apple_patent_video

Samsung

Mobile


These Apple-Samsung trials sure do produce some interesting battles.

Last time, there was a spat over who would sit where. Now, with a new trial set to start on Monday, Apple and Samsung are facing off over which patent-system-explanation video should be shown to the jury.

Here’s the issue in a nutshell. In patent cases, the jury is typically shown a video from the Federal Judicial Counsel explaining the U.S. patent system. From Samsung’s point of view, though, the latest version of that video amounts to a plug for Apple, with the company’s products appearing several times as the video outlines the importance of innovation.

Samsung argues that the jury should see the older, Apple-less version of the video that was shown during the last trial.

“Because Apple’s alleged innovation is a central disputed issue in this trial, it would be highly prejudicial to Samsung to show the jury — before any evidence is introduced — an official instructional video that depicts Apple products in such a context,” Samsung argued in a motion filed on Friday. “Doing so would raise serious concerns about Samsung’s ability to obtain a ‘fair trial’ by ‘impartial’ jurors, which is one of the most ‘fundamental’ interests that exists under the Constitution.”

Apple has yet to submit its response to Samsung’s motion.

Update 3:20 pm PT: And the video is in! Per Judge Lucy Koh, Samsung’s objections are overruled and the video in question will be shown at the upcoming trial. Read the ruling in full, below the YouTube videos, below.

Judge for yourself. Here’s the YouTube video:

And here’s the older video that Samsung prefers that the jury see:

Apple Video Koh Order

More Posts About the Apple-Samsung Trial




6 comments
Dorkus Maximus
Dorkus Maximus

So some guy in the video is pursuing a patent and using a Macbook to fill out the paperwork. We should also note that according to the video narrative, his patent application was at least at first rejected. Meanwhile, all the courtroom settings in the video show Dell computers. 


Are we to infer that all patent applicants, and by extension, all inventors, use Macs? Should we also infer that the serious work of the court system can only be accomplished on Dell computers?


bobmonsour
bobmonsour

My first reaction was that the courts most likely just use the most recent version of the video and since this was made in 2013, it would be just that.


However, what I now find interesting is the description of the video on the US Courts YouTube channel. See below. So much for reviewing it carefully and consulting with counsel before deciding whether to use it in a particular case.


"This brief video provides jurors in a patent case an explanation of what a patent is and the process for obtaining it. It has been carefully crafted, in consultation with judges and members of the bar, to present a balanced view of the patent process, but individual judges will want to review it carefully and consult with counsel before deciding whether to use it in a particular case. "

MobilePhonesFan
MobilePhonesFan

Tho' many of Apple's claims border on risible, clearly Samsung slavishly 'borrowed' aspects of their UI. Even if we could magically assemble a 100% fair (and non-xenophobic) jury, Apple will surely win something on infringement.

That said -- and tho' I don't believe she actively favors the plaintiff, here -- Judge Koh has so far demonstrated no skill in fostering an atmosphere of impartiality. This is yet another ruling which leads me to question her competence as jurist.

.

TechCheck
TechCheck

@MobilePhonesFan  I tend to take issue with the idea that the patent claims are trivial, or in this case risible, they're certainly not and it highlights either a misunderstanding the patents in question, or buying too heavily into commonly spread simplifications of those patents.


A perfect example is the trade dress argument, which was summarised by Samsung, and also Google as being merely about "round corners". (If you want a risible shill, that's it right there.)


However not even Samsung's own legal team were able to differentiate the devices when Judge Koh held them up and plained asked Samsung's legal to identify which is which, but don't also forget Samsung's own 132 page document where they painstakingly detail every change required in their prototypes in order for their Galaxy prototype to match the iPhone as closely as possible. This is indeed not a set of trivial claims, but represents the very reason why the patent system exists - so that companies can take multi-year long risks in order to develop enhanced products, with a short term protection against another who may copy the inventions and sell it for less.


In this new case Apple are asserting 5 patents which relate specifically to iOS features which differentiate the iOS product from others on the market. Samsung are asserting 2 patents, both of which were acquired *after* they released the range of Galaxy devices, and which do not represent unique product differentiators.


Also it's important to note that Samsung's behaviour of asserting SEPs in suits has garnered regulatory attention in the USA, the EU and even back home in South Korea. The idea that Apple are the "bad guy with laughable patents" is ridiculous when cast under an unbiased light.




Jim Hillhouse
Jim Hillhouse

Your comment, which makes lucid and well argued points, is, for this reader at least, a welcome alternative to what normally passes for comments.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 279,128 other followers