Jurors deliberating in Apple-Samsung trial
By Glenn Chapman, AFP
May 1, 2014, 12:03 am TWN
SAN JOSE, United States--Jurors on Tuesday began deliberations in a big-money smartphone patent trial pitting Apple against Samsung, and by extension Google, in the heart of Silicon Valley
In a new trial following up on a landmark 2012 case in the same courtroom, Apple attorneys argued that Samsung flagrantly infringed on iPhone patents in a desperate bid to compete with the California company's culture-changing smartphone.
“Apple cannot simply walk away from its inventions,” attorney Harold McElhinny told jurors in his argument for the U.S. tech giant.
“Here we are 37 million acts of infringement later and we are counting on you for justice.”
McElhinny maintained that Samsung sold more than 37 million infringing smartphones and tablets in the United States.
Apple's legal team wants jurors to order the South Korean electronics giant to pay more than US$2 billion in damages for flagrantly copying iPhone features.
Meanwhile, Samsung lawyers maintained that the legal onslaught is the result of a “holy war” Apple declared on Google-made Android software used to power smartphones.
“We are not pointing the finger at Google,” Samsung attorney Bill Price said during closing arguments in the courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh.
“We are saying they independently developed these features and they don't infringe. Samsung didn't copy.”
The launch of the first iPhone in 2007 shook the smartphone market and prompted Samsung to bemoan a “difference between Heaven and Earth” when it came to its handset line and Apple's coveted devices, McElhinny said while recapping evidence for jurors.
The U.S. smartphone market quickly became a “two-horse race” between Apple and Samsung, according to McElhinny.
Samsung copied iPhone technology to win smartphone sales that would have gone to Apple, the lawyer argued.
Samsung attorneys countered that patented technology at issue in trial has not been used in iPhones and that smartphone buyers weigh a host of features and factors while choosing devices.
“We don't think we owe Apple a nickel,” Samsung attorney John Quinn told jurors.
“What Apple needs to understand is that the answer to the innovator's dilemma is not here in the courtroom suing people.”