July 31, 2012
Apple vs Samsung Day 1 Was All About Sony Style And Jury Selection
Michael Harper for redOrbit.com — Your Universe Online
Kicking off their big dance in Judge Koh´s court, Samsung once again brought up the issue of “Sony Style” and whether Apple borrowed design cues from an interview given by Sony designers wherein they discussed how influenced they were by the iPod´s stylings.
On Monday, Samsung changed their argument slightly, asking if they´d be able to introduce testimony from the Sony designer in question, Shin Nishibori, instead.
According to the Wall Street Journal´s Ina Fried, Judge Koh said she didn´t understand how they´d be able to introduce this testimony without submitting evidence which has already been excluded from the case.
Furthermore, Nishibori has already said he wouldn´t appear in court, saying he is currently in Hawaii “recovering from medical issues.”
Pushing on, Samsung filed their Motion for Reconsideration, arguing that leaving out the Sony Style argument could directly affect the outcome of the trial.
“The Court´s Order striking numerous demonstrative exhibits from Samsung´s proposed opening statement for the jury trial set to begin today threatens the fundamental fairness of this trial and will compromise the integrity of any verdict,” said Samsung´s legal team.
After this little argument was brought back up, the juror selection process began, providing its own set of challenges for Judge Koh. For instance, as the trial is taking place in San Jose – otherwise known as Silicon Valley – finding jurors who aren´t already aware of the suit or who don´t already own one of the two tablets can be difficult. In fact, finding a juror who doesn´t have some sort of connection to Apple or Google can be even more difficult, as Judge Koh and the legal teams discovered.
When asked if the jurors had read anything about Apple or Google, one held up a copy of the day´s Wall Street Journal, saying she read all about the case today. Judge Koh asked her to recycle it immediately.
The jurors were then asked what kind of phones they currently used and what phones they planned to buy in the near future. Judge Koh then said she expects the evidence portion of this trial to run through August 17th and could go as long as August 21, asking if any of the jurors would face a financial hardship by sitting on a jury for this long.
At one point, 4 potential jurors claimed to own patents themselves. One such juror said they own as many as 125 patents. The Samsung lawyer asked one of these patent holders why she was using a basic feature phone rather than a smartphone.
“I use the phone to call people,” she said. “For the data, well I am on the computer all the time,” she said.
The lawyer then asked one woman who said she was planning on buying an iPad why she wanted to own one.
“I love the technology,” she said. “You can just sit around in the yard and play with it,” said the potential juror.
When Samsung´s lawyer reminded her that other companies make tablets, too, the potential juror responded, “Apple comes out with really, really nice stuff.”
One of the potential jurors was a Google employee with patents relating to Android, and though Judge Koh said the juror answered each question credibly and without bias, Apple stuck by their effort to have the juror removed.
In another bit of courtroom fun, one potential juror was asked if they had any reason why they couldn´t be a part of this fair and unbiased jury.
“I work for Apple,” the juror said. The juror was immediately dismissed.