The Samsung Galaxy Tab: An iPad doppelganger? Photo: Jon Snyder/Wired
In day four of Apple v. Samsung trial proceedings, Samsung defended itself against Apple’s claims that the Korean company is a design thief. Samsung questioned witnesses to show that its product strategy focuses on “the democratization of the smartphone,” that no consumer in their right mind could really get confused between a Samsung and an Apple product, and that the iPhone’s shape isn’t original, anyway.
“Consumers do a considerable amount of study and take a considerable amount of time to make their phone choices,” Samsung chief strategy officer Justin Denison told the court late Friday afternoon. In an effort to undercut Apple’s claim that consumers get confused between Apple and Samsung products in stores, Denison continued that the average consumer, based on Samsung’s research, takes six weeks to decide what type of phone to buy. Denison finished his testimony on Monday.
It looks like a contributing factor to that six-week decision period could be the sheer number of options out there: Samsung puts out about 50 new products each year, Denison said, and has around 100 different smartphone models on sale in the United States at any given time.
Apple’s expert witness on industrial design, Peter Bressler, the next person to take the stand, had a different take. “In my opinion the design of this phone is substantially the same” as Apple’s patents, Bressler said of the Samsung Vibrant, which Wired called a rip-off of the iPhone 3G in its 2010 hands-on.
Samsung claims its phones aren’t in fact iPhone copycats at all because of important delineations, like the lack of a bezel around the edge, or in the case of the Vibrant, a raised bezel. The iPhone’s bezel is flush with the glass on its front face. Bressler countered that a typical consumer forms an overall impression of a product, and doesn’t zero in on one feature.
This assertion, however, went against something Bressler said earlier in testimony, which Samsung’s attorney Charles Verhoeven was quick to catch and point out to jurors: Bressler previously said that each and every detail is important in evaluating patents. Verhoeven continued to grill Bressler about the specific details of the Vibrant and other Samsung phones’ designs.
“You’re asking me to compare peanut butter to turkey,” Bressler told Verhoeven as he grew frustrated with the latter’s questions. Your guess is as good as ours as to whether Apple’s phones or Samsung’s are the peanut butter, or the turkey.
Samsung also provided a number of examples of “prior art” — preexisting designs — for the iPhone’s form during today’s proceedings.
Apple’s first three witnesses — industrial designer Christopher Stringer, senior vice president of marketing Phil Schiller, and senior vice president of iPhone software Scott Forstall — who took to the stand Tuesday and Friday last week, attested to the original, groundbreaking physical design of the iPhone, as well as to all of the work that went behind developing both its looks and its user interface.
Apple and Samsung have been duking it out over intellectual property infringement across the globe for more than a year now. Apple claims Samsung is infringing on design patents for the iPhone and iPad, as well as utility patents covering things such as the “bounce-back” effect when you reach the end of a list in the UI. Samsung is claiming Apple is infringing on its essential 3G transmission patent holdings.
The jury trial for the case began last Monday in San Jose federal court. Each party made opening statements to present its case to jurors on Tuesday. The trial is expected to last through the end of August.
No comments:
Post a Comment