Apple vs Samsung Verdict - Case Study Example

Graphic Aids Table of Contents Graphic Aid Apple Share Price 3 Graphic Aid 2: Samsung and Apple Smartphone Designs 5 Graphic Aid 3: Summarizing the Clash 7 References 9 Graphic Aid 1: Apple Share Price Graph Source: Google Finance, 2012 Graph Source: Yahoo! Finance There are several ways to interpret the first graphic aid, comparing the performance of the stock prices of Samsung and Apple, the two warring parties in this analysis. It is to be noted that while the share prices of the two companies have done relatively well, with both companies enjoying increases in the stock prices over the past two years, the improvement in Samsung’s stock price over the past two years can be considered to be more dramatic, relative to historical prices. From the plots, it is clear that the jump in Samsung’s share price year on year is more dramatic, rising by close to 50 percent, as can be judged from the highest and lowest points in the plot, and comparing. On the other hand, Apple’s share price has seen a more dramatic increase in terms of absolute amounts, rising sharply from the low of about US 400 dollars to peak highs of US 700 dollars (Yahoo! Finance, 2012; Google Finance, 2012). On the other hand, focusing on the most recent performance of the stocks, it is clear that while Samsung’s share price has plateaud somewhat with the share price stabilizing around 1.3 million Korean wons, the share of Apple from the most recent poll has seen a kind of dramatic drop. In the plot, one can see that from the high of US 700 dollars, the most recent share prices are below US 600 dollars. The prognosis for Apple moving forward is a bit shaky, and the recent drop in the stock price may be an indication that the investing public is not so enamored with the prospects of the company in 2013 and onwards, given the more recent missteps made by the company relating to core technologies for its smart phone, as well as missteps relating to the way it has priced its new tablet offerings as well. In contrast, Samsung’s price reflects some stability (Lappin, 2012; Yahoo! Finance, 2012; Google Finance, 2012). Graphic Aid 2: Samsung and Apple Smartphone Designs Graphic Source: Evans, 2012 The images tell a story, from the point of view of Apple, about how Samsung smart phone designs have evolved over time, and with the iPhone introduction as the mark point for comparing how Samsung designs changed with that milestone. This graphic has been used by Apple’s lawyers before the court to make their case with regard to their claim that Samsung basically copied the smart phone designs of Apple and iPhone. Prior to the introduction of the iPhone in 2007, the graphic shows that Samsung phone designs were largely rounded at the bottom, many with keypads, and had small screens. There were also navigation buttons at the center, and in all the phones reflected older design paradigms for the smart phone, lacking touch screens and having visible antennas at least in one of the design. Also, the design for the user interfaces were not optimized for touch, with the screens and the images on the screens being small, and lending themselves to being manipulated with the use of the keypads and the navigation buttons. One notices that the iPhone image is placed front and center, and larger than the other photos before and after the iPhone launch. One can see too, that past that launch, the Samsung designs are shown as having become radically different in comparison to the designs prior to 2007. In place of the keypads and the navigation buttons, there came rows and rows of icons, that lent themselves to being touched directly, with no recourse to the older physical user interfaces. In place of the rounded bottoms, the designs became more linear and rectangular, similar to the design aesthetics of the iPhone. One can see, for instance, that the top left most Samsung phone design has very strong similarities to the iPhone, including the icon placement sand colors, even as the Samsung design had more icons. Other phone designs in the right hand side share similar rectangular designs with straight lines and large touch screens, making a break with the past (Evans, 2012). Graphic Aid 3: Summarizing the Clash Graphic Source: Smith, 2012 The graphic summarizes the key arguments and assertions that the two parties in the case made. It is noteworthy that both Samsung and Apple claimed that the other party infringed on key technology patents, and the patents under question are neatly described next to the photos of the primary smart phones that represent the product lines of the two firms. On the one side, Apple’s iPhone graphic details the complaints filed by Samsung against it. On the other side, Samsung’s smart phone graphic likewise details the complaints filed by Apple against it. The right side graphic involving the Samsung design is noteworthy for having a long list of smart phone styles/brands associated with it, indicating that Apple’s copyright infringement complaint traversed through a large portion of Samsung’s smart phone product portfolio. We are made to understand, for instance, that the particular smart phone brand being compared to the iPhone is the Samsung Galaxy, and from the looks of it, it seems that there are indeed similarities in the outward physical design of the Galaxy and the iPhone. On the other hand, the left hand side graphic is also telling in that iPhone’s alleged patent infringements likewise traverse through its more limited product line, and in this particular case it is the iPhone 4 that is shown to have infringed on vital Samsung patents relating to data prioritization as a technique to manage battery life and the resources of the phone; pictures switching; scroll action to enable the taking and email sending of photos; music playing and multi-tasking; and efficient data packaging and transmission. On the other hand, Apple’s complaints centered on outward design and ornamentals; icon design; tapping action for documents enlarging; differentiating multitouch and single-touch gestures; and the so-called “bounce back” when the scroll action reaches the page bottom (Smith, 2012). References Evans, J. (2012). Forget Apple v Samsung, coming soon it’s Apple v Google. Computerworld. Retrieved from http://blogs.computerworld.com/smartphones/20896/forget-apple-v-samsung-coming-soon-its-apple-v-google Google Finance (2012). Apple Inc. Google. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NASDAQ:AAPL Lappin, J. (2012). Apple is so 2010. Forbes.com. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/joanlappin/2012/10/31/apple-is-so-2010/ Smith, C. (2012). Apple v Samsung verdict: members of the jury share details about $ 1 billion ruling. Android Authority. Retrieved from http://www.androidauthority.com/apple-vs-samsung-verdict-members-the-jury-share-details-about-1-billion-ruling-110509/ Yahoo! Finance (2012). Samsung Electronics. Yahoo!. Retrieved from http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=005930.KS#symbol=005930.ks;range=2y;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined; Read More