Apple/Samsung case emails about marketing, not invention

There is still discussion about Judge Koh's ruling on Apple's motion, e.g., Apple v. Samsung II: Twisting the truth in Judge Koh's court. Note that what Apple does, or does not, practice is irrelevant to the question of whether or not Samsung infringes the claims at issue. Another secondary matter arose on Friday, in testimony related to marketing the devices.

from cnet


Those [marketing] themes continued Friday [April 4, 2014], with Samsung's defense emphasizing what it saw as Schiller's frustration with Apple's marketing effort.

Another email, presented during Schiller's cross-examination Friday, revealed that after watching one Samsung pre-Super Bowl ad, Schiller commented in an email to Vincent: "It's pretty good and I cant help but think 'these guys are feeling it' (like an athlete who can't miss because they are in the zone) while we struggle to nail a compelling brief on iPhone...Something drastic has to change. Fast."



And, from Forbes, basically saying patent fights over hardware are looking backward:


The real innovator’s dilemma now lies in how companies like Apple embrace the platform. Let’s call it something else – the platform-owner’s dilemma.


If hardware still provides the bulk of revenue and brand value then embracing the service platform is hard to do; the shift to services is halfhearted and new opportunities are not mined out properly.



As Kodak might have said, give away the camera, sell the film. But now, what film?