'Apple does not own sexy,' Samsung claims as Schiller cries wolf once again

Get the most up to date on iPhone/iPad technology: Ipads Advisor

Apple’s leading PR bod Phil Schiller has actually asserted Samsung’s trademark violation lessened the international view of the company’s ingenious verve and made it more difficult to sell the iPhone and iPad.

During the retrial (as if the world needed one) of the great Apple vs Samsung patent war in the US, Schiller said Samsung’s copycat strategies triggered the tech buying public to question Apple’s design skills.

Schiller, Apple’s Senior Vice Head of state of Worldwide product advertising, told Judge Lucy Koh he was ‘rather shocked’ when Samsung revealed the first Galaxy S. ‘They went and copied the iPhone,’ he stated.

‘It weakens the view that the world has for Apple,’ Schiller added, saying it triggered consumers to ‘question our development and design skills in a manner that people never utilized to.’

Bringing sexy back

Samsung’s legal agents struck back by holding up a Galaxy Tab and asking: ‘Apple doesn’t possess a patent on an item being lovely or attractive. Is not really that fix? Apple does not possess the right to prevent the design of this hardware?’

Upon being shown the 10-inch Galaxy Tab, Schiller responded: ‘I do not know which Samsung gadgets are allowed to copy our devices and whiches aren’t. It appears like an iPad.’

The retrial occurring in California doesn’t center on whether Samsung is guilty of patent violation, but around the damages that Samsung must pay.

In August in 2012, the jury ordered Samsung to pay $1.05 billion in damages, (around $650m, AU$ 1.12 bn) although that was later rescinded to a lower amount.

Apple desires $380m (around ₤ 235, AU$ 406m) in damages, however Samsung just reckons it ought to have to pay $52m (around ₤ 32m, AU$ 55). Regardless of the outcome we are pretty sure they’ll be at least 5,627 appeals and counter-appeals from one side or t’other, so strap yourselves in people.