The trial of Apple versus Samsung is once again providing some interesting insight into a company as secretive as it is successful.
Apple Senior VP Phil Schiller testified on Friday that, following the iPod, Apple was looking for another category it could reinvent. The iPod, Schiller said, allowed Apple to move beyond being a successful but niche player in the computer market.
“This really changed everybody’s view of Apple both inside and outside the company,” Schiller said on Friday, resuming testimony that began toward the end of the day on Tuesday.
People suggested all kinds of things Apple could do, Schiller recalled: “Make a camera, make a car, crazy stuff.”
Schiller said the company had been working on the tablet computer that would later become the iPad, but decided to shift its attention to the phone.
“At the time, cellphones weren’t any good as entertainment devices,” Schiller said.
Apple is charging that Samsung “slavishly copied” the iPhone and iPad, infringing on various patents, and seeks more than $2.5 billion in damages. Samsung denies that, and also argues Apple’s patents should be declared invalid.
To bolster its case of the iPhone and iPad as revolutionary, Apple is having Schiller go through a list of reviews for the iPad and iPhone. We’ll spare you that part.
Schiller also noted that with both the iPhone and iPad, there were plenty of doubters.
With the iPhone, Schiller recalled top executives from Palm and Microsoft predicting the device’s failure.
“Probably the biggest reason was that Apple had never had a phone before,” Schiller said. “They expected we would fall on our faces.”
There were similar concerns voiced about the iPad, Schiller said, with plenty of people in the tech industry doubting the success of a device without a physical keyboard, particularly for content creation.
Earlier in the day, Judge Lucy Koh, the federal judge overseeing the case, denied Apple’s bid to have Samsung sanctioned for a press release it issued discussing evidence that had been excluded from the case.
Koh also ruled that Apple couldn’t keep secret a survey that Apple has done of iPhone buyers. Schiller is now testifying about that, but making reference only to excerpts. Apple has said it will appeal Koh’s ruling and, for now, the company is only referring to bits and pieces that it says it will file publicly.
Update, 10:20 a.m.: Schiller revealed some interesting statistics on just how much it spends on iPhone and iPad advertising.
In fiscal 2008, the company spent $97.5 million on iPhone ads in the U.S. alone. That figure climed to $149.6 million in 2009 and reached $173.3 million for all of fiscal 2010. On the iPad, the company spent $173.3 million in 2010.
10:41 a.m.: Schiller was asked what his first reaction was when seeing Samsung’s first Galaxy S phone.
“I was pretty shocked at the appearance of the Galaxy S phone and the extent to which it appeared to copy Apple products and the problems that would create for us,” Schiller said.
“Customers can get confused as to whose products is whose,” Schiller said, noting that particular challenge with billboards and TV advertising where customers only get a glimpse of the product.”
Competition is great, Schiller said, saying plenty of people compete with Apple fairly, developing their own products with their own design. But Schiller said when company’s copy they are trading off the goodwill and investment Apple has made.
Schiller said he was even more shocked when he saw the Galaxy Tab.
“I thought ‘They are just going to copy our whole product line,’ ” Schiller said.
Schiller said that some customers are choosing to buy a Samsung product because it looks like Apple’s product. Then, as a result of owning that device, Schiller said, they are more likely to by another Samsung device.
“I absolutely believe it has had an impact on our sales,” Schiller said.
Now it is Samsung’s opportunity to cross-examine Schiller.
10:49 a.m.: Samsung’s attorney is working to get Schiller to agree that once you have a software keyboard, there is an opportunity to remove a physical keyboard and therefore have a physical screen.
He gets half. Schiller agrees that you can remove the physical keyboard but says there are many factors that go into screen size.
Samsung is going to try, over the course of the case, to lay the foundation that a large rectangular screen is an obvious outgrowth of having software keyboards. This was a part of its opening argument.
10:53 a.m.: Schiller now being shown an email between two Apple employees with one discussing that there were many things that the iPhone wasn’t first with, but was rather the first commercially successful with those features. For example, the LG Prada had a big touchscreen and, when it comes to being the first with lots of apps, the e-mail notes that Palm had 10,000 or more apps prior to 2005.
11:01 a.m.: Samsung’s lawyer is focused on trying to get Schiller to agree that some of the design characteristics of the iPhone are “functional” versus “ornamental.” He’s not using those words, but that’s the goal. That’s because Apple is asserting several design patents in the case and design patents are limited to features that are ornamental and not functional.
11:03 a.m.: Next up, Verhoeven is trying to show that people take a lot of time when making a phone as it is a major purchase. The goal here is to rebut the idea that customers are confused into buying Samsung products.
- Apple’s Phil Schiller on How Apple Came Up With the iPhone and iPad
- Apple Loses Bid to Keep Customer Survey Secret
- Samsung and Apple Speaking to One Jury, Many Audiences
- Samsung: We Weren’t Trying to Mess With the Jury
- Judge Koh on “2001” Evidence: I’m Sorry, Samsung, I’m Afraid I Can’t Do That
- Apple: Litigation Misconduct Is Part of Samsung’s Legal Strategy
- Samsung Goes Public With Excluded Evidence to Undercut Apple’s Design Claims
- Apple Designer: We’ve Been Ripped Off
- Apple Designer: Even Steve Jobs Doubted the iPhone at Times
- Apple Literally Designs Its Products Around a Kitchen Table
- Samsung: Apple Didn’t Invent the Rectangle
- Apple: Samsung Took the Easy Road and Copied Us
- Day One of Apple vs. Samsung Starts With Another Debate on Apple’s “Sony Style”
- Samsung Thwarted in Bid to Show Apple Has “Sony Style”
- As Apple and Samsung Head to Court, Here’s a Handy Cheat Sheet
- Key Witness No Longer Works at Apple, Doesn’t Want to Testify at Samsung Trial
- Can I Get a Witness? Sure, Here’s a Whole List of Them, as Apple vs. Samsung Heads to Trial.
- Apple’s Case Against Samsung Gives Rare Glimpse at Dozens of iPhone and iPad Prototype Designs
- Samsung Makes Another Case to Have Apple’s “Sony Style” Put Before Jury
- Apple Tries to Torpedo Samsung’s “Sony Style” iPhone Charge
- Samsung, Apple Even at Odds Over Where They Will Sit at Trial
- Documents in Apple vs. Samsung Give Reporters Plenty to Chew On
- Samsung, Apple Reveal Names of Those Who May Testify at Next Week’s Trial
- Apple’s iPhone Has Sony Style, Says Samsung (Full Trial Brief)
- Apple: Google Warned Samsung Against Copying Us
- Jury to Hear That Samsung Failed to Preserve Evidence in Apple Patent Suit
- Apple to Samsung: You Give Us $2.5 Billion and We’ll Give You a Half-Cent-a-Unit Royalty
- Apple vs. Samsung: Another Patent Slapfight, Another Exasperated Judge