vacancies advertise contact news tip The Vault
facebook rss twitter

Apple vs Samsung - the battle continues - Samsung's turn

by Alistair Lowe on 14 August 2012, 09:14

Tags: Samsung (005935.KS), Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qabkuv

Add to My Vault: x

The battle rages on, Apple has made some compelling arguments whilst making its case; the biggest of which was evidence that it had attempted to offer Samsung a licensing deal back in 2010. The deal covered all of Apple's patents - aside from its unique UI - however came in at a rather costly $30 per smartphone or $40 per tablet, with Apple offering a small reduction in licensing fees should Samsung have offered rights to its hardware patents.

It's now Samsung's turn to make its argument and, the firm has begun by attempting to prove prior art for many of Apple's patents, in an effort to discredit their originality.

First on the witness stand was Prof. Ben Benderson, who was amongst the creators of LaunchTile back in 2004, software co-developed by Microsoft and start-up Zumobi, which allows one-handed use of a smartphone through zooming. The tech was originally targeted at Pocket PC devices of the time - though it features both zoom and bounce-back features it does differ somewhat from Apple patents, though may go some way to disassembling the picture painted by Apple earlier in the minds of the jurors.

Most promising was the demonstration that followed of DiamondTouch, a multi-touch table-top computer that featured a capacitive touch panel. The device had been handed-out to many universities in the early 2000s for research purposes and had even been demonstrated to half-a-dozen Apple employees back in 2003.

The focus was all on DiamondTouch's FractalZoom app, which demonstrated single-finger dragging and two-finger zooming. Likewise, a second app, Tablecloth, demonstrated a snap-back feature, not hugely dissimilar to the one listed in Apple patents. On cross-examination, the best Apple lawyers could do was to point-out that the screen was powered by an internal projector and not an LCD panel.

No doubt there will be some legal quibbling over the finer points of Apple's patents, however we think with this move, Samsung has positioned itself well. Likewise, prior to Samsung taking the reins, the GALAXY S, S II and Ace were removed from the case, as these specific model variants weren't widely available in the US.

Where this case will end-up is still anyone's guess.



HEXUS Forums :: 11 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Looks pretty compelling to me.

Although I`m sure Apple lawyers will find some way to twist this. maybe diamondtouch used a worm hole and stole apples ideas and took them to the past.


Is there anyone left in america who actually thinks the USPTO is actually a Worthwhile THing anymore?
kopite
Is there anyone left in america who actually thinks the USPTO is actually a Worthwhile THing anymore?

Apple? :mrgreen:
I want to see were LG will go with the Prada - it was the worlds first touchscreen phone (widely available) and won phone of the year in 2006




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LG_KE850_Prada_Hauptmen%C3%BC.jpg

they really have a strong case to sue…
kopite
Looks pretty compelling to me. Although I`m sure Apple lawyers will find some way to twist this. maybe diamondtouch used a worm hole and stole apples ideas and took them to the past.
I'm actually slightly confused - the buzz on the forums etc is that there's plenty of “prior art” out there - in which case surely it's not hard to find? :undecided
And as to DiamondTouch - I'm sure it'll come out that they copied a previously unknown/unheard of Apple prototype that predates it by a year or two. :rolleyes:
kopite
Is there anyone left in america who actually thinks the USPTO is actually a Worthwhile THing anymore?
I'm sure Apple's legal team give thanks every day that it exists - it certainly gives them a good living. Oh, and don't forget that without the USPTO there wouldn't be a patent troll “industry” keeping hard working ‘mer’can lawyers in champagne and caviar. :mad:

As far as I'm concerned a win for Apple is a defeat for the consumer and the industry as a whole. And if Samsung “win” then I wouldn't necessarily count that as a victory, on the basis that it's introduced a FUD factor into design and also diverted Samsung's resources and attentions off of their product lines.
Agreed, apart from the respective companies there are no winners amongst the consumer here - oh and of course the lawyers who don't care who wins as long as they get paid. Obviously if apple win that would be an absolutely horrendous outcome. The only thing this case has highlighted is that the legal system is utterly corrupt and lacks any shred of common sense - if there was it would have been immediately thrown out of court. The fact that legally apple can be taking people to court for making rectagular devices with colourful rounded icons when they weren't even the first to do so is absurd. All this is giving a pedestal for each company to one up each other in the public domain and waste time and money. Order them both to pay $1billion in to a pot and give it to companies that are actually looking at innovative products rather than wasting resources trying to defend a design that I personally think is outdated and boring anyway :S Innovate don't litigate!