Apple, Inc.’s (AAPL) high priced legal team liked a post by blog TmoNews enough that they’re using it as “evidence” in court. The post describes how Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KRX:005930) (KRX:005935) dropped Universal Search from the Galaxy S3, only to later add it back with a software update.
The author of the post — David Beren — expresses enthusiasm for Universal Search’s return, which Apple is citing as key evidence that Android users saw the feature as a selling point.
Apple is seeking $2.191B USD for accused infringements on five of its patents, including U.S. Patent No. 6,847,959 (filed: Jan. 2000, granted: Jan. 2005) — the patent it says Android’s Universal Search infringes upon.
But apparently Apple can’t handle what the public — or at least some supporters of Google Inc.’s (GOOG) Android operating system — think of it. As noted by FOSS Patent, Apple has heavily redacted the comments, removing such gems as:
Who cares, we’ve had content searches on OS since way before the iPhone did it. Hate this lawsuit garbage.
The people that were deprived of such privileges due to crapple’s non-sense
ismell another stupid lawsuit by crapple
Apple’s lawyers claim they just don’t want jurors to be “confused.” So to avoid confusion they will black out at least half of what a person wrote so that their comment can be taken entirely out of context. The lawyers write:
[The exhibit] should be redacted to remove irrelevant, inaccurate, and prejudicial reader ‘Comments’ that were appended to the online article, including irrelevant and inaccurate references to this litigation and the 1846 case.
Any conceivable probative value of reader Comments speculating about and disparaging this case (and there is none) would be substantially outweighed by the high risk of confusing, misleading, and tainting the jury.
The Samsung Galaxy S3
Samsung naturally isn’t happy with the redactions, but it has to tread lightly as it performed redactions of its own to remove certain unfavorable commentary about its 2012 lawsuit loss to Apple.
Apple is afraid that buyers prefer larger Androids to its smaller devices.
[Image Source: Getty Images]
Apple used a survey of users to estimate the value of the five patents in the case. It considers its slide-to-unlock patent the least valuable, and the universal search patent the second least valuable.
At this point the case is viewed largely as an effort by Apple to squeeze some sort of large per-device licensing fees from Samsung. Recently published documents in the case reveal Apple is upset about its slowing growth and is considering adopting a “me-too” approach to Samsung, move to larger screen sizes and devices priced at under $300 USD unlocked — the key segments its says are growing globally.
The piracy police made one 9-year-old a very unhappy camper
ZMAX will come with a Snapdragon 400 processor and 720p display
UC Davis dares to go where Toyota won't with the Prius
An Apple spokesperson fires back over Microsoft's latest commercials
Engadget gets the scoop on Dell's latest "ultra-portable" notebook