Mikey Campbell
Following a cavalcade of witnesses Apple called to the stand to rebut testimony from Samsung's own experts, presiding Judge Lucy Koh said, "We are done," putting a cap on the nearly fifty hours of testimony heard by the jury, reports All Things D.
Near the start of the day, Apple had about two and a half hours left to rebut Samsung's arguments, while the South Korean company was down to just under 40 minutes. Judge Koh earlier limited each side to 25 hours of witness testimony.
According to All Things D's in-court reports, Apple used its time to call New York University professor and former assistant Attorney General for the antitrust division Janusz Ordover to the stand. In his testimony, Ordover said Samsung's declared standards-essential patents have allowed the company to gain a near monopoly in the industry as far as wireless technologies are concerned.
In rebutting Samsung's claims of patent infringement, Apple brought a number of repeat witnesses back to the stand, including Peter Bressler. The designer disputed Samsung's claims that the 1994 Fidler tablet concept invalidated Apple's own design patents, a point the Korean company tried to hammer home multiple times throughout the trial.
Bressler went on to refute invalidation claims based on several Japanese and Korean designs as well as the LG Prada smartphone. Samsung witness Itay Sherman presented the evidence in court on Wednesday, saying that Apple's designs were functional, not ornamental.
Evolution of Samsung and Apple smartphones. | Source: Apple v. Samsung court documents
On the user interface front, Apple called Karan Singh back to the stand, who explained Samsung's assertion of previous art against the Cupertino company's UI zooming patents didn't hold water. Singh said Samsung witness Ben Bederson's LaunchTile property doesn't actually enlarge any on-screen assets, but launches certain applications instead. Bederson on Monday demoed LaunchTile, a program that allows users easily navigate a screen of 36 applications with one hand by "zooming in" on specific apps.
Up next was Ravin Balakrishnan, who testified in support of the iPhone maker's '915 "pinch-to-zoom" and '381 "rubber-banding" patents, saying Samsung's claims of prior art don't cover the specifics of Apple's property. The Korean company on Monday brought out Adam Bogue, creator of Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratory's DiamondTouch display table.
Bogue argued the device's FractalZoom feature, which supports a single touch for scrolling and two fingers for pinch and zoom, predates Apple's patent. It was also revealed during his testimony that the technology was demoed to Apple hardware engineers in 2003. Bogue went on to describe a follow-up invention, dubbed TableCloth, that incorporates a "bounce back" animation when images are dragged offscreen.
Evolution of Samsung and Apple tablets. | Source: Apple v. Samsung court documents
After the court's afternoon break on Friday, Apple rested its case leading Samsung to bring up two final witnesses, David Teece and Woodward Yang.
Teece testified on Friday that Samsung's disclosure of its patents was timely, showing a study offering examples from other companies. He went on to say that the company's FRAND licensing offer to Apple was reasonable, noting that it had proposed a cross-license agreement with the iPhone maker. On Thursday, Teece and Samsung witness Vincent O'Brien estimated Apple owed up to $421.8 million in royalties pertaining to five patents.
With testimony completed, Apple and Samsung need to finalize jury instructions, with a discussion on the matter scheduled for Monday. Jury deliberations should begin Wednesday after the parties get two hours each for closing arguments on Tuesday.
-m.jpg)
Malcolm Owen
William Gallagher
Andrew O'Hara
Christine McKee
Marko Zivkovic
63 Comments
I just hope that history doesn't repeat itself again. Remember the legal battles between Apple and Microsoft for user interface back when Microsoft brought Windows? That ended badly for Apple and it took Apple years to reinvent itself. I really hope that it doesn't happen again with Samsung.
[quote name="rumpels" url="/t/151998/apple-samsung-rest-cases-in-patent-trial-as-testimony-phase-wraps-up#post_2170616"]I just hope that history doesn't repeat itself again. Remember the legal battles between Apple and Microsoft for user interface back when Microsoft brought Windows? That ended badly for Apple and it took Apple years to reinvent itself. I really hope that it doesn't happen again with Samsung.[/quote] Microsoft didn't 'bring' windows, they simply reversed engineered Mac OS.
I'll take a dollar each way on the outcome.
[CENTER][/CENTER]You can feel Google's presence and counsel in this trial. The Google/Samsung defense partnership extends I suspect from 'willful destruction of evidence' to systematic procedural obstruction over the instructing of a fair and comprehensive trial. Google is Samsung's enabler. Samsung is Google's enforcer. And Google has massive clout, witness their reluctance to expose...as required by the tribunal in Google vs Oracle...the extent of their linkage to bloggers, journalists, academics, and opinion makers. They can turn truth on its head by power-playing their hoard of data on decision makers. They lobby from a leverage position. Apple is the Google killer. Google is the Apple killer. Essentially. No matter how much they've seemed to cross-breed in the past. Through schmidth's presence on Apple's Board, ...or their patented data-sucking luminaries on Apple platforms' home screens, Google has been biding its time to channel Apple's applied genius through its proprietary wormholes ...to a universe where human nature is sliced, marked-up, branded, ...and traded as a cost-plus commodity. These guys are fundamentally incompatible in as much as their core philosophies towards end-users repulse one another. Apple's strategy sits upon establishing unequivocally within the consumer's psyche its driving principle of 'form as a receptacle for infinity'. An inverted funnel; Sir Jonathan Ives and all. Google's strategy is to stream infinity down towards Google's form factor, its politically and economically micro-manageable, assimilative environment. The Android honey-trap experiment. The OEMs, Samsung amongst an ever dwindling few, ...enacting, day-time-soap opera-like, its platform's embodiment. One funnels ...to set itself up as the end-user's complement. The other channels ...to pull the strings at the consumer's detriment. One's a square peg, the other an...a round hole. One's part delta, part sigma, and a sum-enhancing tenure of fatwa. The other's part data, part beta, ...and a sum-reducing measure of LaLa... What better garden of scaled proses to cross-pollinate than an unmanned court of law!? Samsung and Google have been doubling down for ages on the 'cross' part. As for the 'pollinate' part, ...well...'spoliate' has gotten both to jiggle the lexicon and ...ejaculate at the thought...!
I just hope that history doesn't repeat itself again. Remember the legal battles between Apple and Microsoft for user interface back when Microsoft brought Windows? That ended badly for Apple and it took Apple years to reinvent itself. I really hope that it doesn't happen again with Samsung.
That was then and this is now. Not all legal battles are the same and this time Apple has patents to defend, and no weak worded licensing agreements like before. No guarantee it won't end up a loss for Apple but definitely not stacked against them like last time.
With all the witnesses and extra time that Apple had how is that Apple has 'rested it's case' leaving Samsung the the final witnesses? I had the impression that Apple would be weighing in the end of the trial with their witnesses. Much for me to learn about trials I guess.