Apple, Samsung present closing arguments in California patent trial
Closing argument rebuttals
Rebuttals started with Apple lead counsel William Lee, who had some strong words for Verhoeven's closing remarks.
Theres a saying among attorneys, Lee said. If you have the facts, stand by the facts. If you dont, attack your rivals clients, attack their witnesses and attack their lawyers. And thats what Samsung has done. He added that companies should "Compete on [their] own innovations."
More to the point, Lee rebuked Samsung's claims that Apple is attempting to stifle competition, noting research and development investments must be protected in order to survive in the marketplace.
We have to protect our investment in these innovations. Because if we dont, we wont have people like Apple spending five years in a room coming up with a device that revolutionizes the mobile phone," Lee said. "Apple took five years to bring this revolution to us, Samsung took three months to copy it. Thats truth, and thats simple, clear, and undisputed. Samsung copied our products, and they made $8 billion dollars doing it. What theyre saying to you is this: we dont want to pay.
Lee went on to compare the two companies' patents-in-suit, proposing the difference between the two is that Apple's properties are "commercially successful and have been universally praised and copied," while the Samsung products which use the Korean company's inventions asserted in the case "havent been praised or copied by anyone. The lawyer went on to dismantle the Samsung patents in question, including certain 3GPP patents, by restating standards-essential FRAND licensing arguments posed over the course of the trial.
The lead counsel concluded by saying, Competition and innovation in this field has been accomplished by real innovators and scientists, not lawyers. Apple wants to compete fairly and squarely. Taking someone elses intellectual property as Samsung did is not fair and square.
Following Lee was McElhinny, who said if the jury finds Samsung guilty, they "will have reaffirmed the American patent system."
Samsung's Verhoeven used his remaining 14 minutes to argue FRAND patent issues as well as patent exhaustion in regard to Intel chips used by Apple in the company's products. As most of the time was spent rebutting Apple's claims, not much was said in the way of concluding statements besides the final remark, "Let's have Samsung compete freely in the marketplace instead of Apple trying to stop it in the courtroom."
With that, Apple v. Samsung arguments ended. The jury has received the much-disputed verdict form and will begin deliberations on Wednesday. A timeline for judgment is hard to estimate, though a decision could come as soon as this week.