Apple and Samsung face iPhone 'copying' verdict

A jury has retired to decide whether Apple and Samsung unlawfully copied each others' technology and designs for in the iPhone, iPad and Galaxy ranges, following a bitter trial that laid bare some of the secrets of the industry.

A US court will decide whether Samsung copied Apple's smartphone and tablet designs

Closing arguments were delivered in a federal court in San Jose, California. The jury will begin deliberations today.

Samsung attorney Charles Verhoeven urged jurors to consider that a verdict in favor of Apple could stifle competition and reduce choices for consumers.

"Rather than competing in the marketplace, Apple is seeking a competitive edge in the courtroom," Mr Verhoeven said.

"[Apple thinks] it's entitled to having a monopoly on a rounded rectangle with a large screen. It's amazing really."

Apple and Samsung are going toe-to-toe in a patents dispute that mirrors the struggle for industry supremacy between the two companies, which control more than half the booming worldwide smartphone market.

A win for Apple could have a major impact on the industry because the South Korean company's mobile products are run on Google Inc's Android operating system, popular software that is used by many other manufacturers. Before he died, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs told his biographer he intended to go "thermonuclear" on Android, saying it had copied Apple.

If the jury determines Samsung violated Apple's valid patents, US District Judge Lucy Koh could impose sales bans against the Korean company's products.

Apple attorney Harold McElhinny urged jurors to consider the testimony of a South Korean designer who said she worked day and night on Samsung's phones for three months.

"In those critical three months, Samsung was able to copy and incorporate the result of Apple's four-year investment in hard work and ingenuity - without taking any of the risks," Mr McElhinny said.

Apple is seeking more than $2.5 billion in damages from Samsung. An Apple expert said Samsung earned 35.5 per cent margins on the tablets and phones at issue in the lawsuit from mid-2010 through March 2012, on $8.16 billion in U.S. revenue. Samsung has disputed that figure.

Apple accuses Samsung of copying the design and some features of its iPad and iPhone, and is asking for a sales ban in addition to monetary damages. Samsung, which is trying to expand in the United States, says Apple infringed several patents, including some for its key wireless technology.

Both Apple and Samsung used a series of internal emails, witness testimony from designers, product demonstrations and mockups to present their case.

Mr McElhinny laid out what he said was chronological evidence that showed Samsung copied Apple's designs. He also told the jury that, while Apple brought many of its top executives to testify and face cross examination, Samsung had presented no major decision makers.

"From the very beginning, Samsung has disrespected this process," he said.

Both firms have accused the other of violating court processes in a trial that has highlighted the bitterness of their rivalry in spite of the fact that Apple is Samsung's biggest components customer and accounts for 9 per cent of its revenues.

McElhinny focused on a meeting between Samsung and Google executives in February 2010, where Google asked Samsung to stop imitating the iPad so closely.

"Samsung executives chose to ignore that demand and continue on the path of copying," he said.

Samsung argued that consumers would not have mistaken one of its devices for an iPhone.

The trial, which is in its fourth week, has revealed details about the famously secretive maker of the iPhone and iPad, some substantive and some just colorful.

Among the evidence were emails sent by Apple's Internet services chief to top Apple executives, urging them to consider a smaller iPad and indicating that Jobs was warming to the idea.

An Apple industrial designer described working around a kitchen table with his team to come up with the company's mobile products.

Its patent licensing director also said Microsoft Corp was one of the few companies to get a license for Apple design patents, but only because Microsoft consented to an "anti-cloning" provision.