Yesterday Apple and Samsung gave their closing arguments in the ongoing patent and trade dress dispute. Before it got to that stage however, Judge Lucy Koh had to read off a large list of jury instructions which took most of the morning. These included information on things like how to use the devices they’d be given to use and how to prevent any software updates.
Apples closing argument was a narrative in which they claim that whilst Samsung were making phones before the original iPhone, they stepped up the similarities between the products when they seen how successful the iPhone became.
They highlighted that there are documents and emails that show just how obsessed Samsung was with making similar devices and that the jury should not get too caught up on Samsungs attempts to show minor similarities.
Apple wants the jury to focus on the bigger picture and that is that the iPhone took Apple 5 years to develop whilst the Galaxy S only took Samsung 3 months and the reason for that, in Apples view, is because Samsung took all of Apples hard work and built something similar.
Apple also argued that they tried their best to get Samsung executives to take the stand but they refused. Apple focused on the fact that Samsung witnesses never at any point said that the product designs were not similar, instead they continually dragged the case down into the weeds in an effort to focus on small differences.
Samsungs closing argument was much more specific. Their lawyers started by telling the jury that “Apple is attempting to block its most serious competitor from even playing the game,” and then compared the devices to TV’s “Just think about walking into a Best Buy store. You go into the TV section. All of the TVs look the same. They’re all boxes. They’re all flatscreens. They’re all minimalist designs.”
Samsung then began an impassioned plea to the Jury that Apple is not trying to compete in the market and instead they are taking their competitor to court.
Samsung also attempted to win the jury over on what should and should not be patented. Samsung also defended their alleged FRAND violations which, according to reports the jury became quickly disinterested in.
Overall the final day was a summary of each companies case. The Jury now has the incredibly complex job of making a decision based on numerous devices and patents. The jury will have to decide which, if any, products infringed, whether or not Samsung have presented enough evidence to invalidate Apple’s asserted utility patents and also whether Apples unregistered trade dress is protectable. If you want to see just how complex this part of the process is then The Verge have a copy of the verdict form
We’ll be sure to report on the result of the case when it is known.