[rayiner]

This is the stuff that gets missed in these debates. It's not like Apple's attorneys got up in front of the jury, drew a rectangle with rounded corners, wrote PATENTED across it, then sat down.

Rather, stuff like what you linked to is what causes juries to award $1 billion. E-mails along the lines of "let's make this look more like the iPhone." Presentations along the lines of "why isn't this more like the iPhone?" Surveys along the lines of "75% of people thought this looked like an iPhone." Market data on customer confusion, etc.

This particular presentation is pure gold. Slide after slide that basically convinces the jury that Samsung didn't "play fair" and copied someone else's work instead of doing their own.

[sreque]

You know what else gets tossed out of these debates by Apple patent defenders? The fact that Samsung is continuing to have success in invaliding the patents they are being sued for:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/20/samsung-looks-to-h...

[IBM]

The patent wasn't invalidated.

>The Patent Office has been re-examining the claims of the '915 patent, and Apple recently responded to the agency's questions. However, in the document filed by the Patent Office on Wednesday, the group said that it "respectfully disagrees" with Apple's claims about the technology and that Apple's arguments "are not persuasive."

>The Patent Office comments don't invalidate the '915 patent but mean that Apple will have to provide more information and argue for the validity of the patent.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57613191-37/samsung-asks-j...

Other patents have been reaffirmed on reexamination.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/10/us-patent-office-confirme...

[aroch]

Except not really. This isn't actually "final" in any way shape or form. USPTO reexaminations have to pass preponderance (aka, better than 50%) which is a terribly low bar and the Federal Circuit has a higher standard required. Apple can still amend and clarify claims to reinstate the patent.