Lawyers for Apple and Samsung have kicked off their high-stakes US patent trial, in a dramatic day which saw Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan managing partner John Quinn reproached by the judge overseeing the case, reports The Recorder.

The dispute, in which Apple is pursuing a record $2.5bn (£1.6bn) in damages, centres around the claim that Samsung ripped off the unique design features of its iPad and iPhone.

The Quinn Emanuel team representing Samsung got off to a rough start with US District Court Judge Lucy Koh, who was irked by the US firm's managing partner before the jury entered the courtroom.

Quinn asked to admit as evidence images of Samsung mobile phones before the iPhone had been introduced – a request already rejected. Quinn said he had never before begged the court, but he was begging now.

"Don't make me sanction you," Koh snapped. When Quinn persisted, she angrily asked him to sit down.

Samsung subsequently issued a press release in the afternoon saying that "the excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design."

The trial got underway with Apple's lawyer, Morrison & Foerster intellectual property litigation partner Harold McElhinny, telling jurors: "Apple had a vision that technology should be about much more than functionality. It should be about experience. How you react to products, the look and feel, would be just as important as what the device was capable of doing."

McElhinny told the nine-member jury that Samsung deliberately copied features of Apple's products, such as their rectangular shape, rounded corners and flat black screen, knowing the features were patented. He showed jurors internal Samsung reports comparing Apple's products to its own and recommended imitating Apple features.

Apple also will try to show that Samsung infringed utility patents, which are related to features such as the ability to zoom in on a document or a 'bounceback' feature that tells users when they're at the end of a list or a page.

"Samsung had two choices: accept the challenge of the iPhone and create its own products so it could beat Apple fairly in the marketplace or it could copy Apple," McElhinny said. "As we all know it's easier to copy than to innovate."

Quinn Emanuel partner Charles Verhoeven, representing Samsung, repeatedly made the same point to jurors – there's nothing wrong with being inspired by someone else's design. Yes, Samsung compared its products to Apple's, he acknowledged, but that does not prove the company stole Apple's ideas.

"It's called competition," Verhoeven said. "It's what we do in America."

Verhoeven said he would show that Apple's own experts admit Apple has no right to claim a monopoly on features such as rounded corners or flat, black screens.

Samsung also plans to present evidence that Apple's designs were not revolutionary: Apple's engineers got their inspiration for the iPhone design from another company, Verhoeven claimed.

"The evidence is going to show that Samsung hasn't done anything wrong," Verhoeven said.

The trial, which is slated to last four weeks, will resume on Friday.

The Recorder is a US affiliate title of Legal Week.