Battle of the giants draws to a close

Legalbrief reports that the CEOs of both companies conferred by phone in a last-ditch attempt to resolve their differences. It was unsuccessful. After three weeks of listening to technology experts, patent professionals and company executives debate the complicated legal claims of Apple and Samsung, a jury of nine men and women are set to decide one of the biggest technology disputes in history. The Washington Post reports that Apple is demanding Samsung pay it $2.5bn and pull its most popular smartphones and computer tablets from the US market after accusing the South Korean company of 'ripping off' its iPhone and iPad technology. Samsung, on the other hand, is demanding Apple pay it $399m for allegedly using Samsung's technology without proper payments for the iPhone and iPad. Apple's damage demands, if awarded, would represent the largest patent verdict in the US. The report notes that the two companies are the top-selling smartphone makers and combined account for more than half of global smartphone sales. From the beginning, legal experts and Wall Street analysts have viewed Samsung as the underdog. After all, Apple's headquarters are located near the courthouse and the jurors were picked from the heart of Silicon Valley where the company's late founder Steve Jobs is a revered technological pioneer. Patent expert Alexander Poltorak says the case will likely boil down to whether jurors believe Samsung's products at issue look and feel almost identical to Apple's iPhone and iPad. Full report in The Washington Post

As the trial wound down on Monday, the companies each submitted a proposed juror verdict form, an exhaustive set of questions members of the jury must answer as they determine the validity of the multiple patents in question in the case. A report on the allthingsd.com site notes that because there are two lawsuits in question - Apple's suit against Samsung and Samsung's countersuit - the jury will have to review both companies' claims for merit. That means sorting through the 20-odd Samsung-manufactured cellphones and tablets and checking off whether each violates one of the handful of patents in question. It also means deliberating on damages award amounts, should either side score a victory. Full report on the allthingsd.com site

A 2.4% royalty Samsung wanted on the price of the iPhone was discriminatory because the patents in question enabled just a fraction of the smartphone's features, Richard Donaldson, a former lead patents attorney for Texas Instruments, told the court on Friday. Later, New York University professor Janusz Ordover likened that rate - equivalent to $14 per $600 iPhone - to a holdup. According to a Mail & Guardian Online report, Ordover, a former deputy Assistant Attorney-General for the Justice Department's antitrust division, said Samsung's conduct distorted the decision making process in setting standards. 'It enabled Samsung's technology to be introduced, to become part of the standard,' he said. 'They have acquired holdup power.' The former Texas Instruments executive joined a string of rebuttal expert witnesses that Apple presented in court in the closing hours of the legal battle. According to a report in The Guardian, the case also heard from a Samsung designer who was challenged on whether the company was briefed by Google in February 2010 that its early tablet designs looked 'too much like' then-newly announced Apple iPad. The designer, Jin Soo Kim, said he was unaware of the briefing. Few patent-licensing companies would ever publicly reveal royalty agreements they make with others. Add Apple to the mix and you can see how that statement might be even truer. CNet News reports that Apple last week entered into evidence a document showing that it offered the South Korean company a licensing deal on some of its key technologies. Specifically, Apple offered to license the portfolio of patents if Samsung would pay $30 per smartphone and $40 per tablet. To sweeten the deal, Apple offered a 20% discount if Samsung would cross-licence some of its patents back to Apple as part of the arrangement. In addition, Apple wanted royalties on Samsung's Windows-based phones. In the document, Apple said Samsung would have owed it $250m in 2010. Earlier in the week, tempers boiled over with the judge slamming Apple for trying to book too many witnesses in its last few hours. 'I am not going to be running around trying to get 75 pages of briefings for people who are not going to be testifying,' Koh told Apple's lawyer Bill Lee. 'I mean, come on. 75 pages! 75 pages! You want me to do an order on 75 pages, (and) unless you're smoking crack, you know these witnesses aren't going to be called when you have less than four hours,' Koh said. She told both companies that she didn't trust any information that came from either side's lawyers, asking instead to see papers. Full Mail & Guardian Online report Full report in The Guardian First CNet News report Second CNet News report