Not the Details, But the Overall Design

Are the tech consumers really confused whether it is an iPhone or a Galaxy phone? This is the conundrum that the two tech giants Apple and Samsung are battling in an international courtroom centering on product design patents and copyrights. Apple’s team believes that a lot of buyers purchase a Samsung phone thinking that it is an iPhone. Well, this can only mean two things; either Samsung voraciously copied Apple’s iconic design, or consumers aren’t really paying attention to what they buy.

Image Credit: www.mirolta.com

It could also mean that Samsung phones are the affordable ones and somehow, people wanted a taste of an Apple phone, even if only by the looks of it.
In the heated debate with Samsung, Apple summoned, Peter Bressler, an expert witness to confirm Apple’s claims against the South Korean tech firm. In Bressler’s testimony, he stated that the prior art he scrutinized bears no weight due to small differences, such as a curved front instead of a flat one, as is the case of the iPhone. 

Not wanting to be outdone, Samsung combated Bressler’s testimony by introducing four different versions of prior art including 2005 Sharp Design and LG’s Prada smartphone. Samsung went further with each example and asked a checklist of questions:

1. Is it rectangular?
2. Does it have a balanced screen?
3. Does it have a speaker grill?
4. Does it have rounded corners?

To all the questions, Bressler answered ‘Yes’. Yet, throughout the patent analysis, he didn’t object to how the analysis was operating. Later on, he pointed at how the analysis was askew in that it only showed the front view of each piece rather than showing all eight isometric views of the prior art.

According to Bressler, “This is not how you review figures in patents. I believe this is a distorted view of how one should analyze a patent.”

The Samsung counsel went on with the specific Samsung devices and sought the July 31 testimony of Scott Stringer as a backup to their defense. Stringer said it was important that the bezel be of standard thickness all the way around so that the corners would have equal radii and the lozenge shaped speaker grill design would be laterally centered on the phone.

Techcrunch.com offered some detail regarding the trial:

“Samsung counsel then tried to go into very detailed, minute differences between this patent’s embodiments (specific features in patents are referred to as embodiments) and both the Infuse 4G and the Galaxy S 4G. He said the Infuse 4G doesn’t have a bezel, and if the casing it does have were to be called a bezel, it’s much wider than the iPhone’s (and the ’677 patent). He mentioned that the radius of the corners on the Galaxy S 4G aren’t actually equal — the top has a 10mm radius and the bottom 13mm.”

But Bressler insisted that when buying smartphone, the ordinary observer gets an impression of the overall design, and not the discrete elements of the phone.

Will Samsung win this battle? Or, will Apple make Samsung Pay for copying them?
Apple fans and Samsung fans, consider cell phone trade in if you find yourself tired of such debate.

The Apple v. Samsung Lawsuit
by: Technobuffalo

What's your verdict? Let's here that on your comments.