Hearing request to dissolve and declare his win for Apple's recent filing was not approved by Judge Lucy Koh. The trial is taking place on Day 6 (now U.S.), Ms. Lucy has requested the presence of some senior executives at Apple, including senior vice president of worldwide marketing Phil Schiller and vice president of advanced IOS Scott Forstall. The characters will turn out in court to receive questions from the lawyers of the two parties. Apple filed the petition to dissolve his court victory and deal with the reason Samsung has many errors in the proceedings, typically sending information to the press without permission of the court. Apple argues that although the jury is not exposed to other false information, but each individual member can withstand the pressure from relatives and friends have seen that the media content (in the first part of the hearing today, Ms. Lucy had asked each of the jury on this issue, the results showed a negligible effect and she continued to allow the trial as planned). Immediately after Apple filed an application to Judge Lucy, Samsung has expressed fierce opposition. Korean electronics company said that "it is an insult to the jury", and "it requires Apple's nonsense." But get rid of a "blow drank pond" quickly, but Samsung still can not celebrate now, because Lucy had a judge rules for Samsung on how the evidence cited to argue before the court. She lists five main reasons related to the purpose of the Samsung when using evidence "design of the Sony" and documentation of former Apple engineers designed Shin Nishibori. Specifically, the following five reasons: Rejected Apple's claim that the iPhone is a revolutionary product Denies copying design Conclusion that the industry in general is directed to a standard design To demonstrate the ability to design activities that Denied the mistakes made in a deliberate Of the five reasons listed above, just due to the number 4 is Lucy accepted. That is from this time Samsung may cite Apple's internal mail as well as other specialized materials as long as it must be related to the operational performance of product design. Previously, Apple's legal team sent a letter to Judge Lucy Koh expressed concern about the adverse effects can occur for Apple to use the materials in sales and customer surveys of Apple in court . Lucy suggested her company must ensure that sensitive documents must be sealed thoroughly. The hearing today spend more time with senior vice president in charge of global marketing at Apple's Phil Schiller to answer questions from lawyers and judges. Phil's role is to prove to a jury found that the design of the iPhone and the iPad, and how to develop and bring Apple products to market is unique and unique. Convince the jury on this point means that Apple prove damages caused by the company Samsung Korea copy them to take on the Galaxy line of mobile products. The question for Phil regarding many issues, from the development of iPhone (and iPad) to Apple's advertising strategy for two products in the period from 2007 to present. The first question belongs to Harold Mcllhenny, Apple's legal counsel. He asked Phil presentation on the development of the iPhone. Phil said, "we began to research ways to bring entertainment features on mobile phones .... At that time, we recognize that some mobile products do not respond well entertainment needs .... iPhone is a completely new concept. A generation of new mobile phone. To help users understand the features of the iPhone, we've split them up into 3 elements " . Would you remember at the launch of iPhone in 2007, Steve Jobs was referring to a device containing three elements: a widescreen iPod with touch controls, a mobile phone offers revolutionary, and an Internet connection device advanced. Next, Phil mentioned the market reaction when I first saw the iPhone. Many comments were made, from suspicion to admiration, and the end result as we all know: the iPhone very successful, "later sales of total sales of approximately predecessors combined." Switch to iPad, Phil said tablet is "a product segment dead" at that time. Thus, the introduction of iPad is a big gamble for Apple. Similar to iPhone, iPad get a lot of skepticism from the market. However, two of Apple's mobile products have been very successful, according to Phil, thanks to the following reasons: good design, easy to use, software and hardware optimization. When analyzing the samples iPad, Phil stressed that "these beautiful colorful icon" on the display - which directs the attention of the jury on the design patent. Then Phil mentioned a bit about the survey to their clients, including assessment of the importance of design on the outside of the iPhone 3G and iPhone 4. 85% of respondents said design elements important / very important in their purchasing decisions. The rest, Phil focused presentations on strategies and advertising costs spent on Apple iPhone and iPad. Apple gives the jury two DVDs containing the advertisement of the iPhone and the iPad, but Samsung's DVD iPad protest. Next, Apple put a lot of data on the cost of advertising for the iPhone and the iPad, for example, 2011 is 228.6 million USD for iPhone and iPad is 307.7 million. The next section begins to question related to Samsung. Phil asked about his assessment of products to see Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab. "I am quite shocked to see the design of the Galaxy S because of the level of copying Apple products it .... I was more shocked when I saw Galaxy Tab. I think they're copying the whole line of our products Doing this .... that consumers are confused because they do not know who created the products. It reduces the value we create for Apple, and for the product itself this product. It affects the way customers think about Apple ". The question of Harold's done, to turn Charles Verhoeven - Samsung lawyer, questioned Phil Schiller. Charles's questions revolve around the products of Samsung and Apple have made consumers confused or not. Representatives from Samsung offers two devices, iPhone 3G and 4G Infuse to ask a question for Phil, but Charles took a wrong phone other than Infuse 4G model. Phil witty "themselves but also embarrassing." Basically, Phil was general consensus of opinion that Samsung copied Apple iPhone and the iPad, and "I believe that customers can be confused." If Apple focuses on the Samsung designers find ways to reduce the importance of this factor down. Charles doubt Phil survey data given above, and provide other data design elements which do not affect the decision to purchase (only 1% of respondents selected). Phil countered immediately, because Charles does not explain the survey methodology, the figure above is worthless. Representatives of Samsung Phil then asked directly whether Apple has changed the design for iPhone 5 or not? Opposing this question but not, Phil replied, "I will not disclose confidential information about upcoming products." Above are some key points in the trial is taking place today between Apple and Samsung. Essence will continue to update and transfer you to read the next evolution. Source: The verge, SlashGear, SlashGear, SlashGear, SlashGear ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment