Apple and Samsung renew courtroom clash

SAN JOSE — In the third patent trial Judge Lucy Koh is presiding over with the same plaintiffs and defendants, this week a jury of eight heard opening arguments in a new Apple v. Samsung patent trial.

Apple is asking for around two billion dollars in damages, while Samsung argues the final amount should be $39 million, with Apple owing Samsung around $7 million for infringing on two Samsung patents.

Issues at hand relate to software features like slide to unlock, auto-correct and universal search.

Apple alleges the South Korea electronics company recognized the impact Apple had on the mobile device marketplace and made a conscious effort to copy Apple and steal its market share.

Attorney Harold McElhinny opened with the same tale of Apple’s impact of the marketplace delivered during the jury trials held last year and the year before.

Because the five patents are related to the software of the mobile device, McElhinny sought to counter Samsung’s assertion that they just made the hardware and are not liable for intellectual property infringement:

“It is Samsung, not Google, that is selling these phones for a profit.”

McElhinny argued that even though some of the phone’s features were not available on Apple devices until later, the incorporation of Apple’s patented features on Samsung smartphones gave the impression that Samsung had invented and innovated, leading to a greater share or revenue in the smartphone market.

Samsung’s countersuit in this trial seeks to devalue the patents in the eyes of the jury since Samsung’s general argument is that Apple is overvaluing their patents and exaggerating their contributions to the mobile marketplace.

As in the previous trials, Samsung’s opening argument was a deconstruction of the evidence Apple asserts for infringement and some offense.

Samsung attorney John Quinn characterized the lawsuit against his client:

“It is an attack on Android.”

Quinn said Samsung had not modified the mobile operating system that Google has freely distributed to them and other device manufacturers.

Quinn added that Apple is trying to gain from the jury what Apple has lost in the marketplace. Samsung has evidence that Apple recognized their competition’s successful marketing strategy and growing popularity of Android devices in general.

Samsung maintains that Apple’s methodology for damage calculation overvalues features covered by the patents and does not take into consideration the low cost of designing around the patent claims.

Samsung is alleging that Apple infringes on their patents like in the 2012 trial, which covered different Samsung patents and ultimately did not lead to Apple owing any money to Samsung.

Court adjourned in the afternoon after Apple Senior VP of Global Marketing Phil Schiller reiterated the development process of Apple’s mobile devices and their marketing efforts.

The jury trial will resume on Friday morning with Schiller back on the stand on cross-examination from Samsung attorney Bill Price.