This transcript is automatically generated
I was speaking of the market is a jury awaiting apple one billion dollars in damages in the Samsung patent case.
Really move the markets today the verdict found Samsung to have in had infringed on Apple's software and design patents of mobile devices are at.
Bowl is seeking bans on eight Samsung devices including its tablet big galaxy tech patent attorney Christian granny and Forbes publisher rich Carl -- Joining us.
Now gentlemen thank you for being here rich I understand you brought along -- us it's a little bit of a show -- -- you have the Samsung gallery galaxy yet that the -- phone.
Which -- like quite a bit.
Some people of actually thought that that was the new version of the iPad the smaller version of the iPad and I wonder as a result of this verdict.
Whether or not competition that leads to new products might suffer as a result of this verdict.
-- David I'm I'm afraid that that might be the consequence semi and I think it's I love apple I live in -- shadow here in Silicon Valley was a fan of Steve Jobs.
I think Tim Cook is a marvelous.
CEO but I think it's a little bit of -- an irony that the very week that apple becomes the richest company that ever -- -- breaking might Microsoft's market cap record.
It also wins this suit in the implication is is if you're huge.
You can sue everyone and I just don't like what that's going to duty innovation.
And I would really hate to see marvelous and you know improvements like the Samsung galaxy note this huge slam light phone.
You know be thwarted.
Yet yet Chris you seem to think this is good for innovation.
Because I can understand -- the little guys are scared of the big guys they're not gonna take any innovation risks you think otherwise.
I really do but I think that the notion that this is gonna stifle.
Innovation is is no different than.
For any other patent for that regard I mean this is.
This is how the patent system was device that to work I mean it's it's ingrained in our constitution.
That we provide a limited monopoly for a for a limited time.
The idea here what when when there -- been a finding of infringement what we're going to see now.
Is parties including Samsung and other competitors of apple.
They're going to have to go back to the drawing board and devise new unique and appealing looking designs for too long consumers have been confronted with the choice of basically.
Tablets and Smartphones that look basically the same competitors and huddled around a -- winner with apple.
And they continue to produce those types of designs I think we're gonna see -- hungry unique industrial designers and -- and didn't design savvy companies coming out with new and exciting.
-- -- -- -- you just showed us the Samsung galaxy which I assume is part of those one of those products that.
Apple claims was was -- crib from their own -- and it looks pretty different from the iPhone looks pretty different from the iPad so.
You know but yeah they must think it is -- yeah have been doing stuff that's new.
You know what apple tried to patently tried to patent the curved glass -- -- ridiculous that would be alike.
General Motors you know having a patent on curved windshield now for fortunately apple didn't win that.
But let's call a spade a spade here the real enemy is not Samsung her.
Any of the hardware manufactures its Google I have to go back a year ago.
-- little more than a year ago when Steve Jobs on his deathbed told us biographer Walter Isaacson.
That he wanted to commit thermonuclear.
War on Google's Android software system which powers these phones.
Now apple is pretty savvy politically and they were Smart not to sue a fellow American company.
They would lose a lot of their support Silicon Valley if they did that so they're sending a message to Google by suing Google's hardware partners.
Chris let's talk about how far they can go with this can apple truly ban some Samsung phones from him the market.
Well -- a couple couple not notes there.
Firstly with respect to what they did and didn't patent you know that the patent office does a rigorous examination towards what -- -- either gonna allowed has to be -- it has to be non obvious.
That's -- ornamental in the case of a design and are useful in the case of -- utility patent.
Furthermore the jury has looked up precisely at this issue and of course Samsung's attorney's -- scrutinize the validity of these -- up and down but -- it but to no avail.
As far as Ford looking the band that rests in the hands of presiding judge -- Whose whose -- was presides over the case the -- in the notion of to give an injunction or not that lies with the judge in this particular case there's three things that boat and Apple's favor.
One they are actually practicing these patents -- actually -- this is not a non practicing entity secondly the parties are direct competitors.
And and thirdly these are not -- that implicate you know health or public safety interest so therefore conventional wisdom would say that the judge will likely enter this injunction okay.
Well we report you decide folks -- which has an article in today's Wall Street Journal where he outlines.
His case that in fact Google is the company that apple is really -- to get gentlemen very interest thing that divergent set of views we appreciate it.
It was truly can balance yeah.