Finally, after much hype and hyperbole, the opening ceremonies of the Apple v Samsung trial -- the trial that could reshape the entire global smartphone market -- are complete. As anticipated, the first days of the trial are full of fun. Meanwhile, poor Siri is under legal attack again, this time from a Taiwanese University.
Join us for another week Law & Apple as we breakdown every move and score of the courtroom olympians.
Well, we are underway. Jury selection for Apple's gold medal round trial with Samsung finished on Monday, and yesterday both companies issued their opening statements.
Apple claimed, as expected, that when the iPhone was announced in 2007, Samsung made a clear decision to copy that device as well as the iPad a few years later. Longtime Apple designer Christopher Stringer took the stand and explained in detail how products are designed in Cupertino, citing the fact that the team of about 16 designers actually sit around a kitchen table to hash out new concepts. Stringer did not holding back when asked about whether or not Samsung stole their creative designs and intellectual property, stating "We've been ripped off. It's plain to see."
Samsung countered by stating that the company spends billions of dollars on research and development. It doesn't seem likely that this argument of spreadsheets and accounting is going to hold water, particularly because spending money on research does not preclude a company from stealing intellectual property, but again, anything can happen.
Show them that we hired designers, too. Then they will know.
Samsung continues to draw the ire of Judge Lucy Koh, who was not too happy when Samsung emailed the press rejected evidence, apparently hoping to undercut Apple's claims with the public. After All Things D ran an article detailing the evidence, Judge Koh became angry and demanded to know if Samsung's legal team, led by John Quinn, was behind the leak. "I want Mr. Quinn's declaration as to what his role was," said Koh. "I want to know who authorized it."
Quinn's law firm has had significant success against Apple in the courtroom already, so there is probably some strategy here that escapes us, but is sure seems like a really bad idea to us to make Judge Koh livid just as the trial begins.
Siri, the voice-activated intelligent assistant beloved by many and ridiculed by some, is going back to the courtroom again, it seems.
Too shy to offer much insight on the Apple vs. Samsung trial, Siri seems to prefer to stick to business (aside from the occasional quip or two).
The National Cheng Kung University claims, however, that they were in the business of Siri before Apple, producing one patent for a speech recognition system and another that matches speech data, and they want to get paid.
Claiming Apple is infringing on their patents with the Siri software, the university believes they have "suffered monetary damages in an amount not yet determined, and will continue to suffer damages in the future unless Apple's infringing activities are enjoined by this court."
Haters gonna hate.
The lawsuit, filed in a district court in Texas, is not the first to put Siri in the legal crosshairs, and in this case the university is seeking a permanent injunction against Apple along with costs and damages. Siri is tough, though, and hopefully this case can be settled quickly and not interfere with all of the new features Siri is promising for iOS 6.
Adrian writes the weekly Law & Apple column and the occasional feature story for MacLife.com. Follow him on Twitter, or subscribe to him on Facebook.
hourglass
August 02, 2012 at 2:55pm
Lots of people have created programs involving voice recognition. Doesn't mean that every one of them should pile on to Apple for creating Siri, a more advanced program.
