Apple: Samsung Didn’t Live Up to Its Standards Obligations
Lawyers for Apple tackled the last major part of their case on Friday, arguing that Samsung didn’t live up to its obligations with regard to its standards-related patents.
Samsung is alleging that Apple infringed on two kinds of patents, some feature related and others related to wireless standards.
On those patents, Apple is alleging both that the company had a duty to disclose the technology rights before the 3GPP standard was adopted and that Samsung had a commitment to license any such intellectual property on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory basis.
The company called Michael Walker, a former chairman of ETSI, the European standards body that ultimately adopted the 3GPP standard.
Walker testified on Friday that Samsung didn’t provide timely disclosure of the standards-related patents it now is accusing Apple of infringing.
Samsung is arguing, in part, that it didn’t have a duty to disclose its intellectual property because it was confidential. Apple argued that Samsung didn’t treat the information as confidential before ETSI.
Apple is also making the case that Samsung hasn’t offered fair and reasonable terms.
Ahead of the trial, Samsung sought 2.4 percent of the cost of an iPhone or iPad to license its standards-related patents. In court, Samsung’s expert said the Korean company is entitled to 2 percent to 2.75 percent of iPhone sales if the jury finds that Apple infringed on either or both of the two standards-related patents in the case.
For its part, Apple called Richard Donaldson, a former Texas Instruments patent lawyer, who testified that Samsung’s demands were neither fair nor reasonable. Donaldson disagreed with both the percentage Samsung sought as well as the fact that it was seeking that percentage for the entire sales price of the iPhone.
He also noted that were others with UMTS-related patents to seek same amount as Sasmung, patent licenses would add up to more than half of the cost of an iPhone.
Just before lunch, Apple played deposition testimony from Seung-Ho Ahn, in which the Samsung top licensing official said he had not familiarized himself with requirements of fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing nor did he know of any steps taken to ensure that Samsung meets any FRAND obligations.
Both sides are running short on time, given the strict 25 hours that Judge Lucy Koh has given each side to make their case.
As of 10:45 am, Apple had only about two and a half hours of time remaining to make its case before the jury. Samsung has just more than half an hour after using more than half its time cross-examining Apple witnesses in the early part of the case.
Given that, testimony in the case should end later on Friday. The jury is likely to get Monday off while the lawyers and Koh haggle over the final legal instructions that will be read to the jury.
On Tuesday, the jury will hear closing arguments — two hours per side — as well as the final jury instructions before beginning their deliberations.
Update 1:28 p.m.: Now on the stand is Janusz Ordover, an NYU economics professor and former assistant Attorney General in the antitrust division. He’s talking about the economic benefits and downsides of standards. One of the downsides, Ordover said, is that the owner of technology that becomes a standard can hold-up others that adopt the standard.
1:44 p.m.: Ordover says that Samsung has basically gotten monopoly power with its technology having been adopted as a standard.
2:24 p.m.: We’re in rerun season, with Apple calling back two of its earlier experts–Peter Bressler and Karan Singh–to rebut Samsung’s expert witness testimony. Bressler argued that the Fidler mock-up and Compaq tablet don’t invalidate Apple’s trade dress. Nor does he see the LG Prada and various Japanese and Korean patents as invalidating the iPhone-related trade dress.
Singh, meanwhile, took issue with the examples Samsung used to make its case that the tap-to-zoom and center patent was invalid. The LaunchTile program, Singh said doesn’t actually enlarge anything but rather launches related content.
With respect to Apple’s scrolling-versus-zooming patent, Singh took issue with Samsung’s use of the Mitsubishi DiamondTouch as an example of prior art.
Apple’s remaining two scheduled experts (if they have time for them) are also repeats–patent expert Ravin Balakrishnan and Terry Musika, Apple’s damages expert.
2:39 p.m.: Balakrishnan back on stand to talk about the bounce-back patent and rebut Van Dam’s testimony that the Tablecloth app on DiamondTouch represents prior art that would invalidate Apple’s patent.
He talks about some ways that both LaunchTile and DiamondTouch are doing things differently than is spelled out in Apple’s patent.
Samsung has 20 minutes remaining while Apple is now down to 16 minutes. “Six more witnesses,” jokes Apple attorney Harold McElhinny, eliciting a laugh from Judge Koh and others.
3:10 p.m.: Apple rests its case following the afternoon break. Samsung’s first witness is David Teece, who is testifying as to whether Samsung’s disclosure of its patents was timely. Teece shows a study he did showing various lengths of time from months to years from other companies.
Teece also testified that he believed that Samsung’s FRAND offer was reasonable and noted that Samsung also offered to engage in cross-license agreements with Apple. Teece also took issue with Apple’s antitrust arguments saying that the company had not established a monopoly.
3:28 p.m.: Both sides have six minutes left. Samsung is calling its last witness Woodward Yang.
3:34 p.m.: Samsung wraps up its questioning of Yang just as time expires. Apple lawyer Bill Lee now has six minutes to either cross-examine Yang or take a hit off the crack pipe.
- 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