IPad vs. Galaxy Tab: Samsung Lawyer Can't Tell Rival Tablets Apart During Courtroom Face-Off

By Dan Levine

SAN JOSE, California (Reuters) - A U.S. judge said that Samsung Electronic's Galaxy tablets infringe Apple Inc's iPad patents, but added that Apple has a problem establishing the validity of its patents in the latest courtroom face-off between the technology giants.

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh made the comments in a court hearing on Thursday, but has yet to rule on Apple's request to bar some Galaxy products from being sold in the United States.

Apple and Samsung are engaged in a bruising legal battle that includes more than 20 cases in 10 countries as the two jostle for the top spot in the smartphone and tablet markets.

Earlier on Thursday, an Australian court slapped a temporary ban on the sale of Samsung's latest computer tablet in that country.

Apple sued Samsung in the United States in April, saying the South Korean company's Galaxy line of mobile phones and tablets "slavishly" copies the iPhone and iPad.

Apple then filed a request in July to bar some Samsung products from U.S. sale, including the Galaxy S 4G smartphone and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet.

Mobile providers Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile USA have opposed Apple's request, arguing that a ban on Galaxy products would cut into holiday sales.

Apple must show both that Samsung infringed its patents and that its patents are valid under the law.

Samsung attorney Kathleen Sullivan argued that in order to defeat an injunction bid, Samsung need only show that it has raised strong enough questions about the validity of Apple's patents.

"We think we've clearly raised substantial questions," Sullivan said at the hearing on Thursday in a San Jose, California federal court.

Apple attorney Harold McElhinny said Apple's product design is far superior to previous tablets, so Apple's patents should not be invalidated by designs that came before.

"It was the design that made the difference," McElhinny said.

Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.

"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.

"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer.

Additionally, at the hearing Koh said she would deny Apple's request for an injunction based on one of Apple's so-called "utility" patents.

She did not say whether she would grant the injunction based on three other Apple "design" patents.

Koh characterized her thoughts on the utility patent as "tentative" but said she would issue a formal order "fairly promptly."

"It took a long time to make that distinction," Koh said.

After the hearing, Samsung spokesman Kim Titus said Apple's injunction request is "groundless."

Apple spokeswoman Kristen Huguet said, "It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad ... This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas."

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Apple Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al, 11-1846.

(Editing by Tim Dobbyn, Steve Orlofsky, Richard Chang and Alex Richardson)
Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions

Comments

[AppleSamsung]

11:48 PM on 11/12/2011

whether who is right or wrong, without Steve, no one will take a look at these tablet... there is similar product in the market before Apple, none of them success on sales... Steve and Apple make the different today... Samsung is just a follower that try to make profit from other people hardwork... No matter how good they are, they are still follower, they cant lead coz they can only follow...

[PotholesInMyLawn]

03:07 PM on 10/17/2011

Apple is full of iCRAP!

[berrycuda]

02:18 PM on 10/17/2011

South Korea has been copying US and world wide companies products for YEARS.

It is no accident that Hyundai's and Kia's look almost exactly like BMW's and Mercedes and other popular models.
Hyundias large excavating equipment and thier forklifts are copies as well. So are most of thier electronic componets.

But since they have bought thier share of political clout in DC the US won't do anything about it.
In fact, our own Congress and the president are about to give them permission to copy w/o fear of reprisal, through the latest free trade agreement with SK.

As for the Pads, I can tell the difference, why can't they? The biggest difference is the price, Apple is ripping people off...

[zagatosz]

11:06 PM on 10/16/2011

Samsung makes some great products but they have a long history of copying. Some of the first products I encountered from Samsung when I was in the electronics business were TVs and VCRs and they were shameless copies of Sharp and Panasonic designs,it saves a lot of time and money if you seal other peoples work. Why everyone is defending Samsung is beyond me, this is a giant conglomerate that makes washing machines to tablets, they are not your friend. They have been busted several times price fixing electronic components with other asian manufactures. I have a hunch that part of the reason that Apple has gone after them is that as one of Apples major suppliers they had access to product information that others would not have.

[NerdyStudent]

07:41 PM on 10/16/2011

Inside, and out!

[Phlan]

12:10 AM on 10/17/2011

Well, no. Apple runs ios Samsung runs Android.

[PotholesInMyLawn]

03:06 PM on 10/17/2011

Best comment of the day!

Next they will want to sue anyone using a cell phone that is not and Iphone

[MissTake1989]

08:12 AM on 10/16/2011

Apple sucks.

[DRaymond]

11:42 PM on 10/15/2011

Frankly the Samsung lawyers were paralyzed by fear of the wrong answer. I could certainly tell them ten feet away: 1. The Samsung has a 16/9 screen aspect ratio 2. The Apple has a home button bottom center. Apple is abusing a law that is intended to protect against counterfeiters. It was a law that was intended to give protection against products that a consumer might mistakenly think is the real thing. Nobody is going to buy a Galaxy thinking that it is an iPad.

[oldgeek1]

12:30 PM on 10/15/2011

If they show the products from the back rather than the front, Apple loses its case

[CSDofNM]

12:07 PM on 10/15/2011

"This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star

Who stole who's look and feel?

Steve Jobs was not the brilliant mastermind that Alan Kay and Adele Goldberg were. He took their ideas, without compensation, and used them as if they were his own.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Kay
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adele_Goldberg_%28computer_scientist%29

Apple cannot defend what id did when the facts come out. This is bottom feeder lawyer fraud frenzy, not to protect a product, but to protect a market.

[tainteddr34ms]

05:19 PM on 10/15/2011

Xerox was compensated with pre ipo stock options. Just because later boards resented the generous terms Apple was given doesn't change that fact.

[CSDofNM]

06:48 PM on 10/15/2011

I hear lots of Apple defenders say this. No one can provide a link to substantiate it. Apple stole it straight out and never compensated Xerox for years, if ever.

Show me I'm wrong.

[Shomali]

07:08 PM on 10/15/2011

I think you are missing the point. Steve Jobs wasn't an engineer or even a software programmer. He was a visionary who hit aces in everything he got involved in. Xerox system at the time was $16,000, it was a larger system dedicated to businesses. Steve Jobs brought the WYSIWYG to public. His genius was adapting technology to every day life at price point, ease of use and style that everyone wanted. Nothing he ever did was original (actually nothing anyone ever does is original, if you consider the ideas always come from somewhere) but the total package on each product was always one of a kind.

[DRaymond]

11:38 PM on 10/15/2011

Steve hardly hit aces in everything he got involved in.  He was involved in more than a few flops.

[CSDofNM]

02:00 AM on 10/16/2011

If nothing he ever did was original it could not be patented, and the Apple lawyers are committing fraud to protect their market to say any product violates their patents.

[sinnerG7]

03:12 PM on 10/14/2011

Wasn't it Steve Jobs who said "Good Artists borrow...Great Artist Steal"?Actually I'm pretty sure he stole the quote from Picasso.I know for a fact the whole GUI interface was invent by Xerox (PARC) they didn't sue Apple or NeXT to best of my knowledge.Apple shouldn't worry if their products are truly superior than their competitors.It's not an Apple Clone.If it was,then Apple might have a case

[helioszephyr]

05:19 PM on 10/14/2011

why would XEROX/PARC sue Apple for the GUI? Apple didn't "steal" it, they worked out a compensation agreement with Xerox. Xerox was in a process of drastically cutting PARC funding and selling off what they didn't feel was worth while keeping and what they could profit from at the time.

GUI development by XOROX was part of their office document management system, which never made it to the next level.

Again, Apple didn't "steal" the GUI, they bought the existing tech from XEROX then further developed it.

[CSDofNM]

01:38 PM on 10/15/2011

[A Xerox spokesman said the company planned to appeal. ''The ruling does not mean Apple hasn't taken substantial portions of the Star and claimed them as their own,'' a statement issued by Xerox said. ''The court merely held, we believe erroneously, that Xerox does not have standing to present facts in support of our contention.'']
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/24/business/most-of-xerox-s-suit-against-apple-barred.html

Not the line you were pushing. Apple did steal the look and feel.

Judge said that Xerox didn't have standing to sue Apple for suing Microsoft. Not the same thing at all, legally.

[Kynn]

11:56 AM on 10/15/2011

Xerox did sue Apple.

It was thrown out very quickly because they had basically signed over the rights of the GUI to Apple.

[CSDofNM]

01:39 PM on 10/15/2011

No, it was thrown out because the court said they couldn't sue Apple for Suing Microsoft for stealing their work. Apple still stole their work. Judge just said the forum was not convenient to make such a decision.http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/24/business/most-of-xerox-s-suit-against-apple-barred.html

[terrisca]

03:07 PM on 10/14/2011

If Apple wants to win, they will drop the price. They are surrounded by near-identical products and it's just going to get worse. Instead, it's looks like they're going to charge $800 for the ipad3.

[menschmaschine5]

03:04 PM on 10/14/2011

Ah. Here's the problem, then. Samsung has terrible lawyers. I guess this is why they're losing all these lawsuits.

Maybe I should buy a Galaxy Tab before it's banned in the US...

[2crudedudes]

02:39 PM on 10/14/2011

"we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas."

That's the hand of free market capitalism

[Jeremy Frasier]

02:25 PM on 10/14/2011

Has anyone that has stated that Samsung ripped them off actually went to the store and looked at the 10.1 Samsung compared to the Ipad? It is easy to tell the difference. Yes they have very similar packing and box, but the device itself is easy to tell the two apart. Why isn't apple going after Lenevo? I just bought a Lenevo tablet for my father, and from the front screen view looks exactly like the Ipad? The ony difference I see, is they put a textured back to it, which is actually a better idea then the smooth metal surface easier to hold on to.

[JWoode]

02:14 PM on 10/14/2011

Apple should just patent the dimension 8x7 and be done with it.