During Samsung’s confusing closing arguments many of the points made by their Attorneys in one area actually strengthened Apple’s cause in others.

I am sure that the jury picked up on this.

this is not the result of competition, this is the result of a corporate culture that has been weaned on copyism (my new word), their lack of innovation and their addiction to copyism has served these companies fine when stealing industries from the innovators using low labor costs and toxic manufacturing to compete. tv

When Samsung got their turn at closing arguments this is how they began quotes here thx to The Verge’s coverage of Samsung’s closing arguments from the mouths of Samsung’s Attorneys

2:41:18 PM PDT “Competition is what’s built this country.”

2:41:55 PM PDT “Just think about walking into a Best Buy store. You go into the TV section. All of the TVs look the same. They’re all boxes. They’re all flat-screens. They’re all minimalist designs.”

2:42:35 PM PDT The same is true with phones, he says. All black rectangles with touchscreens.

Samsung’s logic is totally bogus, yes competition built this country but copyism (new word) like Samsung’s gave it away, ask the auto industry, ask the appliance business, yes, all flat Screens look the same , this is not the result of competition, this is the result of a corporate culture that has been weaned on copyism (my new word), their lack of innovation and their addiction to copism has served these companies fine when stealing industries from the innovators using low labor costs and toxic manufacturing to compete. Eventually this leads to low profit margins and low quality. Maybe if American television companies had been as aggressive as Apple ,we would still have some around. Apple is right to stand tall.

2:42:57 PM PDT Phones used to look like “old Ma Bell” phones. “Then technology changed.”

2:43:42 PM PDT Verhoeven cites the BlackBerry as a game-changing device. “What happened to the competition?” Every single one came out with a QWERTY phone.

2:44:24 PM PDT Verhoeven now talking about what we do with our phones. Making calls, checking emails. “Form followed function here too.”

Blackberry maybe on the verge of going out of business for many reason, many of them self-inflicted but unlike Apple, Rim’s protected secret sauce was not their hardware design, (they probably should have protected it) but rather their corporate security feature. The security feature is now the only property Blackberry has left to sell off. This argument of form and function does not explain why Samsung changed their design after the iPhone introduction. Below is an example of a LG’s Prada phone that Samsung offered as proof that subtle designs can differ this was to used to counter Apple’s trade dress accusations, it seems to me this makes Apple’s case regarding other companies ability to design different icons for instance to distinguish themselves from Apple, if Samsung devoted itself to design its own look and feel as did LG, Apple may not be suing them. I believe Apple has won this and the effect on the market will be massive. Another winner may turn out to be Microsoft. Read why here

in related news

This week, Judge Koh reversed herself and stated that she would now instruct the jury that both parties in the suit can be held liable of destroying evidence , previously she had ruled that only Samsung should be criticized. Many tech journalists cried foul , I actually believe this works in Apples favor, if Apple should win Samsung has been closed out of an appeal issue. She may have done this to entice Apple to settle but I believe this indicates that Judge Koh believes Apple will indeed win and she felt safe enough to protect herself from being overturned.