Apple decided to put its patent licensing director, Boris Teksler on the stand, where he testified that Apple had licensed the iPhone and iPad statements to Microsoft, with a clause that prevented the Redmond based company from the production of any devices implementing Apple’s designs. Furthermore, Teksler also said that Apple had reached out to Samsung with a similar deal in 2010, thus confirming the presentation document which was presented in court the week before. He also stressed that the number of times that Apple had licensed its prized technologies at such affordable prices were very few. The clause that prevents the production of clone devices could be the reason why Microsoft never released a Zune Phone. However the announcement of the surface tablet has raised brows once again. However, that would be another lawsuit all together.
The Judge had instructed both sides to meet face to face over the weekend and submit their jury instructions on Monday. Copying, is not legal in any way, however, Apple is trying to convince the jury that this case falls right under the category of wilful infringement and even indirect infringement. Samsung on the other hand continues to assert that they didn’t copy Apple. However, even if they did, there doesn’t seem to be any infringement of patents from Samsung’s side. Samsung is also trying to put forth a point i.e. in an industry with similar products only shows that competitors tend to adopt similar designs whether they are patented or not. The judge’s decision on the jury restrictions could decide the verdict of this case.
In other news, Apple’s internal research has revealed, why consumers now prefer Android over the iPhone. These findings were released by Apple, in the course of the ongoing lawsuit against their Korean based rivals; Samsung. During that time (in 2010) around 25% of the Android owners, considered the idea of purchasing an iPhone before settling for an Android. Of the 25% evaluated, around 43% of them didn’t want the iPhone because they didn’t want to switch carriers. Google’s brand name was the reason for 36% of the same and 30% wanted a phone with a larger screen. Realising the carrier exclusiveness issue, Apple was quick to expand to other carriers as well, thus increasing their brand value and also their market share. Apple moved away from its “first love” and decided to expand in an attempt to gain quickly in a short period in time.
