Photo credit: AP | The once sexy iPhone is starting to look small and chubby next to the Samsung Galaxy S.
Both executives reaffirmed in testimony the special effort and investment Apple poured into the iPhone; both followed the lead of Apple’s chief designer, Christopher Stringer, in declaring they felt “ripped off” by Samsung.
It consisted of slides of a former Apple designer’s deposition regarding a Sony Styled iPhone, as well as including a statement which Samsung claims would have proven their innocence.
An Apple marketing executive revealed the company’s reliance on free press coverage and product placement as it unveiled its case to jurors in the first week of a multibillion dollar patent infringement trial against Samsung.
Apple filed the motion Wednesday after an incident in which a Samsung attorney provided the press with a link to documents airing evidence he believed should have been shown to the jury.
In retaliation to this antic, Apple has filed a petition to sanction Samsungs attorney, John Quinn, for releasing the photos.
The attorney, John Quinn, defended the document release, saying the full story of how the iPhone borrowed from other companies’ designs needed to get out.
Samsung presented the document to the court after preliminary hearings had already determined what documents would be part of the trial.
California, like many states, has a code of conduct that expressly forbids lawyers from making statements to the press that interfere with or prejudice proceedings.
A Wall Street Journal story on Quinn’s move, published Friday as the trial resumed after a two day hiatus, quoted New York University legal ethics expert, Stephen Gillers, as calling it “a bold move, to put it kindly.”.
Most lawyers try hard to avoid sanctions, aiming to avoid being labeled as unskilled at staying within proper procedures and willing to create disruptions.
Koh, a young judge who’s been on the bench for only two years, addressed the matter at the start of Friday’s session.
Koh then took the unusual step on the second day of testimony of polling the jury members individually about whether they had discussed the case with anyone or received any information on it while outside the courtroom.
After seven of the nine jurors said they had not, she declared her confidence that the integrity of the jury remained intact and reseated the existing members.
]Phil Schiller, the bespectacled, gray haired, senior VP of Apple’s worldwide product marketing, testified that the iPhone was an important project to Apple, following on the heels of its success with the iPod.
It had already started work on a tablet project, and it occurred to some Apple designers that the technology that produced a software based keyboard on a tablet might also be used on a second generation smartphone.
But such a phone, with numbers beneath a touch sensitive glass face instead of on physical buttons, would not work as the public expected.
Apple would need a new touch user interface and a different way of letting users move through documents, images, and applications.
Eliminating the number keypad freed up the device’s face and enabled a much larger screen than on previous cellphones.
On such a screen, users could browse the Web and interact with content, as well as dial numbers on the soft number pad.
Apple spent $97.5 million advertising the iPhone in the US in 2008; $149.6 million in 2009; and $173 million in 2010.
Samsung Electronics’ Galaxy S, left, and Apple’s iPhone 4 are displayed at a mobile phone shop in Seoul, South Korea, in this file photo.
It introduced the iPad in January 2010, and spent another $139.5 million that year advertising it, according to figures submitted as evidence to the jury.
The bigger problem that Apple faces, is that Samsung products are sold at a much lower price than iPhones and iPads, and although they may not be as cool as Apples, they provide great user experience and competitive features.
Under cross examination by Samsung attorney Bill Price, Schiller was asked to discuss the same product development, but from the Samsung point of view.
“Once you put everything on a screen, you can make the screen bigger,” he suggested, saying the touch technology to do so wasn’t owned by Apple.
And if they did so, they would be likely to produce phones with bigger screens, which would come closer to resembling the iPhone than earlier generations.
For the benefit of the jury, Price whipped out his own “ancient” phone, a RIM BlackBerry, and pointed out how much space was occupied by its push buttons.
Doesn’t a larger screen offer functional advantages, such as being able to browse the Web, view images, or watch movies, Price asked.
The purpose of the question was to suggest that putting more content on the phone was an outgrowth of technology evolution, not the brilliance of Apple designers.
“It depends on the screen resolution. There may be an advantage in that (larger size),” he said.
Apple didn’t have exclusive rights to soft keypads and large touchscreens,” Price persisted.. “we do believe the buyer would be confused.
“we do believe the buyer would be confused. we look at this phone (a Samsung Galaxy model) and believe Samsung ripped off a number of elements,” he said.
Jeeuk MacGregor is a business journalist based in Busan, Korea. Jeeuk has a passion for financial markets and breaking news stories and loves writing about business news, stock market, and economic opinions that matters most to its audience. Jeeuk spends a lot of time discovering and researching latest financial markets and industry news stories in order to make sure the latest and greatest stories are brought to you first on BigBoardNews.com.