As Apple and Samsung Head to Court, Here’s a Handy Cheat Sheet
As you may have heard, Apple and Samsung are having a bit of a tiff.
Actually, it is more like a knock-down, drag-out brawl at this point. But one piece of the argument is due to be settled in a trial that starts today in a federal court in San Jose.
Now you may not know your subpoenas from your sub sandwiches, but that’s what we’re here for. Before I joined the ranks of AllThingsD, I once spent a summer covering the federal tax evasion trial of Heidi Fleiss. So I’ve got you covered.
Plus, we have spent the past few days putting together a little cheat sheet to understanding the big issues at stake, and offering tips on how to muddle through the minutiae.
So, now who’s suing whom?
Well, Apple filed the initial suit in this case in April 2011, charging Samsung with infringing its patents. Samsung, however, has countersued. That means that Apple is the plaintiff and Samsung is the defendant, although Samsung has filed a motion contesting even that. Samsung asked that both sides be referred to as “claimants.”
What are they suing over?
Both sides are accusing the other for patent infringement. Apple is suing over several patents related to the way the iPhone looks and acts, accusing Samsung of “slavishly copying” its device. Samsung, meanwhile, is suing Apple over patents related to the way mobile communications operate more broadly.
Their patents are part of a particular class known as “standards-essential” patents. Such patents are needed in order for a device to meet an industry standard. Such patents are generally required to be licensed to all parties under what are known as FRAND terms — that is fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory.
Also in dispute the manner in which royalties on Samsung’s standard essential patents are calculated. Samsung argues they should be derived from the market value of the device in which they are used. Apple contends they should be calculated from the component in which an the patents are actually used. The difference between the two is vast. Samsung is angling for a royalty rate of 2.4 percent on the full price of the iPhone. But Apple insists it only deserves a rate of 2.4 percent on the iPhone’s baseband processor, which amounts to just $0.0049 per unit.
And what do they want again?
Both sides want money. Apple wants to be awarded damages of $2.5 billion — more, if the judge finds Samsung’s infringement was willful. Beyond that, Apple is also seeking an injunction barring from sale any Samsung products hat infringe on its patents.
Aren’t there a million of these darn suits?
Yes, yes there are. In addition to other cases before U.S. federal courts and the U.S. International Trade Commission (a body with the ability to bar imports into the U.S.), the two sides have a variety of other legal battles in courtrooms across the globe. Apple is also suing HTC, and Microsoft and Motorola are suing one another, to name just a few of the key cases.
So why should we care about this one?
Because we say so. And it’s also one of the first big cases to go to trial among the many, many disputes over smartphone patents. If Apple prevails on its complaint, Samsung could face a massive monetary judgment as well as potentially lose the ability to ship its key products in a huge market, or be forced to significantly reshape them. If Apple loses, its aggressive legal strategy against Android phone makers could face a significant blow.
Samsung could also get a significant royalty fee if a jury sides with the Korean firm in its cross-complaint against Apple.
Are there a million lawyers working on this case?
It only seems that way, based on the zillions of filings made in the last couple weeks. But there are a lot of them. Nearly 80 attorneys had filed an appearance with the court as of Friday. Most represent Apple or Samsung, but a number represent third parties, including many tech companies seeking to keep their contracts secret, as well as Reuters, which is fighting those requests.
How long will this all take?
The trial itself starts with jury selection today. Opening arguments could begin later today, or perhaps more likely by Tuesday. And expect the case to drag on at least into the middle of August. Court won’t be in session every day, though.
So this will be a straightforward battle over the facts?
Um, no. Trials, particularly big federal cases, feature all kinds of side shows. We’ve seen this already in the important matter of who will get to sit where. When the jury is around, expect to hear objections, strenuous objections and requests for sidebars. And that’s when the jury is there.
Once they go home for the day, the attorneys in the case will often appear before the judge to argue all manner of other motions, ranging from what evidence will be allowed to which witnesses should be permitted to take the stand, and anything else that the dozens of lawyers can dream up.
That said, things will get really boring for long stretches, as a big part of patent cases focuses on trying to make sense of very complicated patents and the even more arcane law that governs them. Let’s just say you wouldn’t want a liveblog.
Who gets to pick a winner in all this?
Ultimately, a 10-member jury will decide whether or not either party is guilty of infringing the other’s patents. The trial will be overseen by Judge Lucy Koh, who also will determine what information does and doesn’t get before the jury.
So will the jury verdict be the last word on this?
Again, not so much. Either side — and perhaps both — will inevitably appeal whatever the jury finds, ensuring continued full employment for future generations of law students. Sorry.
Will there be more juicy details, like unreleased Apple prototypes and confidential licensing agreements?
We can only hope so. That would certainly make all those long trips to San Jose worthwhile. Both sides have asked the court for a process by which they can keep certain trial exhibits from public view, but they will probably have to disclose more than they would otherwise like. Reuters has petitioned the court to make nearly everything public, a request being opposed by Samsung, Google, and a number of other tech heavyweights.
- Calling All Gluttons for Legalese Punishment: Here’s the Apple-Samsung Amended Verdict Form
- Apple-Samsung Juror Tells CNET Debate Was “Heated”
- “The Jury Has Now Spoken”: Apple CEO Tim Cook’s Memo to Employees on Patent Win Over Samsung
- Apple’s Big Patent Win: A Shot Across the Bow of All Android Device Manufacturers
- Next Stop for Apple-Samsung: Appeals Court
- Wall Street Reacts to Apple’s Legal Win Over Samsung: Maybe, Let’s Not Kill All the Lawyers!
- Apple Says Verdict Is a Win for Values; Samsung Says It’s a Loss for Consumers
- Jury Slightly Lowers Apple-Samsung Verdict After Inconsistencies Noted
- On One-Year of Anniversary of Jobs Stepping Down as CEO, Karma’s a … Patent Victory for Apple
- Jury: Samsung Owes Apple More Than $1 Billion for Infringing Patents
- Competing Views of Competition in Apple-Samsung Trial
- Ringside as Apple and Samsung Go Into the Final Round
- Apple, Samsung Jury Won’t Hear About Missing Evidence
- The Definitive Insider’s Guide to Apple vs. Samsung
- At Long Last, Testimony Wraps up in Apple Vs. Samsung
- Apple: Samsung Didn’t Live Up to Its Standards Obligations
- Judge Koh: It’s Samsung’s Own Fault It Ran Out of Time
- Apple Lawyer to Frustrated Judge: Yes, We Need All These Witnesses, and No, I’m Not Smoking Crack
- Apple vs. Samsung Judge Encourages “Horse Trading” to Narrow Case
- Apple Says Samsung Documents Show Google’s Influence On Galaxy Products
- Patience Runs Thin as Time Runs Short in Apple vs. Samsung
- Samsung Designer Says Galaxy Tab 10.1 Work Preceded iPad Announcement
- Give Peace a Chance, Judge Says, Asking Apple and Samsung CEOs to Meet One Last Time
- Samsung Document Notes Their Smartphone Icons Not Always Iconic
- Samsung Designer Testifies She Didn’t Copy Any of Apple’s Icons
- Fireworks in Apple-Samsung Trial Over Whether Expert Had Improper Access to Intel Source Code
- The iPhone Advantage Is Largest in Big Cities, According to Samsung Study
- Judge Refuses to Toss Most of Apple’s Suit Against Samsung
- Apple: Offer to License Patents to Samsung Didn’t Include iPhone’s Interface
- Latest Front in the Apple vs. Samsung Battle: Jury Instructions
- A Look Back at the Second Week of the Apple-Samsung Trial
- Here’s Apple’s August 2010 Warning to Samsung on Patents
- Apple Offered to License its Patents to Samsung for $30 Per Smartphone, $40 Per Tablet
- Apple Patent Head: We Don’t Want to License Clones
- MIT Professor Says Samsung Customers Might Pay Extra $100 for Apple-like Features
- After Starting With a Bang, Apple vs. Samsung Now Just as Boring as Other Patent Cases
- Samsung’s U.S. Tablet Revenue Less Than 5 Percent of Apple’s, Court Documents Show
- Apple vs. Samsung Trial Forces Companies to Open Up the Books
- Jurors in Apple vs. Samsung Get a Raise, but Still Woefully Underpaid
- Samsung on Its iPhone-Envy Memo: Nothing to See Here, Move Along
- Samsung’s 2010 Report Says Its Galaxy Would Be Better if It Were Just More Like the iPhone
- Similarity of Apple and Samsung Icons “Beyond Coincidental,” Designer Testifies
- iPhone Caused “Crisis of Design” at Samsung (Memo)
- Samsung Exec Downplays “Crisis of Design” Memo at Patent Trial
- Five Things We Learned at the Apple-Samsung Trial Last Week
- Samsung’ Hinges its Case on Rectangles and Rounded Corners
- Apple’s Case Against Samsung in Three Pictures
- Top Apple Executive Saw Market for 7-Inch Tablet in 2011, Said Company Should Do One
- Apple’s Scott Forstall on How “Project Purple” Became the iPhone
- Apple’s Phil Schiller on How Apple Came Up With the iPhone and iPad
- Apple Loses Bid to Keep Customer Survey Secret
- Samsung and Apple Speaking to One Jury, Many Audiences
- Samsung: We Weren’t Trying to Mess With the Jury
- Judge Koh on “2001” Evidence: I’m Sorry, Samsung, I’m Afraid I Can’t Do That
- Apple: Litigation Misconduct Is Part of Samsung’s Legal Strategy
- Samsung Goes Public With Excluded Evidence to Undercut Apple’s Design Claims
- Apple Designer: We’ve Been Ripped Off
- Apple Designer: Even Steve Jobs Doubted the iPhone at Times
- Apple Literally Designs Its Products Around a Kitchen Table
- Samsung: Apple Didn’t Invent the Rectangle
- Apple: Samsung Took the Easy Road and Copied Us
- Day One of Apple vs. Samsung Starts With Another Debate on Apple’s “Sony Style”
- Samsung Thwarted in Bid to Show Apple Has “Sony Style”
- As Apple and Samsung Head to Court, Here’s a Handy Cheat Sheet
- Key Witness No Longer Works at Apple, Doesn’t Want to Testify at Samsung Trial
- Can I Get a Witness? Sure, Here’s a Whole List of Them, as Apple vs. Samsung Heads to Trial.
- Apple’s Case Against Samsung Gives Rare Glimpse at Dozens of iPhone and iPad Prototype Designs
- Samsung Makes Another Case to Have Apple’s “Sony Style” Put Before Jury
- Apple Tries to Torpedo Samsung’s “Sony Style” iPhone Charge
- Samsung, Apple Even at Odds Over Where They Will Sit at Trial
- Documents in Apple vs. Samsung Give Reporters Plenty to Chew On
- Samsung, Apple Reveal Names of Those Who May Testify at Next Week’s Trial
- Apple’s iPhone Has Sony Style, Says Samsung (Full Trial Brief)
- Apple: Google Warned Samsung Against Copying Us
- Jury to Hear That Samsung Failed to Preserve Evidence in Apple Patent Suit
- Apple to Samsung: You Give Us $2.5 Billion and We’ll Give You a Half-Cent-a-Unit Royalty
- Apple vs. Samsung: Another Patent Slapfight, Another Exasperated Judge