May 14 (Mon.) Apple and Samsung once again entered the court due to the patent war between the two parties. It is reported that the case will be held in the US District Court for a five-day trial. The court will quantify the degree of damage of the early lawsuit.
According to the results of a review by Judge Gaoy Hui (Lucy Koh) of San Jose, California and jurors, Samsung Electronics infringed on Apple’s three design patents and two utility patents. Apple’s attorney representative Bill Lee stated that the jury’s The only job is to figure out how much damage these patent infringement brings to Apple and how much compensation Samsung Electronics needs to compensate for these losses.
Here, the core question is how much money should be paid. In other words, should Samsung Electronics compensate the entire mobile phone, or just compensate the infringing parts? It is clear that Samsung Electronics is in favor of the second compensation plan and wants The amount of compensation will be controlled within 28 million US dollars.
In Tuesday's court debate, Greg Joswiak, vice president of Apple's product marketing, said: 'Our company has paid a lot of attention on the launch of the iPhone, so it has applied for and received a lot of patent protection, covering communication technology, smart machine industrial design, etc. For example, in 2007, the company’s late founder Steve Jobs displayed a multi-touch patent on the iPhone and announced that he had applied for a patent.
According to Bill Lee, an attorney representing Apple, the jury should return its focus back to 2006, including clamshell phones, slider phones and other similar phones that appeared before the iPhone.
In addition, Bill Lee also stated that Samsung Electronics obtained US$3.3 billion in revenue from Apple’s design patents and US$1 billion in profits. The number of smartphones sold has reached millions. Moreover, this is only a patent for design. Data, Samsung Electronics’ infringement of profits from Apple’s utility patents was not counted.
In response, the representative of Samsung Electronics Lawyers John Quinn stressed that no matter how much compensation needs to be paid to Apple, the judgment criteria should be based on the profits generated by the infringing parts, not the profits brought by the mobile phone as a whole.
Apple insisted that Samsung Electronics should make compensation based on the overall profits from mobile phones. However, according to Samsung Electronics, Apple’s patents did not cover the entire mobile phone.
It is noteworthy that during the new round of questions on Wednesday, two other Apple experts, Adam Ball and Susan Kare, appeared in court to testify. The two experts mainly discussed the advantages of the Apple patent. More importantly, the two stood Consistent with Apple's lawyer's position, the three granted patents were referred to as the 'articles of manufacture' of the iPhone.
Under the challenge of the Apple Legal Team, Adam Ball criticized No. D618,677, the infamous 'Round Cornerd' U.S. Patent, while arguing that the No. D593,087 patent is in tandem with it.
Susan Kare, a former Apple designer known as the 'a smiling woman for Mac computers', proposed a similar view of the No. D604,305 patent. The patent covers the iPhone's system graphics, especially on the iPhone's main screen. A formatted application icon.
However, Samsung’s lawyers did not sit still and successfully broke through the words of Ball and Kare – because they all acknowledged that “smart phones are made up of many separate parts”.
For example, Kare said 'I got the screen is the same thing', suggesting that it and other parts belong to the articles of manufacture. In addition she agreed that 'Apple's patent illustration includes a dotted line', providing a complete picture of the iPhone At the same time, it is not necessarily included in its statement.
From Ball's point of view, he believes that smartphones can be broken down into parts, but emphasizes that the jury should focus on the final design.
It is reported that the case will be finalized this week, and the court will announce the closing statement on Friday.