding the recently-released iPhone 5 to its suit against Apple in California.

In a filing to a case being handled by United States Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Samsung contends that the iPhone 5 violates two Samsung UMTS standards patents and six features patents.

In their filing, Samsung said: “On September 18, 2012, Samsung informed Apple that it expected to seek leave to amend its infringement contentions to add the iPhone 5…Samsung obtained an iPhone 5 on September 21, 2012, and immediately began investigating whether the iPhone 5 practiced its patented technologies.”

“One week later, on September 28, 2012, Samsung provided Apple with its proposed amendments to its infringement contentions, to include the iPhone 5, and informed Apple that it would be filing the present motion on October 1…Apple did not indicate a position on the motion prior to filing,” the South Korean consumer electronics giant added.

Samsung alleges Apple’s iPhone 5, as well as other devices, of infringing two Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) standards patents and six feature patents.

iPhone 5, Samsung, legal, Apple, California, motion, lawsuit, patents, infringement, violation,

Here are the two UMTS standards patents Samsung alleges the iPhone 5 of infringing:

  1. United States Patent 7,756,087: Method and apparatus for performing non-scheduled transmission in a mobile communication system for supporting an enhanced uplink data channel
  2. United States Patent 7,551,596: Method and apparatus for signaling control information of uplink packet data service in mobile communication system

Here are the six features patents Samsung alleges Apple devices of infringing:

  1. United States Patent 7,672,470: Audio/video device having a volume control function for an external audio reproduction unit by using volume control buttons of a remote controller and volume control method therefore
  2. United States Patent 7,577,757: Multimedia synchronization method and device
  3. United States Patent 7,232,058: Data displaying apparatus and method
  4. United States Patent 6,292,179: Software keyboard system using trace of stylus on a touch screen and method for recognizing key code using the same
  5. United States Patent 6,226,449: Apparatus for recording and reproducing digital image and speech
  6. United States Patent 5,579,239: Remote video transmission system

Aside from the iPhone, Samsung also contends that other models of the Apple iPad, and iPod Touch infringe on these patents.

According to Samsung, it “could not have known whether the rumored iPhone 5 would practice its patented technologies when it filed its infringement contentions on June 15” and therefore only filed its motion to add the iPhone 5 to its lawsuit after the company has had time inspecting the device.

Apple launched the iPhone 5 on September 12 and Samsung lost over $1 billion to Apple in a jury decision in California last August.

Via The Verge


Apple will be asking for thrice the amount a jury has awarded it in damages in its fight against Samsung in California, a new report says.

Citing “multiple legal sources,” The Korea Times reports that Apple will be asking US Federal Judge Lucy Koh to award it $3 billion.

Apple last month won $1.05 billion in damages against Samsung as a jury found most of its points in the case valid and judged Samsung as having committed “willful infringement” of Apple patents.

Judge Koh has the authority to reduce the amount the jury came up with but she also has the prerogative to triple it.

Apple, Samsung, damages, Lucy Koh, California, patents, lawsuit, legal,

Apple asking for thrice the amount it was initially awarded hinges on the “willful infringement” verdict by the jury.

According to a “reliable source” of the publication, “By using that condition, Apple has decided to request the judge to order Samsung to pay more than $3 billion in the hearing on the San Jose verdict on Sept. 21 in California.”

“`The decision means Apple want to quickly address the harm that Samsung’s infringing products are said to be causing. As has been the case throughout this trial, Apple is pressing its full advantage over the jurors’ decision,” The Korea Times source added.

Furthermore, another person the publication talked to said that Apple still wants the Galaxy line of smartphone and tablets that the South Korean tech giant produces to be pulled in the US.

“Apple lawyers still believe Samsung should pull its popular Galaxy line of devices including smartphones and tablets from the United States and leave the market to proprietary handsets from Apple and Microsoft,” the unnamed source said.

The source did not want to be named because he said he is not authorized to give official statements.

Apple, Samsung, damages, Lucy Koh, California, patents, lawsuit, legal,

Apple sued Samsung last year in San Jose California alleging its partner and rival “slavishly copy” its iPhone and iPad devices.

Apple used a mix of patents against Samsung with some concerning the look and feel of its devices and some the workings of the operating system powering its popular i-devices.

Samsung, on the one hand, used patents concerning technology used in mobile communications and asked the jury to award it $421 million. The jury ruled that Apple did not infringe on Samsung technology.

Apple initially asked the jury to award it a whopping $2.75 billion in damages.

Samsung and Apple are currently locked in a bitter and long-drawn legal war involving more than 50 cases in over 10 countries worldwide.

Images from Which? Tech & gillyberlin on Flickr (CC)


After Samsung lost a massive case against Apple in California, the South Korean company has been vindicated by a win against its rival in Japan.

On Friday, a Japanese judge ruled that Samsung did not infringe on patents Apple said it violated.

In his ruling, Tokyo District Judge Tamotsu Shoji said that “It’s hard to believe the products belong to the range of technologies of [Apple],” Bloomberg reports.

According to the publication, the judge has ordered Apple to pay for the costs of the lawsuit.

Apple, California, Japan decision, lawsuit, legal, Samsung, verdict

The win isn’t as big as Apple’s win over Samsung in California recently where a nine-member jury awarded the Cupertino, California-based iPhone maker more than $1 billion in damages.

According to The New York Times, Apple sought just 100 million yen or $1.3 million in damages from Samsung.

However, perhaps more important than the monetary win for Samsung is that the win in Japan demonstrates that not every court sides with Apple in their ongoing global legal war, observers note.

Apple and Samsung are currently locked in a bitter legal dispute involving dozens of cases filed in more than 10 countries in the world.

Apple first sued Samsung in California April of last year alleging the South Korean technology “slavishly copy” i-devices with its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets.


Judge To Apple: Advertise Samsung Didn’t Steal iPad Design

Apple Names Samsung Smartphones To Ban In The US

Samsung: Apple Pay Up For The Galaxy Tab 10.1 Preliminary Ban

Samsung Loses German Court Ruling Against Apple

German Court Rejects Another Apple Bid To Ban Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1N

Apple Sort Of Scores With Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 US Ban

Apple Loses Case Against Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1N in Germany

Samsung Files Suit Against Apple In Germany For Emoticon Input Method

Apple and Samsung Fate Up To Jury As Closing Arguments Delivered

Apple, Samsung Chief Execs’ Out of Court Settlement Fails

Apple Says Samsung Copied iPhone With Galaxy Nexus To Lift Market Share

Apple Expert Replicates 1994 Concept Tablet In Trial Against Samsung

Apple CEO Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Kwan Oh Hyun Attempt to Resolve Patent Disputes

Judge on Apple Last-Minute Witness Strategy: Are You Smoking Crack?

Samsung Says They Were Designing Tablets Before iPad

Apple Advised Samsung To Pay $30, $40 Licensing Per Smartphone, Tablet

Apple and Samsung Forced to Submit Financial Records

Long Samsung Report Compares Original Galaxy S With Apple iPhone

Samsung Survey Damages Own Case Against Apple

Mac Designer Susan Kare Mistook Samsung Phone For iPhone

Damaging Samsung Memo Admitted In Apple Trial

Apple Says Samsung Copied Its Icons

Original image from GDS-Productions on Flickr (CC). Edited.


Back from an unexpectedly short 21-hour deliberation period, a jury has sided with Apple in its lawsuit against Samsung Electronics in California and awarded more than $1 billion in damages to the Cupertino, California-based iPhone-maker.

The verdict was handed down on Friday at a California District Court and means that Samsung must pay $1.05 billion to Apple. That’s $1,049,343,540 if you must split hairs.

Meanwhile, nothing of the $421 million Samsung asked as damages from Apple in its own counter-suit was granted by the jury.

apple, California, verdict, lawsuit, legal, Samsung, decision

The damages award for Apple is relatively much smaller than the $2.75 billion the iPhone- and iPad-maker asked the jury to award it.

However, the case is much more than about money as the decision in favor of Apple has given it a serious leg up against competitors in the smartphone space.

The case has far reaching effects in Apple’s various legal battles against Samsung and other manufacturers.

The jury found for Apple in its arguments that Samsung infringed design and utility patents. The jury also ruled “willful infringement” on Samsung’s part in five of six patents Apple alleged its rival violated.

Furthermore, Apple design and utility patents were upheld by the jury meaning they could use the patents to sue other manufacturers of smartphones.

The jury also upheld trade dress patent ‘983 held by Apple and consequently grants Apple with more legal ammunition to go after manufacturers it thinks are infringing on how their devices look, feel and are packaged.

apple, California, verdict, lawsuit, legal, Samsung, decision

As for Samsung’s side, Apple did not violate Samsung utility patents. Apple owes Samsung no damages, the jury decided.

However, on the bright side for Samsung, the jury ruled that it was not violating antitrust laws with its 3G-related patents which have become industry standards.

Apple argued in the case that Samsung copied the look and feel of its devices. It also said that the South Korean consumer electronics giant, its biggest supplier of components that go into i-devices, infringed some of the utility patents it owns.

Samsung argued in the case that Apple should not have a patent on a rectangle with rounded corners which Samsung lawyers paraphrased Apple as claiming it owns. Nonetheless, the jury decided otherwise.

Herein lay the biggest win for Apple. It can use these patents to sue other manufacturers of smartphones running on different mobile operating systems like Android, Windows Phone and others.

Design-wise, Apple can choose to go after manufacturers like LG which also makes phones which look alike Samsung smartphones with their flat front and rounded corners.

Apple’s arguments also included a patent for the look of the home screen of the iPhone including the appearance of their icons.

This means Apple can also sue other device manufacturers for possible likeness of their phones’ icons with the icons of the iPhone.

apple, California, verdict, lawsuit, legal, Samsung, decision

The shortness of the deliberation comes as somewhat of a surprise even for the lawyers in the case.

The case was a complicated one with myriad allegations the jury had to decide on.

To demonstrate the complexity of the case, jury instructions which were read on Tuesday was 109 pages long and prompted Judge Lucy Koh, the US District Judge who oversaw the trial, comment that she needed the jury and herself awake for the reading.

She even made the court stand up every now and then to, as she said, make sure they were all alive.

For the verdict, jury had to fill out a form which was 20-pages long that listed questions that the jury had to answer to specify which allegations they judge as correct.

This is in spite of Judge Koh having imposed a time limit for both camps to present their case.

Samsung and Apple were each given 25 hours to present their case and then an additional four hours to deliver their closing arguments before the court.

apple, California, verdict, lawsuit, legal, Samsung, decision

Here’s a copy of the verdict form by the jury in the case. Samsung is expected to appeal this decision which was overwhelmingly in favor of Apple.


Apple and Samsung Fate Up To Jury As Closing Arguments Delivered

Apple, Samsung Chief Execs’ Out of Court Settlement Fails

Apple Says Samsung Copied iPhone With Galaxy Nexus To Lift Market Share

Apple Expert Replicates 1994 Concept Tablet In Trial Against Samsung

Apple CEO Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Kwan Oh Hyun Attempt to Resolve Patent Disputes

Judge on Apple Last-Minute Witness Strategy: Are You Smoking Crack?

Samsung Says They Were Designing Tablets Before iPad

Apple Advised Samsung To Pay $30, $40 Licensing Per Smartphone, Tablet

Apple and Samsung Forced to Submit Financial Records

Long Samsung Report Compares Original Galaxy S With Apple iPhone

Samsung Survey Damages Own Case Against Apple

Mac Designer Susan Kare Mistook Samsung Phone For iPhone

Damaging Samsung Memo Admitted In Apple Trial

Apple Says Samsung Copied Its Icons

Images 1, 2, 3 & 4 from Which? Tech, Ricky Romero, Samsung_ua & gillyberlin on Flickr (CC)


Apple and Samsung today delivered their closing arguments in a long-running trial between the two consumer electronics powerhouses in San Jose, California.

Hanging in the balance is more than $2.5 billion in damages Apple is asking and a precedent which will have a great effect on the patent system of the U.S. and of industrial design in the whole world.

However, before the courtroom heard the closing arguments of both camps, the jury and District Judge Lucy Koh had to wade through 109 pages of jury instructions. This was no easy task as the judge even said that she needed “everyone to stay conscious during [the reading of the instructions], including myself.”

Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, closing arguments,

“Upon the conclusion of the arguments you will begin deliberating today,” the judge said. Sure enough, there wasn’t enough time after Apple and Samsung delivered their closing arguments.

Deliberation, which may span a day up to weeks, will begin tomorrow.

Judge Koh has been strict with time in this particular trial. She gave Apple and Samsung 25 hours each to present their case and question their witnesses as well as witnesses of the other camp on the stand.

Apple and Samsung were also given four hours each to make their closing arguments and rebuttals.



Apple Closing Argument

 Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, closing arguments,

Apple lawyers Harold McElhinny and William Lee delivered the closing argument and rebuttal for Apple respectively.

McElhinny laid out three points the closing argument centered on.

“First, is that documents are the most valuable key in the truth-finding function. Historical documents are almost always where the truth lies,” he said.

His second point was that “If you want to find out what really happened, if you want to see the truth, make a chronology of it.”

Thirdly, he said that Samsung did not respect the legal proceedings. “No Samsung executives were willing to come here from Korea. Instead of witnesses, they brought you lawyers,” he said.

According to the Apple counsel, the iPhone development project was initiated by Apple cofounder Steve Jobs way back in 2003. He described the iPhone as possibly “the most famous product in the world.”

Pointing out this fact, he showed the courtroom a slide showing Samsung phones saying “These are what Samsung’s phones looked like between 2004-2007.” Then he showed a slide after this of Samsung phones after the iPhone.

The lawyer then referenced internal Samsung documents that praised the iPhone. Furthermore, he said that the product of the discussions inside Samsung about the iPhone was the original Galaxy S which debuted in 2010.

The lawyer then said that smartphone sales for Samsung increased after it being stagnant before they copied the iPhone.

As the lawyer moved on to the design patents held by Apple and which it argues have been infringed on by Samsung, McElhinny addressed infringement and invalidity.

“We’re talking about comparing design to design,” he said. “No Samsung witness ever sat in that chair and said ‘those designs are not similar.”

He said that infringement should be judged by “overall appearance” and not “minor differences.”

He showed the crowd a Nokia Lumia phone and a Sony Xperia Arc phone. He said that “Not every smartphone needs to look like an iPhone.”

McElhinny later said that “Samsung was the iPhone’s biggest fan. They knew a good thing when they saw it. They tried to compete with it, and when they couldn’t, they copied it.”

As for tablets, Apple argued about infringement and dilution. “No one can say there is only one way to design a tablet. Or one way to design a tablet,” the lawyer said.

“You cannot help but reach the conclusion that these products are so similar… that Apple’s products wil be viewed as less than unique in the marketplace,” he asserted. “They have spent a billion dollars mimicking our designs and holding it out to the world so the Apple design is no longer seen as unique.”

As for utility patents, McElhinny said that “No Samsung expert, no Samsung witness testified that Samsung is not using the bounce-back feature. No one came here and denied it.”

When he discussed the double tap to zoom patent, he said that “Samsung never put up a non-infringement defense.” He also made a dig at the DiamondTouch and LaunchTile, both used by Samsung as prior art example in their defense.

McElhinny then proceeded to discuss damages. He said: “Samsung makes fun of our damages claim… but there are two factors that are driving the damages numbers in this case.”

According to him, Samsung has sold 22.7 million devices that infringe on Apple patents. Apple also said through its lawyer that Samsung should pay damages since they were given notice by the company in August of 2010 that their product infringe on their intellectual property.

Apple presented the following damages scenario to the court.

Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, closing arguments,


Samsung Closing Argument

 Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, closing arguments,

Unlike Apple, Samsung had just one lawyer deliver their closing argument and rebuttal.

Samsung lawyer Charles Verhoeven said straight of the bat that design patents are Apple’s main argument in this case. “Apple is asking you to award it over $2 billion” for alleged infringement of these design patents, the lawyer said.

Making a dig at the massive damages Apple is asking, he said that “you’d think that if Apple is going to come in here and ask for over $2 bilion in damages they might have used all the money” to get an expert to show the court that people really confused Samsung smartphones and tablets and the iPhone and the iPad.

Verhoeven argued that instead of competing in the markets, Apple is “attempting to block its most serious competitor from even playing the game.”

He told the jury that if they favor Apple, their decision “could change the way competition works in this country.”

Waxing poetic about the US and Silicon Valley, he said “Think about Silicon Valley, the way it used to be, back in the day… now there’s tens of thousands of tech jobs…Consumers deserve a choice.”

He also said that “Competition is what built this country.”

Echoing an argument frequently heard in comments sections in reports about this trial, the lawyer brought up a comparison with the TV market.

He said that TVs all looked alike with their rectangle shape and “minimalist designs”. He said that smartphones are the same and argued that form followed function.

His next point implicitly admits that the iPhone was a device that marks a turning point in the mobile industry. He said that the BlackBerry smartphone is also one of those devices. He pointed out that hen it came out, every competitor brought out QWERTY phones.

The lawyer then proceeded to show the court phones in the market which all are rectangle and have touchscreen displays.

He said that Apple is of the opinion that it is “entitled to have a monopoly on a rounded rectangle with a touchscreen.” He said that “Apple has no credible evidence” that people confuse Samsung’s devices with Apple’s devices.

“There is no deception, no confusion, and Apple has no evidence of it. Consumers make choices, not mistakes,” he said.

“The only way you’re going to find substantial similarity between these products is if you think having a device with a rectangular screen and rounded corners is unique,” the lawyer said. He then proceeded to stress details that make the Galaxy devices unique compared to Apple products.

He touched on the Apple ‘889 design patent and how the Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn’t have the seamless and shiny smooth back of the iPad prototype that was the basis of the patent, a start up of a Samsung Android device that clearly displays the Samsung and Droid trademarks, Dr. Susan Kare’s testimony saying that she just looked at the visual similarities of the icons and not their function, the larger screen of their smartphones compared to the iPhone and a start up of the Galaxy Tab showing Samsung Galaxy Tab clearly for a long time as well as the Verizon logo.

“What they’re suggesting is that Samsung’s phones looked one way before the iPhone and another way after it,” the Samsung lawyer said. “I submit to you that this is an intentional attempt to mislead the jury.”

Aiming at the slide shown by Apple of Samsung phones before and after the iPhone, he showed a much more detailed chart that includes other phones made by Samsung. These other phones included in the slide are not even close to resembling the iPhone.

“They’re intentionally ignoring an entire category of phones. This is a shell game. They’re pretending these phones never existed,” he stressed.

“Samsung’s business model is all kinds of different phones for all kinds of different people,” Verhoeven said.

According to Samsung, its internal documents referencing Apple products are research documents. Apple has argued that internal documents from the South Korean tech powerhouse are proof that it copied its products. Samsung says research like this is standard practice in the industry.

“They’re mixing and matching, Verhoeven said. “They’re taking a document from a completely different part of the company” arguing it is proof that Samsung copied products.”

The lawyer asserts that Samsung is “a good corporate citizen.” He added that the company just wants “to build products consumers want.”

“All this copying nonsense is hand-waving from Apple,” he said. “They know just like I know, just like you know, that no one is going to be confused when buying a smartphone.”

Touching on the ‘381 patent which covers the bounce effect of the iPhone when you reach the end of a screen, the lawyer said the DiamondTouch and the Tablecloth devices would have led the US patent office to not grant the patent if it had known these devices.

In contrast, Samsung’s 3G patents are state of the art, the lawyer said.

As for damages, Verhoeven stressed that Apple’s expert witness Terry Musika who computed their claims was paid $2 million for his service. He also pointed out that Musika did not account for other expenses like R&D and marketing costs.

He also made sure to point out that Samsung is asking for reasonable damages for Apple’s alleged patent infringements.



Apple and Samsung Rebuttals

Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, closing arguments,

Apple lawyer William Lee says that “We’re going to have them to protect our investment in innovations…Because if we don’t, we won’t have people like Apple spending five years in a room coming up with a phone that revolutionizes the world.”

“They copied our product, but what they’re saying to you is we don’t want to pay,” he said.

According to him, Samsung’s argument that they had a broad lineup of products that Apple chose to not present in closing is overshadowed by the fact that the company, in its internal documents, said that they had a “crisis of design” when confronted with the iPhone.

Lee says Apple spent five years making the iPhone and that Samsung copied it in three months. “That’s truth, and that’s simple, clear, and undisputed,” he said.

As for Samsung patents, he pointed out that Samsung does not even use them in their products meaning they are old technology.

Samsung, he says, does not play by the rules.

“You’re going to have to decide who lived by the rules and who didn’t live by the rules. And those who didn’t live by the rules were Samsung,” Lee told the jury.

“Make no mistake about it: Apple wants to compete… Apple wants to compete fairly and squarely with inventions and innovations and products,” he said.

He said that Samsung should not get away with what they did. The jury should not give the Samsung a get-out-of-jail-free card.

According to him, a guilty verdict for Samsung would reaffirm the American patent system.

Samsung lawyer Verhoeven said in refutation to this that Samsung played by the rules, specifically with ETSI guidelines for their standards-related patents.

“If Apple wanted a FRAND license they needed to come to us,” he also said.

As closing, he asked the jury to let Samsung “compete freely in the marketplace instead of Apple trying to stop it in the courtroom.”

Both Apple and Samsung lawyers thanked the judge and the jury after their closing arguments. Deliberation for the legendary patents dispute may take weeks, observers note.

Apple first sued Samsung in April of last year and the legal war has now expanded into dozens of cases in courts in more than 10 countries around the world.

Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, closing arguments,


Apple, Samsung Chief Execs’ Out of Court Settlement Fails

Apple Says Samsung Copied iPhone With Galaxy Nexus To Lift Market Share

Apple Expert Replicates 1994 Concept Tablet In Trial Against Samsung

Apple CEO Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Kwan Oh Hyun Attempt to Resolve Patent Disputes

Judge on Apple Last-Minute Witness Strategy: Are You Smoking Crack?

Samsung Says They Were Designing Tablets Before iPad

Apple Advised Samsung To Pay $30, $40 Licensing Per Smartphone, Tablet

Apple and Samsung Forced to Submit Financial Records

Long Samsung Report Compares Original Galaxy S With Apple iPhone

Samsung Survey Damages Own Case Against Apple

Mac Designer Susan Kare Mistook Samsung Phone For iPhone

Damaging Samsung Memo Admitted In Apple Trial

Apple Says Samsung Copied Its Icons


Read: The Verge [1, 2]

Images 2, 4, 5 & 6 from Tiger Pixel, samsungusa, Which? Tech & indi.ca on Flickr. Image 3 from The Verge


An Apple expert has replicated a tablet concept from 1994 to try to discredit the assertion made by Samsung that the concept device is prior art that should invalidate Apple’s design patent on the iPad.

On Friday, Peter Bressler was called to the stand by Apple bringing with him a replica of the Fidler tablet. The Fidler tablet was a project by Roger Fidler for the Knight Ridder company’s Information Design Lab.


Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, Fidler tablet, prior art, design patent,
Roger Fidler with his Fidler tablet prototype and the Apple iPad.

“This is a duplicate that I had created of Mr. Fidler’s original tablet, the industrial designer revealed to the court.

He added that he “went to Missouri with a model maker laser scanner and digitized the surface of [the Fidler tablet”, photographed them, measured them so that we could fabricated it to be exactly the same.”

He said that the replica is an exact copy “right down to the scratches and the paint.”

Bressler said that there are major differences between the Fidler tablet and the iPad. This includes the glass covering and the display of the Fidler.

Samsung has previously mentioned the Fidler tablet and the Windows-powered Compaq TC1000 tablet from 2004 to argue that the iPad is not at all that unique design-wise.

Apple has a design patent for the iPad which covers its appearance. This includes its rounded corners and the rectangle shape of the tablet. Samsung has argued in the past that Apple’s design patent should be invalidated.

Samsung has also said that the company has been designing tablets, including the Galaxy Tab 10.1, even before the iPad came out in 2010.

Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, Fidler tablet, prior art, design patent,

In a previous testimony, a Samsung chief designer presented an email thread which includes drawings of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 dated before the iPad was launched by Apple.

Jin Soo Kim also said then that tablets made by the company have flat fronts because that is the practical surface for the front of the device. He said that curved glass would be more expensive and hard to make and would make the screen of the device more prone to mis-registering touch input.

The bezel, he said is there to protect the device that is why it is included in the design. He said Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1, a device Apple claims to have infringed on their design patent, has a screen size that way because that size is the most cost-effective size to cut glass from.


Judge on Apple Last-Minute Witness Strategy: Are You Smoking Crack?

Samsung Says They Were Designing Tablets Before iPad

Apple Advised Samsung To Pay $30, $40 Licensing Per Smartphone, Tablet

Apple and Samsung Forced to Submit Financial Records

Long Samsung Report Compares Original Galaxy S With Apple iPhone

Samsung Survey Damages Own Case Against Apple

Mac Designer Susan Kare Mistook Samsung Phone For iPhone

Damaging Samsung Memo Admitted In Apple Trial

Apple Says Samsung Copied Its Icons

Images from Apple Insider Forums (1, 2)


Emotions ran high in court on Thursday as the judge handling the Apple and Samsung case in California became irritated with Apple trying fit what she says is an excessive number of witnesses into its remaining allotted time.

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh even went as far as saying a lawyer representing Apple can only think that they could enter that number of witnesses in the last few hours of their time in court if he was “smoking crack”.


Apple, Samsung, legal, lawsuit, California, Judge Lucy Koh


Samsung has argued that it was working on tablets even before the first iPad was launched.

The claim is the latest in the ongoing courtroom battle between Samsung and Apple in California.

In a testimony, Samsung chief designer Jin Soo Kim told the court through an interpreter that the design of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 was influenced more by practicality than Apple’s design.

Apple, Samsung, Galaxy Tab 10.1, tablets, design patent, legal, lawsuit, Jin Soo Kim, California,


Apple has just presented a new piece of evidence in its case against Samsung in the form of an internal document from its South Korean rival revealing a detailed comparison between the original Samsung Galaxy S and the Apple iPhone.

Apple’s lawyers on Tuesday argued that the 132-page document clearly show that Samsung went out of its way to copy every single detail of how the iPhone’s software behaves.

Samsung, Apple, legal, lawsuit, California, comparison, original Galaxy S, iPhone, internal document


A survey sponsored by Samsung itself has seemingly hurt its arguments in the ongoing trial between the South Korean company and its rival Apple.

What the Samsung survey revealed to the court was that customers mistook the Samsung advertisement for marketing material made for or by Apple.

Samsung, Apple, legal, survey, lawsuit, California,


The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule whether or not to outlaw the sale of violent videogames to children in the U.S., a report from The Associated Press says.

Ama in Ohio / Flickr (CC Y-NC-SA)According to the AP, the ruling will be controversial, however, as some have voiced out that making it illegal to sell violent videogames to kids may be a violation of First Amendment free speech rights.

Naturally, the videogame industry isn’t happy about the prospect of losing much business in their industry which reeled in no less than $18 billion last year, experts say.

However, there has been much debate about whether violent videogames are dangerous for children because they expose them to violence at an early age.

The issue the Supreme court will be deciding on stems from the state of California’s efforts to ban the sale of violent videogames to children under 18, the AP reports.

The AP says that indications point to a divided court with no clear signal whether it will decide to ban or allow the sale of violent videogames to children.


Mark Zuckerberg, one of the youngest billionaires in the world and CEO of social networking giant Facebook, stopped in for the graduation ceremony at Belle Haven Community School in Menlo Park, California.  The Belle Haven Principal explained that Facebook is going to relocate its headquarters to Menlo Park soon, so “Mr. Zuckerman” was being neighborly by paying a visit.


Zuckerberg told the Middle School graduates that he doesn’t remember much about his Middle School days, and they probably won’t either, years from now, but he said: “I hope you have fun.”


Zuckerberg advised the school children that they should eliminate the words “I can’t” from their vocabulary, and that building a company like Facebook had everything to do with being determined and believing that it could be done.  “Everything that’s worth doing is actually pretty hard”, he said.


Zuckerberg also emphasized the importance of friendship in going about one’s life work. “No one does anything alone. Great friendships make life fun and meaningful”. Last, he said if one loves one’s life work, problems can be overcome more easily.  “It’s a lot easier to focus on challenges that you actually really enjoy doing.”