Apple, however, argued that the South Korean company could not have
competed in the smartphone market without copying its flagship
phone. The two companies also sparred over how Google's work on the
software used in Samsung phones should impact Apple's patent claims.
Apple Inc and Samsung Electronics Co Ltd have been litigating around
the world for nearly three years. Jurors awarded the iPhone maker
about $930 million after a 2012 trial in San Jose, California, but
Apple failed to persuade U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh to issue a
permanent injunction against the sale of Samsung phones.
The current trial involves a fresh batch of Apple patents, which
cover iPhone features like slide to unlock and search technology.
Apple is again seeking to ban sales of several Samsung phones,
including the Galaxy S III, as well as roughly $2 billion in
Samsung also claims Apple violated two of its patents, and is
seeking to ban the iPhone 5.
In court on Tuesday, Samsung attorney William Price said some of
Apple's patented technology in the case was never even incorporated
into the iPhone. That undermines Apple's claim for billions in
"They have to get you a little angry to justify this number," Price
told the eight-member jury.
But Apple attorney Harold McElhinny said Samsung's copying of Apple
technology has greatly harmed the iPhone maker and turned the
smartphone market into a two horse race.
"Unlike in fairly tales, we know that Samsung's illegal strategy has
been wildly successful," McElhinny said.
While Apple called several engineers to testify at trial, Samsung
did not produce any of its own software executives to discuss the
creation of its phones, he said.
"None of them were brave enough to come here and face cross
examination," McElhinny said.
[to top of second column]
Samsung's phones run on the Android mobile operating system
developed by Google Inc. Google is not a defendant in the case, but
during the trial Samsung pointed out that some of the features Apple
claims to own were actually invented by Google. Samsung called a
handful of Google executives to testify on its behalf.
McElhinny said the fact that Google developed Android is irrelevant
to Apple's ability to collect damages from Samsung. Google agreed to
reimburse Samsung for some of those costs, he said.
"At the end of the day Google will not be an issue for you,"
But Price said Google's development of Android belies the idea that
Samsung took Apple's technology.
"Google is critical on the question of copying because we didn't
copy," Price said. "Samsung didn't copy."
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is
Apple Inc vs. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, 12-630.
(Reporting by Dan Levine; editing by Richard Chang)
[© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights
Copyright 2014 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.