In what seems like a never-ending legal battle, Apple's claims of patent infringement worth $2.19 billion are said to be a "gross exaggeration" as well as an "insult" to the intellect of the jurors, says business school professor Judith Chevalier of Yale University who testified for Samsung in San Jose, California in front of a federal jury.
Apple's claims, to be more specific, are said to be 57 times higher than the actual amount Samsung should pay if and when the jury proves the latter infringed the debated patents, which describes its demand of a penalty of over $40 per phone as opposed to Samsung's claims of as low as 35 cents per phone. Samsung however counters that its rival's argued patents are of little value.
Chevalier was called by Samsung to question Christopher Vellturo's report made for Apple, saying that Samsung owes the said multi-billion dollar penalty for two reasons: reasonable royalties of Apple for the infringing products sold for the period of August 2011 to December 2013. Vellturo is a Boston-based consultant trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
"My analysis compensates Apple through a reasonable royalty and zero lost profits," Chevalier said to the jurors. "When Samsung sells a phone, Apple may be losing out. But that is not the same as saying that Apple loses sales because Samsung infringes Apple's patents."
Chevalier said Samsung only owes Apple about $38.4 million in damages.
Meanwhile, Samsung also started its case against Apple for allegedly infringing two patents and lately brought in three witnesses, namely inventor Michael Freeman, computer science professor Dan Schonfeld of the University of Illinois and tech expert Ken Parulski who was a member of the team of Kodak that created the first color digital camera in the world.
Freeman testified that he invented the video transmission technology in the early 90's and got its patent in 1994, which it later called FirstLook. He also said he sold the patent and another one in October 2011 to Samsung for $2.3 million. Schonfeld testified against Apple for infringing a 239 patent in the iPhone with the use of FaceTime and another feature for video attachment in mails and messages. Parulski, meanwhile, argued that Apple also infringed another patent of Samsung that is for photo and video organization in folders. These argued patents, Samsung said, weren't original creations of Apple.
Oral arguments of the two companies are expected to be complete by the end of April, with court in three sessions a week.
Legal tussles between Apple and Samsung are one big mystery for many observers. During the first legal case, Samsung lost against Apple, and as for their second case, it remains to be seen. Some believe that this is no longer about getting money from whoever loses in the case, while others say it could also be against the third-wheeler Google that powers Samsung devices with its Android system. Regardless, what's also clearly at stake is the market for mobile devices, which continues to be tugged in what seems like a war of these two mobile leaders. For whatever is the real reason behind these court dramas, one thing is true: the entertainment for market watchers continues.
