Samsung Legal Filing Reveals Different Picture than Apple Claims; Apple Stole Ideas

[dgstorm]

Updated: More details surfaced regarding Samsung's Legal defense against Apple, and were shared over at PhoneArena. We used the older F700 vs the iPhone pic in the story before, simply because we didn't have a better example. Now however, we have the original Sony design concept pic that was in the public domain 6 years ago. Apparently, this is a big part of what Samsung will use in court to fight Apple. We have edited this post to show the more updated info, and you can see the pic above. Source: PhoneArena

For many months now we have been hearing from Apple constantly that Samsung stole their ideas and that their blatant copying must stop. Not surprisingly, Samsung has a different perspective on this issue, and they have recently shared it in a legal brief to the U.S. Court. Of course, when showing their side of things, it's easy to asume that they are biased, especially since they are going to show the point-of-view that is most supportive of their position. In this instance, what is so interesting (and "damning" for Apple) is that Samsung's perspective mostly just offers facts based upon documented evidence from the history of smartphones.

It really displays in stark relief just how much Apple has abused the patent system, and that they have acquired patents which should be invalid. There are multiple cases of "prior art" that seem to establish these discrepancies. In fact, in part of their legal brief Samsung even points out that both Samsung and Apple borrowed Sony design concepts that were available in the public domain far prior to the release of the iPhone, such as phones that were “square with a screen” and had “corners [which] have been rounded out.” Apple's own internal documents even reflect this. Another famous example is shown in the picture below, in which Samsung debuted a smartphone design, the F700, a year before Apple announced the iPhone. Now, it is important to note, that it is possible that both of these devices could have been developed at relatively the same time; however, that would still show that Samsung didn't copy Apple, which still invalidates Apple's argument.

Here are several quotes from Samsung's legal defense brief that elaborate further:

Samsung has been researching and developing mobile telecommunications technology since at least as early as 1991 and invented much of the technology for today‘s smartphones. Indeed, Apple, which sold its first iPhone nearly twenty years after Samsung started developing mobile phone technology, could not have sold a single iPhone without the benefit of Samsung‘s patented technology.

Samsung internal documents from 2006, well before the iPhone was announced, show rectangular phones with rounded corners, large displays, flat front faces, and graphic interfaces with icons with grid layouts.

As . . . documents confirm, Samsung independently developed the allegedly copied design features months before Apple had even announced the iPhone. It did not switch its design direction because of the iPhone.

Apple‘s utility patents relate to ancillary features that allow users to perform trivial touch screen functions, even though these technologies were developed and in widespread use well before Apple entered the mobile device market in 2007. Samsung does not infringe any of Apple‘s patents and has located dead-on prior art that invalidates them.

Apple relied heavily on Samsung‘s technology to enter the telecommunications space, and it continues to use Samsung‘s technology to this day in its iPhone and iPad products. For example, Samsung supplies the flash memory, main memory, and application processor for the iPhone. . . . But Apple also uses patented Samsung technology that it has not paid for. This includes standards-essential technology required for Apple‘s products to interact with products from other manufacturers, and several device features that Samsung developed for use in its products.

Long before Apple even announced any of its 3G products that use Samsung‘s standards-essential technology, Samsung had offered licenses for these patents (along with other patents) to virtually every major player in the mobile phone industry, successfully striking cross-licensing deals with all of them. After Apple released products that use the technology patented in the [two standards-essential patents at issue in the trial], Samsung similarly offered a cross-licensing deal to Apple, asking for a fair and reasonable royalty in return for Apple‘s use of Samsung‘s technology. Unlike all the major players in the mobile phone industry, however, Apple refused to enter a cross-licensing deal with Samsung.

Instead, despite the fact that virtually every other major industry participant was willing to take a license from Samsung for use of the standards-essential patents in this suit, Apple claimed that Samsung‘s patents are unenforceable.

So, just who is copying whom? The trial begins next week, and we shall see...

Source: WSJ - Samsung's Defense Brief and WSJ - Apple's Argument

[jroc]

What kills me....is ppl try to dismiss the F700.

Not saying the iPhone is a copy....but just showing Samsung had prior art.

How come their digital photo frame can't be used in defense against the iPad....

[riko540]

Is that a front faceing camera on the F700? Could just be a sensor of some sort but it looks like a camera.

Edit: Yes it is a VGA camera on the front.

[Tillmorn]

I was wondering when Samsung was going to pull the F700 card. I can picture Apple's lawyers trying the "But it's not a cellular device" approach. It's still prior art though, even if the devices have different functions and were intended for different uses. I hope...

[Dave12308]

The only problem being that this was debunked over a year ago:

Who was really first? Apple vs Samsung F700 Story Truly Debunked | Android Community

The F700 was announced in 2007, not 2006. If Samsung goes with this argument, they are going to look like jackasses in court.

[Narsil]

The Samsung report states that they have internal documents dated 2006 regarding the issues over which Apple is suing.

[sb1831]

The only problem being that this was debunked over a year ago:

Who was really first? Apple vs Samsung F700 Story Truly Debunked | Android Community

The F700 was announced in 2007, not 2006. If Samsung goes with this argument, they are going to look like jackasses in court.

You can't really believe that Samsung would perjure themselves in a lawsuit that that could cost them BILLIONS. They know every piece of item of evidence is going to be scrutinized and looked over with a fine tooth comb.

[jroc]

The only problem being that this was debunked over a year ago:

Who was really first? Apple vs Samsung F700 Story Truly Debunked | Android Community

The F700 was announced in 2007, not 2006. If Samsung goes with this argument, they are going to look like jackasses in court.

Yea...announced in Jan or Feb 2007. I'm pretty sure they were designing and building this in 2006.....

http://www.samsung.com/us/news/newsR...?news_seq=3516

Its like the LG Prada. I REALLY dont think LG and Samsung made phones in 1-2 months....or is Apple the only company allowed to spend time designing and developing phones....

[liftedplane]

Yea...announced in Jan or Feb 2007. I'm pretty sure they were designing and building this in 2006.....

news SAMSUNG

Its like the LG Prada. I REALLY dont think LG and Samsung made phones in 1-2 months....or is Apple the only company allowed to spend time designing and developing phones....

actually apple had been developing the iphone since 1999... you know it only took samsung what... three weeks to develop the f700 and the prada... well... lg put it together overnight. amirite?

seriously though, samsung won't perjure themselves in court, that would just be stupid. I have a feeling that this might finally start looking ugly for apple, they've already started forcing a look at the patent system.

[acousticshade]

You can't really believe that Samsung would perjure themselves in a lawsuit that that could cost them BILLIONS. They know every piece of item of evidence is going to be scrutinized and looked over with a fine tooth comb.

Possibility #1-Samsung has falsified documents in an attempt to save themselves billions.
Possibility #2-Samsung snookered Apple into suing them, holding their cards close to the vest until Apple was deep into their we designed everything first bs argument & couldn't back out. Thusly they drop the thermonuclear bomb on the aggressor juuuusst a milisecond before they were going to push the button.

It's either pure desperation or pure genius.