Susan Kare, Greg Joswiak to Testify in Upcoming Apple v. Samsung Damages Retrial

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Apr 23, 2018.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Apple and Samsung today submitted their witness lists for an upcoming retrial in the long running patent infringement battle between the two companies, reports CNET.

    Neither Apple CEO Tim Cook nor design chief Jony Ive will be taking the stand, but several other notable figures will be providing testimony during the retrial. Apple will call Richard Howarth, a senior director on the Apple Design Team, along with Greg Joswiak, vice president of product marketing.


    Howarth will discuss the design process at Apple, the design patents that were infringed upon, and other design topics, says CNET, while Joswiak will talk about Apple's marketing approach for its devices and the competitive nature of the smartphone market.

    Apple also plans to call Susan Kare, who designed many of the early icons for Apple's Macintosh computers, to talk about icon and user interface graphics design. Other witnesses include Ravin Balakrishnan, a professor of computer science; Alan Ball, an industrial design expert; Julie Davis, a consultant with expertise in damages analysis; and Karan Singh, another computer science professor.

    Samsung will call Justin Dension, its senior vice president of mobile product strategy and marketing, along with Drew Blackard, senior director of product marketing and Jinsoon Kim, a vice president at Samsung's Corporate Design Center.

    Apple and Samsung's latest damages retrial will kick off on Monday, May 14, with the aim of determining how much Samsung has to pay Apple for infringing on three Apple design patents.

    The two companies have been fighting in court since 2011, when Apple sued Samsung for copying the iPhone's design. Apple was initially awarded $1 billion in 2012, but after several appeals and retrials, the award was reduced to $548 million.

    Samsung paid Apple the $548 million in 2015, with $399 million of that total awarded to Apple for the design patent infringements. Samsung at the time argued that it was asked to pay a "disproportionate" sum for the design violation, and appealed to the Supreme Court to reduce that portion of the award.

    Apple had been awarded damages based on the full value of the infringing device, while Samsung argued that it should pay damages based only on the infringing portion.

    The original devices involved in the 2011 patent infringement case​

    Samsung's appeal was successful, and the Supreme Court ordered the U.S. Court of Appeals to redetermine the amount Samsung owes Apple for the design patent infringement. The U.S. Court of Appeals sent the case back to the district court, which brings us to the May trial.

    During the retrial, Samsung will argue that the damages awarded to Apple should be less than the original award because the infringed Apple patents represent only a small part of the design of the entire Samsung smartphone in question. Apple, meanwhile, will argue that it deserves damages based on the full value of the device.

    Article Link: Susan Kare, Greg Joswiak to Testify in Upcoming Apple v. Samsung Damages Retrial
  2. bigjohn7407 macrumors member

    Sep 17, 2012
  3. Andres Cantu macrumors 68030

    Andres Cantu

    May 31, 2015
    Rio Grande Valley in South Texas
  4. HiRez macrumors 603


    Jan 6, 2004
    Western US
    Wow, I seriously thought this was over like over 5 years ago...

    Let's sue on some Newton patents!
  5. macfacts macrumors 68030


    Oct 7, 2012
    It keeps going because Apple is two faced. They want Samsung to pay a percentage of the total cost of the Galaxy phone for copying the rectangle shape of the phone. That includes all the tech inside it too that Samsung didn't copy.

    Mean while in the other court room with Apple and Qualcomm, Apple is saying they shouldn't have to pay a percentage of the total cost of the iPhone for using Qualcomm modem tech.
  6. -BigMac- macrumors 65816


    Apr 15, 2011
    Melbourne, Australia
    Create a poll for this, titled "who even cares anymore?"

    Its honestly been going on for so long, I dont think even the companies care anymore.
  7. WannaGoMac macrumors 68000

    Feb 11, 2007
    Wonder when the lawyer fees cost more than the settlement?
  8. tito2020 macrumors 6502a

    Oct 16, 2011
    apple fans created this
  9. Brandhouse macrumors 6502

    Aug 6, 2014
    What has iconography and UI to do with anything? Especially when UI is about patterns of behaviour.
  10. wbeasley macrumors 6502


    Nov 23, 2007
    You can say all the tech inside doesn't mean the entire device was copied but search what Samsung phones looked like before the iPhone was released and then after... They blatantly copied everything they could. They knew the tech Apple put inside (weren't they suppliers back then as well?)

    The difference in a full touch screen device and the old candybar phones would be huge. Android changed all the software too. Samsung deliberately chose the look and feel to be as similar as possible with their UI skin. And if that wasn't enough, they could have chosen any number of screen layouts but they even went as far as the rounded app buttons in the same grid. If you stood a few feet back, it would be hard for regular people to tell the difference.

    The only ones getting rich out of this are the lawyers. It should have been settled years ago.

    Samsung is probably worried if they lose (again) other companies they have copied are finally going to have a shot at them too for white goods they were "inspired" by.

    Maybe patent law needs to be simplified. So much relies on previous work now it must be hard not to infringe and patent trolls think they can make money without ever building a product. What defines a product is the whole hardware, software, UI, OS, app store and overall feel. Breaking down what percentage each bit contributes is difficult. The sum of the parts...

    Jobs famously said they'd patented the hell out of this. They maybe should have tested those patents earlier.

    I agree with -BigMac-: even Apple probably doesn't care for this lawsuit now. When you see how much of the market profit Apple captures does it really matter any more?
  11. AutisticGuy macrumors member

    Feb 1, 2018
    Companies like Samsung can get away with blatantly copying the style, layout, and underlying principal of a profitable device like the iPhone because courts have absolutely no power in righting this wrong. Even if Apple wins, they'll get pennies on the dollar compared to real damages. The market favors theft of intellectual property.
  12. japanime macrumors 68000


    Feb 27, 2006
    I want an iPhone with the same size, durability, and bug-free iOS as that iPhone 3Gs.

    I'd sue for that. :D
  13. DotCom2 macrumors 68040

    Feb 22, 2009
    That was my all time favorite iPhone. And I’ve had them all!
  14. macrumors newbie

    Mar 15, 2018
    Samsung is guilty, the made the UI look and feel like the iPhone instead of coming up with their own idea.
    For a rounded corner design that is rectangle no, Apple didn't come up with that design it was just a natural choice, even the iPad design is older it is a old school slate design so the iPhone shape is just an old shape design.

    the UI is were they copied.
  15. mariusignorello macrumors 65816

    Jun 9, 2013
    Beyond Samsung, the number of companies that have copied Apple’s style is endless.

    Mattress companies are copying Apple’s TV ad style for crying out loud.

    The fact that so many companies have profited from copying Apple is just sickening. But, who’s going to stop them. That’s the real question.
  16. OlliFlamme macrumors member


    Jan 2, 2018
    Due to the gravity of the situation, I’d ask the
    Piggs in space to come and solve that!!

  17. AngerDanger macrumors 68040


    Dec 9, 2008
    Ugh, all this unresolved sexual tension is terrible. When are these two going to realize they're helplessly drawn to each other and just kiss?!

  18. TomMcIn macrumors member

    Oct 22, 2008
    Samesong claims they should only pay on the value of the items they copied. If they hadn't copied these items, they most likely would not have sold any clones. Therefore, the value of all their take on the clones should be paid to Apple.
  19. krause734 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 30, 2010
  20. Rocketman macrumors 603


    Obviously the legal system itself is defective. It takes decades too long, costs millions too much and in no way complies with the "intent of the law" because it is procedural and anal.

    AI is looking pretty good right now!
  21. LaraCroft835 macrumors member


    Apr 22, 2014
    Adelaide, Australia
  22. convergent macrumors 68030


    May 6, 2008
    You really seriously believe that no one would buy a phone that doesn't look like an iPhone, when about 90% of the world buys phones today that look nothing like an iPhone, and did so at the time it was released? Other than a few minor things, it didn't look like a clone at the time, and now looks completely different. The iPhone has never had any significant market share. The fact that this case is still going on is kind of ridiculous.
  23. mi7chy macrumors 601


    Oct 24, 2014
    Ironic that iPhones lately have looked a lot more like old Galaxy phablets than the other way around. They don't look anything like my last iPhone 4S anymore.
  24. koruki macrumors 65816


    Aug 16, 2009
    New Zealand
    how is that similar at all?? Qualcomm's business model is to license their stuff out, they just wanted MORE from Apple than other vendors cause Apple has more money. Apple never licensed the design out to Samsung
  25. deanthedev Suspended


    Sep 29, 2017
    Apple, don't you know it's not nice to kick a dog when they're down?

    You've already decimated Samsung in the market, so you've won far more than what you'd get from this trial.

Share This Page