By Seth Fitzgerald / Mobile Tech Today. Updated April 22, 2014.
As the trial between Samsung and Apple heats up, the Korean tech giant is claiming that Apple’s FaceTime video chat service infringes on a Samsung patent that covers the transmission of video over cellular networks.
Michael Freeman, who was originally awarded the video transmission patent, took the stand on behalf of Samsung. Freeman explained that his invention finally allowed videos to be sent across cell networks, something that was very difficult in 1994 when the patent was filed. Since FaceTime operates in a similar way, it may technically be infringing upon the patent, but that is up to the jury to decide.
Experts hired by Samsung have taken the stand during the ongoing patent lawsuit initiated by Apple in California. The experts wrapped up Samsung's defense by pointing out that the massive $2.2 billion settlement that Apple is looking for does not make sense. After Samsung wrapped up its defense, the company went on the offensive and began to make patent infringement claims against Apple.
After three weeks of trying to explain why it did not infringe on Apple's patents, Samsung decided to switch its tactics. Now, with just one day of testimony left, the Korean tech giant is claiming that Apple has infringed on at least two of its patents with certain models of both the iPhone and iPod Touch.
Not $2 Billion
The last major defense that Samsung is putting up against Apple's claims is that even if it did infringe on Apple's patents, $2.2 billion in damages is simply unreasonable. To explain why Apple's proposed settlement is incorrect, Samsung called on Professor Judith Chevalier of Yale University.
Chevalier claimed that the five patents allegedly infringed upon by Samsung are not of any significant value, meaning that they did not result in a loss of revenue for Apple or an increase in revenue for Samsung. With this in mind, Chevalier argued that if Samsung did infringe on those patents, the settlement should be less than $1.75 per device. In total, that would be $38.4 million, not the $2.2 billion Apple is demanding.
We caught up with Rob Enderle, principal analyst at the Enderle Group, to get his opinion on how the five Apple patents played a role in the success of Samsung's devices. He told us that if Samsung hadn't copied Apple, its phones would not have been successful.
"Without the five features tied to the patents Apple alleges Samsung infringed I doubt Samsung would sell many phones," said Enderle. "If these features weren't important why would Samsung copy them? Particularly slide to lock, which you’d think was redundant to a power button but was core to Apple’s user experience."
Even though Samsung's primary focus is avoiding a $2.2 billion settlement and possibly bans on some of its devices, Samsung is also dedicating some of its allotted time to Apple's alleged infringements. Two patents that were purchased by Samsung in 2011 and originally owned by other parties were infringed upon, according to testimony from Samsung.
Both Apple and Samsung will provide closing arguments on April 28, after which the jury will begin to work on its verdict.