By Daisuke Wakabayashi
The jury foreman in the high-profile patent trial between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. said the introduction of Google Inc. in the case raised questions in his mind about the iPhone maker's true motivations.
Tom Dunham, a former International Business Machines Corp. software executive, was the foreman of a four-man, four-woman jury that Friday awarded Apple $119.6 million because Samsung infringed on three patents for software features of the iPhone.
The verdict was considered a symbolic victory for Samsung, because the jury cleared the South Korean company of infringing on two other Apple patents, and because the damages were a fraction of the $2.2 billion Apple had been seeking. In addition, the jury found that Apple had infringed on one Samsung patent, and awarded Samsung $158,400.
All css and css3 for css tools and css3 tools with css code generator and css3 code generator. All css generator and css3 generator for css button gerator and css3 button generator, css gradient generator and css3 gradient generator, css menu maker and css menu maker, css button maker and css3 button maker other help css editor and css3 editor.
Mr. Dunham spoke Monday outside the U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., after the jury adjusted its damages calculations to fix a clerical error, while keeping the total unchanged.
Mr. Dunham said the jury was curious about how Google affected Apple's motivation in this case. Samsung's smartphones and tablets use Google's Android operating system. Apple hasn't sued Google directly, but has sued Samsung and other device makers that use Android.
"If you really feel that Google is the cause behind this, as I think everybody has observed, then don't beat around the bush," said Mr. Dunham, whose job at IBM was to oversee developers expected to file patents. "Let the courts decide. But a more direct approach may be something to think about."
His comments suggest that Samsung lawyers succeeded with arguments that Samsung was merely a proxy for Apple's real target: Google and its Android operating system. Apple's lawyers insisted that Samsung--and not Google--was the defendant in this case.
To support its point, Samsung presented evidence of an email sent by former Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs saying that Apple should wage a "holy war" on Google.
Last Wednesday, on the first day of jury deliberation, the jurors asked if there was additional evidence related to Mr. Jobs's comments about Google. U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh told the jury it had to reach a decision based only on the evidence presented. Mr. Dunham said the jury didn't consider other information related to Google.
John Quinn, a partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP who was Samsung's lead attorney in the case, said Monday he expects the damages award to eventually be reduced to zero. Mr. Quinn said Apple's lawsuits against Samsung for violating Apple's patents had become "a futile exercise" and that Apple "should declare victory and get back to work."
A Samsung spokesman said it was "disappointed" by the jury's finding of infringement, but agreed with the jury's decision to reject Apple's "grossly exaggerated damages claim."
An Apple spokeswoman reiterated a company statement from Friday that the verdict reinforces that "Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products."
A Google spokesman declined to comment.
Evidence during the trial showed that Google offered legal protection to Samsung for two of the five patents at issue. The jury found that Samsung didn't infringe on either patent, which pertained to background syncing and searching for information on the phone.
A second juror, retired teacher Margarita Palmada, said she wishes that the two companies could settle their dispute outside court. "It would have been so much simpler for everyone involved and not have to resort to litigation," she said.
Mr. Dunham, the jury foreman, retired four years ago and now works repairing classic cars. He said the jury had "a lot of common sense" and reached the verdict and damages award by weighing all the evidence. It had no intention of sending a message to either company.
After four weeks of testimony from the two dominant forces of the smartphone industry, Mr. Dunham said he knows now what type of phone he will buy next: "a landline rotary dial."
No comments:
Post a Comment