By Graham K. Rogers

Opening Gambit:

Patent Wars

Analysts and surveys had shown previously that sales were in the millions, but with the revealed figures, the article suggests that 98.5% of Samsung's sales would have to be outside the US. Now the stores that sell these devices have lots of people in them here and a number of people I know have these things, but nowhere near the numbers that have the iPad. Katie Marsal on AppleInsider adds to the comments by suggesting that they show Samsung has lost the war.

The discrepancy may be that this is all tablets, and not just those in the court case, but even so, the figures are dismal compared to what we had been led to believe. Those Apple-knocking critics might also want to take note that the disappointing quarter Apple was supposed to have had still means it is selling more iPads than it did before and certainly more than any other manufacturer.

More figures also came out Mikey Campbell reports on AppleInsider with Samsung having sold 21 million phones and 1.4 million tablets from June 2010 to June 2012. There are charts in the article giving breakdowns of the products and the iPhone figues.

This difference in figures, if it is not some sort of number-juggling going on at Samsung, will have an effect on the amount of damages Apple is awarded when if it wins the case. To get a grip on how much this could be, AppleInsider reports that documents filed with the court show that Apple did try and negotiate with Samsung and wanted $30 for phones and $40 for each tablet to cover patent licences. There was also a cross-licensing fee discussed, but we presume that these were all turned down.

On Friday Boris Teksler, who is Apple's Director of Patent Licensing and Strategy gave evidence, we are told by Bryan Bishop on The Verge. He talked about the discussions that went on between the two companies and the shock within Apple when a trusted partner produced the Galaxy S which was seen as a clone of the iPhone. He gave evidence about how Apple classifies patents and that some of the technology on the Samsung device used patents Apple did not want to licence: the difference. More from Teksler on Monday.

And it is those differences that Apple wanted to keep (for itself and its customers) that are at the center of the problems, which are perhaps highlighted by information in an article by Daniel Eran Dilger that tells us how many customers bought Samsung stuff thinking it was an Apple product (38%). I see this here, when people I know have Samsung handsets or tablets and are convinced that they can do all that can be done with an iOS device. As it slowly dawns on them, they talk about it less and less and it disappears from sight.

As part of the messy way Samsung and its attorneys have been operating, AppleInsider reports that one of the team had apparently been arguing in court without a licence -- which seems Samsung all over. This was done even though the judge issued an order that said all those appearing must be admitted to the District Court of the Northern District of California (she was OK for LA only). A mistake she claims and has now acquired the required permission although it is not known if the alleged oversight may have repercussions for Samsung.

More of the messiness of the Samsung case was brought home when Foss Patents reported that Samsung complained that Apple was attaching large exhibit labels to the rear of exhibits. Say, What? Samsung thinks these labels will confuse the jury as certain parts may be obscured. Judge for yourselves as Florian Mueller includes photographs. The Judge decided this was a non-event but does think the labels could be smaller, but is going to any problems by keeping the exhibits in court custody while the case is not in session.

Before this, however, Apple's witnesses were on the stand and they were cross-examined. According to Bryan Bishop it was a fairly interesting affair to with Samsung's legal team trying to discredit expert witnesses and tripping themselves up in the process.

Next week (or this, starting in a few hours), it is Samsung's turn and Josh Lowensohn suggests that they will be going on the offensive, trying to claw back some of that lost ground. But of course, their own witnesses can cause the most damage under expert cross-examination, especially of there has been some ambiguity to what they said.

A blogger who goes by the name of Nicklazilla (Part 22-year-old Danish boy, part sea monster) has put online a series of pictures comparing the Apple products and Samsung's homage alongside. He also provides a link to an item by Charles Cooper who points out that a possible Samsung witness (Apple wants this testimony blocked) claims they did not copy anything and that the phone design was inspired by a glass of water. They have rectangular glasses in Korea?

Graham K. Rogers teaches at the Faculty of Engineering, Mahidol University in Thailand. He wrote in the Bangkok Post, Database supplement on IT subjects. For the last seven years of Database he wrote a column on Apple and Macs.