Apple v Samsung explodes in bitterness

The case of Apple v Samsung is turning out to be a corker. Cupertino accuses Seoul of copying its 'trade dress' and infringing its patents, but the South Koreans say Apple's evidence is selective and its experts can't agree. Judge Lucy Koh is not amused (despite her amusing official picture).

In IT Blogwatch, bloggers break out the popcorn.

By Richi Jennings: Your humble blogwatcher curated these bloggy bits for your entertainment. Not to mention a PSA: I've turned on Google 2-factor authentication. Have you?..
  
        
John Paczkowski and Ina Fried read the exhibits:

Apple has shown snippets of an internal Samsung document. ... And it’s a doozy.
...
[It] evaluates everything from the home screen to the browser to the built in apps. ... In each case, it comes up with [this] recommendation...Make it work more like the iPhone.
...
Of course, to win its case, Apple will have to prove...that either it infringed on the specific design and utility patents...or that it infringes on specific design elements...what’s known in legal terms as trade dress.
...
Samsung [says] its products don’t infringe and that Apple’s designs and functions [aren’t] patent-worthy.      

Michelle Fitzsimmons adds judicial insight:

Samsung's lawyers accused Apple's counsel of tampering with evidence...tweaking the...Samsung phone to make it look more like an iPhone.
...
Lucy Koh, the perpetually harried U.S. District judge presiding...deemed Apple's claims credible, telling Samsung lawyers she didn't "believe [their] story."
...
Susan Kare, a designer who was part of the early Macintosh team...[and] designed classic icons like the "happy Mac"...[said] Samsung's phone display screen designs produce the same overall visual impression as the iPhone's...because of its grid, four rows of icons and colorful mix of square icons.      

But, as Greg Sandoval recounts, Samsung's also accusing Apple of destroying evidence:

Samsung wrote to...Koh and pointed out how few were the emails that key Apple managers...turned over for discovery. ... [They] allege that Apple failed to meet its obligation of preserving relevant documents.
...
Up to now, Samsung has been the party most often accused of litigation misconduct. ... Now Samsung wants the jury to be instructed that Apple destroyed evidence. ...the tactics being used are getting closer to...hair pulling and eye gouging.      

And Kellen "kellex" Barranger searches for perspective:

[It doesn't] prove that Samsung “slavishly copied”...the iPhone, but...this certainly isn’t helping. ... Trying to prove that your rectangle was copied by another rectangle is one thing...[but] stuff like this is simply embarrassing.
...
Whether or not they did completely copy all things Apple is up to the judge to decide.      

Meanwhile, Chris Dixon opines thuswise:

Sure, Samsung copied Apple. But consumers benefited. ...court interference would be anti-consumer. ... You really think Apple needs/needed [a] government granted monopoly?      

      
And Finally...
PSA: I've turned on Google 2-factor authentication. Have you?

Richi Jennings is an independent analyst/consultant, specializing in blogging, email, and security. He's also the main author of Computerworld's The Long View and IT Blogwatch -- for which he has won ASBPE and Neal awards. A cross-functional IT geek since 1985, Richi also publishes a full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.