Gadgetory

sup girl hey welcome to Virgin chat special edition apple vs samsung I'm nilay patel the are we sure we run the music the whole time Creighton all right I'm nilay patel i'm joined by matt meharry in Arizona what's up dude hey how's it going ah pretty well and we have brian bishop on the phone right right although that we gone it's going really well so Brian this is a this is a crazy edition of our special edition it's also the second episode so I guess it's not that crazy but brian is live from the trial so this week the trial that was scheduled for five days of testimony and Sabrina's there today and this is your lunch break are you eating yeah we I'm not even a sense right now I'm in my car in a parking structure next to the courthouse so it's very exciting Wow um are you like selling drugs like what's going on I don't like to talk about that all right so let's I know you have a limited amount of time let's uh let's talk about what's going on so real quick Brian you want to give us the rundown of what happened sort of an on Thursday and Friday last week and into this week yeah well mean first off the bat you know something interesting this morning judge Koh asked basically both Apple and Samsung CEOs to get together talking one more time before the trial goes to the jury for deliberation she'd have come to that a number of times you know before and I still do it one more time against a day they're hoping to go she was really pushing it evidence you know all of it has been this week Apple wants to call Susan kare back one more time who can't until Monday but just so that we said if you can't get you know care industry she was going to be out you know for her money and also I arrow down the case basically no she cut three phones the international galaxy s galaxy s2 and the ACE from the trial altogether because Apple couldn't prove that they were sold in the US yeah I'm so she that's undergoing a trim down their claim you know even further she battles done a bunch of stuff that happened this morning and the last couple days and we saw samsung finally going to cone you know kick into their case you know after apple basically bring out the best terms of birth the two patents that they say Apple has infringed that was all this morning yeah it was a pretty dry stuff we're talking about me how essential patents about 3g you know packet length and you know regulating powerful channel like super Drive stuff and I was kind of cute await started because out of nowhere samsung Display deposition testimony can choose and tell employees with no context whatsoever and then put an expert on afterwards to kind of explain that he's still on the stand so he's going to be wrapping up should I take the back here at the bread for lunch we have a samsung understand some designer coming in you know we just start like two minutes to four lunch break start again I that follows a an icon designer to Samsung called yesterday the kind of gives men to do their design process but a little weird actually they kind of struggle for talking about you know how hard stance and designers work Apple dogs be pushing out how dedicated their teammates how much they work and then the same thing she mentioned a I working on the galaxy s really split two or three hours a night and kind of out of nowhere just volunteered that she just had a baby is it closed him away from 50 and when she had about breastfeeding which was just odd but definitely convey that they're committed you know she was definite committed to her job yeah it's it's human interest that's what they're doing yeah absolutely but I made a point and it's interesting the industrial designer that speaking today as well the icon designer both from Korea they speak cooing and they're having a translator go and in both cases we kind of saw John plan you know emerge from the shadows kind of question both of those witnesses again no nobody had a meaner yeah so he's kind of you know emerging again and obviously imagine those vista testimony are very carefully you know constructed Orchestra don't want to throw you know you're leaving a lasting appeal then if you have a translator involved so it makes sense but interesting change of control vero and been dealing with the laudable of the most I mean so it sounds like Samsung is kind of their opening tak was to go with the invalidity kind of argument right and depth later yeah they introduced that I show different they witnessed had their different product they focus on one called launched I'll won't call the diamond touch table at a number witness we speak about that no I mitsubishi diamond touch everybody remember that good amazing product that changed the world bennett but you know it's an overhead projector you know showing you images down on a capac there's really the software that you're really interesting one is called fractal normal on his Mandelbrot yeah and that does Joe very similar single finger such going and you know your gestures IE doing that kind of stuff and it was pretty people pretty compelling than they showed it and the other piece of software was a little bit less though it was called launched I'll this was like a new Idol is developed I'm actually sure of running on the the ipaq which is another thing was pitching the world right um and basically had a rough approximation kind of inverse bounce back features long story short on this trigger you I you'd have like a huge field of tiles you can drill down one level for the screen to cut into quarters and these were chillin those files if you score a little bit you know old hunk left to right or up and down we didn't go far enough and the page would kind of like mouth snapback and the information that that was so much of the bounce back feature and she strolled to the edge with this thing it didn't drink special there was no you know revealing the blank space and having it out back the edge so there's a visual chief was interesting but wasn't necessarily a direct corollary the bath pakpattan all right even more visual example was this thing called tablecloth that was on the diamond touch and that was basically they shirt it looked like a Windows desktop and you could use a finger to go and scroll up or down and would deal reveal a second desktop right behind it like a mirror image exacting image and then he let go of that it would snap back again so once again interesting visual similarity but not the same functionality I mean definitely not you know what was described in the past back patent which is very very specific about what they're doing note how that office works right so Matt let me ask your a patent lawyer right aren't you isn't that what you do for us I don't get and I used to hate him um what's your take on kind of this this prior art that they're showing and how it kind of relates to Apple's bigger case well I said from the beginning I think that's where I think that's where the best case is for defense because I don't think they really have much of a non-infringement argument at least on these older models that that used to practice these various features um but you know I don't know how a jury is gonna receive it because I think well the bounce back feature whatever they call it in that diamond touch is not the same thing doesn't match up very well with the claims um but you know that doesn't necessarily mean a jury won't kind of draw the won't kind of put it on top of there and figure out a way to to see it as it as an invalid ating reference but I just don't what were the other ones what was what did they use for invalidity on the tap tap to zoom Brian that hasn't shown up yet I mean there's a thing like they were kind of hinting at it with the with launched I'll and that you know if you could like would zoom up but in terms about that being a very specific thing now you double tap or you single tap in and zooms up they haven't had any you know direct corollary to that one the one I took it and really good shot with though is fractal zoom did that pretty much looks like the exact same thing so Brian what's the jury when they're going through this not you know I completely agree with Matt that invalidity adding Samsung's devices especially the older ones the galaxy ass Aeneas to I mean they did they do the same thing so I you know there's the non-infringement is whatever but I think the better argument and kind of argument that any most of us believe should be true is the invalidity argument that these ideas have been around that Apple got patents on them by drafting claims around the prior art and what's the jury when that when what's the jury looking like when they're going through kind of the tech goal here's X it doesn't compare to apples why are they engaged they bored what's the situation they're into everything as long as it seems to be you know visual or design related and I think that's the way it feels in the quarters and you know like everybody is engaged by that stuff when it starts cooling down to the real specifics of technical patterns of stuff today it gets really really smoothie it started going to stay engaged because they're doing down to such a level you know there is never seen source code today there wasn't being shown up on the public screen is that we couldn't see but you get that a level of granularity that it's just you know it's just hard to being engaged with my preset up here in as well as they could have by dropping into their stuff today I kind of out of left field but you know the most part of all the design stuff they're really really engaged and you know several of the example Samsung showed earlier this week in terms of prior art for the iphone and ipad design patent was compelling others i mean they're not necessarily the exact same kind of x you look at all the illustrations up together next to the the iphone patents they do look like you know rectangles they do have like center screen there's a lot of similar elements there so depends i think and how well the jury is going to go in and buy into you know what the distinguishing elements of those features are like how how broad is just you know a centered screen you know how important is the world lines on the side how important is the notion of the bezel in terms of an actual vessel or the impression of one from yale a plastic you know line the plastics it kind of compare to how they can interpret all this stuff yeah so actually let me talk about non-infringement for a second because i just i just remembered something that I definitely wanted to talk about last week Brian you caused what I would call a firestorm of controversy but because Samsung was trying to show that its devices did not infringe several of apples patents I think chief among them that the scroll back patent the the bouncing scrolled everybody knows I'm talking about and they were showing some devices and it wasn't clear what they were showing and it wasn't clear that they were even using the devices in a way that would cause behavior and you wrote there trying to mislead the jury in a head I agreed with I think Brian agreed with two can you explain what was going on with that argument and why you reacted so strongly to it well they're about three or four examples over the course of the day and actors / startup that they were showing a galaxy tab 2 7 is the original Galaxy Tab basically thing like you know look it doesn't go and have this bounced back feature to which the extras that will know it doesn't version i did and there's several different yo applications in which should have that functionality no such like a direct direct like assaults as things like no you're just line it was just a weird way to approach because it wasn't necessarily like they're talking about the new show to specific it was just a device didn't say what version of the OS was running didn't say what version is actually was running just here's something that has that same form factor that doesn't do this you know this you know we're going to throw hear that you're wrong here in correcting your line which is just weird because there can be a versions depending on each other software updates back but it doesn't have behavior but those are the important elements that deter other that's legitimate or not yeah like you have to go by that effect is presented that with no context felt really really weird and they call it up later they were showing on bounce back sures with her for one in the browser scrolling up and down and saying like what we're strolling up and down and it's not having the bounce back but they weren't scrolling all the way to the edge of the screen which is what activates the bounce back in the first place and the witness corrected them and i was just kind of odd and they went back to another one they're talking about you know single finger scrolling dual finger scrolling you know dual finger gestures method and the base that has to witness you know do any other do this galaxy tab you know how to duel finger scrolling and he said but what doesn't they said well yes it does and they basically showed a video of a user you know basically scrolling with two fingers what they were doing is they were moving her fingers you know in and out while they were going into doing while they were scrolling it's also works on an iphone the same rate or not you know and I've had the same way and trying to misrepresent that as two finger scrolling was incorrect that's not the way the devices work if you're talking about do Samsung devices you know scroll with one thing I didn't have gestures with two they do right so Matt let me ask you is this is this just more courtroom theatrics is this what patent attorneys trying to do in front of a jury to try to they try to evine is this is this presenting a case zealously or is this technical and constantly it's lame lame because you know there's times when there's greater how you describe things compared to the claim language and whether or not you're arguing about whether your features the same if its operating the same way but when you're actually you know kind of playing games like that I don't know what you're gonna prove because I assume you mean it sounds like the expert called them on yeah and even if the expert wouldn't have you know that Apple's attorneys would have on redirect so I it I just think it makes you look bad I don't think it gets you anywhere I mean the bed do you think that they have a good non-infringement tactic at all I mean you're Samsung's attorney what do you what do you say on the designs may be better um I don't think they really have that I mean it sounds like the no I think I'm the designs it's about it because I don't think that what's come out when we saw some of these dealt with specially designed patents and pulmonary injunction motion and co judge Koh said you know she pretty much dismissed all the claims except ended up being the tab 10.1 but um in each case for the design pad she says there I think there's one that she didn't but it's likely infringed and likely valid but there's no a reparable harm so I mean and we're talking about the same basic prior art here now I don't know if the diamond touch was part of but I know that other table what's called the Brian do you whatsoever not the second a lot of us do what is it wats problem well launch atop yes that was that was part of the preliminary injunction motion as well and it didn't went the day obviously so um no I think on designs they might have it i mean juries different than judge code they can convince a jury you know where they can convince judge go but i still don't really see the utility patents getting and I think it's pretty clear there in fringe so I mean that's a if you knock out one or two of the designs may be one of the utilities I mean you still have a pretty big case going forward um for Apple you know whether it's an injunction or damages right looks likely damages it's still significant about so let me let me ask about in terms of pairing this down samsung argued that Apple shouldn't have included the International Galaxy S the S 2 and the galaxy ace which is funny because I ranted and raved about why the galaxy ace was in the trial last week so i'm assuming samsung listen to me and took action on my words obviously what does that mean I mean the galaxy s2 in particular the international s2 was a massive selling device a huge hit around the world does that affect their damages calculation does that affect I mean and you know in many ways I think the s2 in the ACE they they touch on those design patents much more directly than some of the other products the epic touch 4g right i mean i don't think that it's a qwerty slider it looks appreciably different whereas the acs to they look very much like the iphone just getting around the case reduce apples damages claim does it reduce the effectiveness of their case Matt what's kind of your sense there and then Brian I want to get your sense about how that's playing out in front of like the jury my sense is that it's not a huge you know this is the hard part we haven't been able to get exact number breakdowns of where each one of these phones kind of falls into the damage model yeah so I know that yes you know there's a big part of these that hurt us sales and to be realistic the International was i9000 and and i 9100 yep s1 and s2 variants those should never been in the case because they were there's never any indication that they were sold directly to the u.s. other than through some yeah the reason internet purchase you got a ship there but um so I don't really see it I don't know I don't know if it's maybe brian has a better idea because he's heard him talking about that and kicking those phones out of the trial but I and really seen a number attached right well Brian let's talk about when they got kicked out because it was another contentious samsung moment in the court when they were arguing that that they should were they they should kick these phones out can you talk us through what happened there and and sort of what what the judge in Samsung's attorneys were discussing yeah well those public is like you know at the end you know we've seen through service coracle as well you know at the end of the case you know each side kind of like you know files for a judgment basically um you know things right in this case samsung basically said no we want to go and you know file that Apple temporary things so we should just win and everything's good and just you know the days leading up she said like hey you know I just want to do these oh maybe he'll want the rule 50 thing to these big deal i play ball at the trial I'm going to happened you know Sam someone to go and provide a a lengthy argument gone like you know mentioned multiple details about you know why thought they thought apples you know hadn't proved its case and whatnot and a toe got very very frustrated was like basically I've never had anybody need to go and you know file like a written brief for a rule 50 this is ridiculous now they made their card with me the arm and finally she said okay and it went on for about an hour like I know which took a while yeah but was interesting because they talked about these phones she rejected you know basically rejected everything up they requested expect for these free phones but Apple to put up a fight like Apple very you know there's a brief discussion about an apple and basically shape it like you know what's the deal Apple said okay and then that was just over you kind of like this oh my god so he's a kind of felt like Apple was really wasn't fighting that hard for it either right me because why would they who cares I mean they're not sign if I mean there's a loser already yeah it is whether they would have been put it out in the first place expected effect they're trying to go and get like the demarcate marquee like non carrier branded versions of these things up here just like they're just pure entitle you know galaxy s and also the truth is you know a lot of those comparison documents that we've seen have been for you know the original gallic yes not the domestic variants it's just you know these icon comparisons my coffee no toys like to a tree at this point you documents internal Samson documents comparing the iphone to dig out the other GT i9000 thing you know how can you prove it to be more like the iPhone and so I feel like that may have motivated part of what they wanted it in there isn't if it's not in a certain point maybe there's a controlled as much water yeah um but uh but it wasn't like Apple put a big huge training with spite of the day kind of like no let it go on the doll well yeah I mean I think you're right i mean i think they got to they got to do discovery on the galaxy s2 which is the phone that led to all the u.s. variants and then when samsung threw it out there like whatever we got our necessary evidence in front of the jury and now we can just say like you saw the samsung fascinate became was from the s2 and here's the process that led to the s2 i'm not sure that they couldn't have gotten there in a more indirect way by saying the precursor but they did it they accomplished a goal so Brian let's talk a little bit about what happened today with the judge asking asking both sides to pare down their cases saying please don't confuse the jury get your CEOs together you both have a lot to lose what's your sense there from her I mean what was that I was that moment like she's always made at the beginning she's been pushing every way to go and like you know this down because she did not wanna have a long trial she saw something move along her she has no criminal cases coming up she wants you know move on to so she's never been shy about basically saying you know like you know cut it down be reasonable um it was interesting cuz you know she start after this narrowing basically bringing out the three funded and kicked out as an example of like now hey you know you guys really didn't need to go and ask for Apple later you can kind of go through as well a couple more in a couple more long but then she asked the Aspen since the CEOs to meet again and both sides agreed readily the loving any hesitation there but it was interesting because she kind of a cold mountain a couple things you said you know basically I see bad things to be in store for you for both sides if there's goes to trial you know ethernet you know we get a berth is not hung jury it can still play out bad and then she kind of called it out it was really really great she put the whole reason guys are doing it just to make everybody really really aware of your intellectual property mission accomplished now it's under stop but yeah it was closed if I called it up up because obviously that's a lot of what's going on here I think there's a lot of you know a lot of you know chest beating on Apple's part you know she make it really really really scared to go and that's what they're they're designing a patent force people to go and design around yeah another way she's doing what she has to do because you're never going to get people to settle if you unless you convince them they both have something to lose so I mean she's kind of just doing what every judge would do well I mean my assumption is that the settlement talks have been going on in the background of this the entire time I mean it Matt I mean there's no way you would have a trial without constantly talking about settlement with the other side through I think there's been a lot of settlement I think it's uh I mean that brings up a good point we chose documents that came up an end of last week that showed that they know exactly the details of some of the offers that Apple made or the deal they were trying to work out at least initially with Samsung um that's been going on many many more times than we could possibly know I'm sure um even up to date i mean i think those talks that we've seen right before the trial and then like a month or two before that those are just you know kind of the judge forced them to get in the same room but I'm sure it's nothing more than they've been doing already well I mean do you think that actually co saying you got to get Tim Cook you've got to get the CEO Samsung whose name I'm just not going to butcher in this forum you've got to get these guys together in a room and they've got to be the ones who make the settlement agreement I mean do you think that the lawyers are having settlement conversations and co is just pushing the actual executives to do something or is it this a show I don't under to trial and I don't know how helpful it is because we've already seen him getting a room together yeah leastwise right and nothing's come of it um and I think and I think we have a pretty good idea why I mean I don't think we've seen kind of surprisingly just how how willing Apple was and I I want to qualify that there will they were very willing to settle but you know think about their offer they're willing to give their whole portfolio even these people don't quote fundamental core patents but the price was very high and it was a big dispute here I thinking the reason it's not settling is because in the end in these cross-license deals you usually have a net winner Annette payer internet winner and I think apples asking for a huge amount of money and getting all of Samsung's portfolio and a cross-license and only given them like a 20-percent discount yeah he's done that portfolio so they're coming out with big money on the other end of that and there's ego problems with that with Samsung there's there's value problems because they do have whether or not it's really the same type of portfolio it's pretty clear it's not yeah but there's still a lot of value in it you know with regard to some of these standards pads and some of the kind of core fundamental hardware pads so i think it's i think it's just that apple would settle i just think they probably aren't moving off to moving off those big numbers brian they are big they're I mean they're huge cuz there compared to we thought Motorola's offers a you know 2.2 dollars and twenty-five cents a unit were insane or two dollars in twenty two point two five percent that's what it was yeah yeah it was that's what I was not dollars I'm crazy I they want bucks per night for samsung vo/nat forty bucks for tablet I mean that's that's bonkers so Brian let me ask you when you're in the courtroom and this is this is wild I'm basically asking you like dude like us magazine body language reading here and I mean what what is your read on the lawyers and the executives who are showing up every day are they ours Apple side like ignoring Samsung they are they talking to each other before and after are they throwing spitballs at each other what's what's your vibe of the emotion in the room you're not seeing anybody talking to each other and that was that's a big difference from google oracle because they would always kind of powwow or beef on their seems I don't know if it it's like it's necessarily contentious but it does seem like they people know they came out and chatting it up and being cool you know after everything wraps is usually like one side on their side the other side on the other side in terms of executives there's been some Samsung executives they've been in the overflow room with some that are no in the scan they're just very very reserved and are interacting with people of general but I know it's also a matter of you know of styles of the attorney everyone we have their own kind of you know five you know in the courtroom yeah that kind of carries over of uh you know they're arguing about you no objections and all these kind of things you know that can go and get a little heated because you know they're both getting press Biko on both sides she's having them both kind of you know you know hurried along or be more realistic or anytime should get them to go move things along quicker she does she's not you know she's a true both so if you have both sides are your organic or point that can get a little frustrating there can be some cutting off and that kind of thing now on that sometimes happening you know then what the situation that can be happening out in front of the jury right although most patients are try to keep it really mellow and for the old guy and that present like a nice you know become you know accommodate right so let me ask you who is it's been what two weeks two and a half weeks now with us for you yeah who's that who's kind of the smoothest lawyer and on what side because i know in Google Oracle was was clearly robert van nest on the Google side who was leading the charge in terms of being the most charismatic after the jury who who's really leading a charge here you know it every splitting stuff up it's hard to pick a particular person I think belvera joven is actually is pretty good because you he's given witnesses can kind of get can kind of get defensive you know he's good at kind of you know being fun and so as bill price for that matter both on the Sampson said they're both like really really good and working with witness um you know Apple you have a William Lee who can to keep it going for people yeah you know without me like a big jerk you can kind of like you know do those great you know it's almost like a courtroom chief knowing where he's like now what about this and you're like that without coming off like a jerk ya know and Michael Jacobs was also attorney for oracle uh he does always feel vaguely just kind of floating above everything is not very engaging on a human personal level I don't feel like yeah um now which I think there's a problem that when Oracle of Oracle yeah so it kind of a kind of you know it's kind of various in person to person you know the one person I think that still you know has some stigma attached them and this may I don't know if the jury feels this way cuz they didn't see what we saw but it's over time here John Quinn on Samson said that stuff your septic expecting something outrageous to happen but that was acetone he said early on that's probably why he hadn't been around so much that yeah well I mean he did make it seem like he was and he's not and he's like a famous litigator you know like he's he's a high-end attorney he's not a cheap guy to having her side and it's funny that he set this tone of being completely out of control at the beginning because that's not as well and it could be fair like you know both sides both of these teams are so smart and so good and so professional you know it's need to go and see them do this thing even if they're like no strange tactic but these are all just like really really smart people and everything they do I think you know is very very calculated and intelligent there's always a motivation behind so and i was talking to brian about that and he said it's interesting to judge a house up in the coracle case was Barry I mean I think there's a couple times he said you know great arguments he was kind of appreciated the lawyer those going on to the most extent oh but Co is Jesus had it him you come right out and say at her you know I need a written down I need evidence cuz I don't trust anything you guys say in this courtroom yeah yeah that's pretty harsh you don't hear that very often from a judge talking to lawyers are representing clients in front of her I mean that's that's bizarre why I think there's I think you know my theory on this is this goes back to them trying to settle I think the gamesmanship at trial is ultimately about leverage in these other conversations that are happening and I think on many levels both Samsung and Apple maybe not at the legal division but in the executive division cannot believe that this has gotten this far and that there will be a resolution then the jury will make a decision and that you know either Samsung has to pay two billion dollars or Apple us to pay however much and have some of its patents and validated that they think are treasures you know I don't think their executives believe that that day will come and so they're playing this game brinksmanship and they're using the court as a proxy and I think judge Koh really sees that I think she understands that that really what's happening in a courtroom is a proxy for what it's happening in a settlement or conference room somewhere in settlement negotiations and she's really irritated about it I mean that's the sense in any of you think they're gonna settle before do or during deliberations uh I yeah I kind of do at this point I kind of do I it just it's so dumb I mean how can you run one of these companies if you're Tim Cook in the jury is in deliberations how can you say we're going to leave it up to the 29 guys right Brian or nine people rather yeah we're going to leave it up to these nine strangers we don't know to decide the value of our patent portfolio and the value of what Samsung did to us in the past with these other devices if you're running Samsung how do you say we're going to let these nine people decide if we have to pay apple two billion dollars like that to me is great you know you made your case you presented it you you know the verge ran a hundred stories about your internal documents like that's great and it's all wonderful but at the end of the day just these companies have to continue to compete in a broader level they have to continue to partner and if they can't figure this out I mean I do think it'll be like the last day of deliberation unless the jury goes away for like ten minutes and they come out and like yep they did it like I don't don't worry you know I got good yeah I mean I think it would be the best of both worlds if they did because we get all the fun we had all the funds yeah and oh yeah the market hasn't really changed that much in others and I think behavior has changed like we talked about last week yeah I think things aren't different between what Samsung's doing now and what they did then so that's you know perhaps a good thing so I think you still get the change you maybe want you get some value because I'm sure that there would be some money exchanging hands in any settlement um and and it like so we got we got to write about the stuff and see all these cool documents Ned an oddly Apple didn't really I think a lot of people worried they would settle or thought they might settle because they'd be afraid of all these documents but for the most part this stuff what we saw was all very interesting but it's all historical well you know I had I talked to a source of mine a person who worked on the iphone and I said you had better get ready to relive 2006 before the trial started you better get ready to relive 2006 because you're going to see every everything that ever happened I mean that time of your life is going to be poured over and examined by the press and we're going to talk about in this person he/she mermaid I mer man could be anyone said to me that's cool I want people to know how much hard work we did to make the iPhone because nothing like it existed before and I think that was the attitude at Apple I think that it's like whatever it's out eunos on we're not talking about the iphone 5 we're not talking about the next iPad we're talking about it came out three years ago and changed the industry to have at it this is here are all of our bad ideas it didn't change the industry you know like I don't think they care and you know that to me this this idea that Apple is some like irrational crazy actor that doesn't know how to run a business it is like purely emotional and operates on passion alone is insane herbal decor thing it yeah i mean like looks so yeah so Steve Jobs might even CEO of Apple and he might have said I'm gonna blow up android spend all the money but he had to report to a board of directors and he had an army of employees who could say that is stupid like ultimately that is stupid and I don't think even even Steve Jobs I don't think had the power to say we're going to blow all of apple's enormous amount of cash reserves on killing Android just because I'm mad I think it's something there's there are plenty of checks and balances on system to Brian I know you're going back into the trial right you're right it I had to jump off yeah we're we're starting up in seven minutes here so I there to jet alright well hey this it's I think next week it's not five days next week is it no no we're three days from here on out and like unless you know co is hoping the third of the jurors may be in deliberations you know uh you know in next next week so this thing is going to be progressing even quicker show all right well Brian it's great to have you will looking forward to more reports this week for me and we'll have you on the podcast again next week absolutely thank what guys take care sit all right guys all right man any any last you you cut off Matt there's mad again now you got two brides that's right to bryant's better than one man can we get a Batman to brians double Brian and we filed Matt can you write something up so Matt let me get some last thoughts before we go um I mean how do you how do you think Samsung's on the offensive now right they've done invalidity they're starting to get into their friend patents all other stuff how do you think their offensive case is going to play with the drain and then we can well I've been I've been trying to get a feel for that from Brian yesterday and today it sounds like it's really kind of scattered they were jumping around between kind of their offensive case no now that they're presenting you know the primary doing all the direct examinations they jump in between you know kind of invalidity non-infringement jump back to their offensive case on their pads and I think now it's kind of settled into just their offensive case today on their patents and my guess is it's incredibly boring they have you know unfortunately they have to have translators in there for a couple of witnesses so it's very methodical and dry and slow yeah and I think that doesn't help it and I just learned something from Brian today um I just really bizarre to me as they were as they were questioning I mean they were presenting their evidence on these fran patents which we know are the case in us from the very beginning I thought that was the biggest snafu that Samsung made is keeping those patents in the case going before a jury because first you have apple presenting their story their narrative nap ha peers and we're innovators and and then you then you get to the to where Apple's defending and then they get to bring a story back up and say see these bad guys now they're trying to throw Fran patents and standard pads it's desperation so I figured you know they would buy the end it would just eliminate those and that's because there's such a such a wart on their case that I had a hard time believing they would keep it um but then I found out today that for some reason something's happened in this case and I'm not sure where if there's been some briefing that we did see but there the judge and Samsung is basically keeping apple from really asking these experts anything about Fran shoes I mean they're talking about the wireless technology they're talking about whether it's actually performed by the iphone and the ipad which ones that are talking about licensing i think with Qualcomm and infineon but when it gets too actually Apple trying to tell a story about these are Fran patents that are standard you can't do this with them it's getting cut off really the drivers kind of wine yeah apparently they're objecting and the judge is sustaining the objections on those issues and I I'm not sure if that's because they haven't opened the door enough to it but I don't know why because to me that's I mean the easy argument for Apple there is we can talk about this all day long because it affects the damages we have to pay on these patents because they're Fran patents and the percentages are lower and you can talk about what it means to be free and but for some reason they're just they haven't been able to get into that story and that could be huge for samsung if they can present these pads as kind of normal patents and not really get into the obligations yeah under Fran I think they can avoid that stigma well but there isn't yeah honestly I did the the legal mechanics of this or so opaque um but you know they don't have apple doesn't have the the breach of contract claim at issue here right I mean it's just a patent infringement claim it's either you do or you don't not you didn't finish fast yeah you've got it you've got to put the claim in there though right I mean it's you either you do infringe a patent or you don't and then the stuff of well we had to infringe Pat in order to use the standard or we have a contract with this standards group that you will license the patent to us that to me I mean that those are alternate claims aren't that yeah yeah but I don't understand I guess they've tried to actually talk about it so that's the weird safe they keep trying to go in on this and and Samsung's quick job Jett and the courts keeping them away from it well and it seems like if you're arguing on our freshmen you could also be arguing and maybe maybe it's a case okay night you bring up bring up your you do cross on yeah I don't know to me it seems like these woods would be the witnesses but maybe it's just because they're experts on infringement right and that's not relative to the Frant so at some point they'll have somebody up there that can actually testify as to the standards part of this yeah using Apple's gonna put up somebody some old french engineer from from etsy yes to be like that'll be great alright well Matt I think we should wrap this up we've we've gone plenty deep this week always a pleasure to have you ghost Brian I'm gonna miss you next Wednesday Creighton that's next Wednesday we're doing this again and we'll be cruising towards either a jury or a settlement by then I would say this case is like three quarters done I mean I don't the fact that co was trying to steal streamline the case more didn't really make sense to me because cases almost done I think she doesn't make of that big sheet of paper the jury that says here's 50 and then twenty phones um I'm that's that's got to be it so um well we'll see what she does we'll be tracking at brians there I started again according to his seven minute calculation and we'll keep you updated for the rest of the week and we'll be back again with the podcast next Wednesday so thanks very much for listening that's been the verge cast special edition apple vs samsung mat thanks a lot buddy very good times over wednesday you