Dan Levine and Poornima Gupta of Reuters:
Apple attorney Harold McElhinny started off by showing slides that featured old Samsung phones from 2006 and compared it to the Korean company's newer smartphones from 2010.The key question, McElhinny said, would be how Samsung moved from the old phones to "these phones."
"As we all know it is easier to copy than to innovate," he told the court. "Apple had already taken the risks."
Starting things off with this kind of claim is, to say the least, inconsiderate and ill-researched. Samsung did change the design of its phones after the iPhone, but so did every other manufacturer out there. The only major difference between the Korean company and competitors is that all of its products did more than closely resemble the iPhone and, in some areas, blatantly copied Apple's product. I don't think this should have been taken to the current level of "it [was] easier [for Samsung] to copy [rather] than to innovate."
Honestly, it's appalling to see Apple being so hypocritical in something like this. After all, it stole Xerox's operating system to create the Mac. I don't care if Jobs made it better. He still stole it! (Then Bill Gates stole the Mac OS for Microsoft shortly afterwards, so maybe they're even.) Now that Apple is all grown up and powerful, however, it wants to make sure no one gets to the level that it's at. That way there's no competition, which means that the Cupertino-based corporation will dominate the market. It's as if the company thinks banning competing products will help innovation when in reality all it will do is destroy the market.
Innovation is not a lawsuit and it never will be, so stop wasting your time already.