Samsung v. Apple (Smartphone Patent Wars)
Articles,  Blog

Samsung v. Apple (Smartphone Patent Wars)


Samsung v. Apple is a long-running dispute
between two main mobile phone manufacturers. These two companies have been fighting with
each other over a various span that they hold all over the world, with Apple winning some
and with Samsung winning some, but the Supreme Court is going to focus on just one issue:
whether Samsung’s infringement of the way Apple’s phone look should be punished by
forcing Samsung to turn over every single penny that they’ve made on the sale of those
devices or whether the damage should be much lower and be reduced to limit them only to
the value of a particular design that Apple came up with. There are generally two types of patents. One is called utility patent and one is called
design patent. A utility patent is one that is meant to cover
the way things work. The design patent covers the way things look,
irrespective of how they work. It’s purely ornamental. Design patents are meant to cover these ornamental
features that do not affect the utility of a particular device. Currently, it’s only those patents, it’s
not the utility patents, that are at issue. The Court is concerned by whether or not Apple
has really reduced the price to fairly small features. These are not fundamental, groundbreaking
things. Whether or not by having patents on those
things, they can essentially bankrupt an entire line of Samsung products. Apple prevailed at a jury trial and a jury
concluded that Samsung’s Galaxy devices infringed some of Apple’s design patents
and awarded them a judgment in the amount of, roughly, one billion dollars. Eventually, the case was appealed to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Unfortunately for Samsung, the statute language
is fairly clear. It does say entirety of the profits. Section 289 of Title 35 of United States Code
says that when a design patent is infringed, the infringer is liable for the entirety of
his profits. The section is actually fairly clear and we
can certainly debate whether that’s a right decision or a wrong decision from microeconomics,
fairness, incentives, and so on. Nonetheless, that’s what Congress said,
therefore, Samsung was liable to figure out how much money they made on the sale of their
Galaxy devices and turn it all over to Apple. It’s going to take some effort by Samsung
to convince the Court that the statute is either not as clear as people think or at
least doesn’t make sense in a modern economy. Samsung’s argument is that people were not
necessarily buying Samsung because it has rounded edges and a button at a particular
location, and even if they’ve infringed those patents, according to Samsung, they
should pay something, but they should pay only for the value of those particular features,
and of course the value of the features is not very high. If the Supreme Court agrees with Apple, then
Samsung will pay its one billion dollar judgment plus whatever interest has accrued since then. If the Supreme Court agrees with Samsung,
then the case will be remanded back to the trial court for additional trial, not on the
issue of infringement because that’s already been settled, but on the issue of how much
that infringement is actually worth under the rule the Supreme Court will announce.

16 Comments

  • sung yong lee

    Samsung and Apple's patent litigation among other things well without knowing the design Rounded shapes its model, the copy was not anything outrageous lunatic says Samsung only as htc Lg Motorola google blackberry Lenovo sony etc. All other company in the smart phone of the corner shape round like Apple then conceptualizes sharply Otherwise conceptualizes a triangle which ideas will Samsung beak to leave kicks accusations good even as a person who studies the motdoenda design a word anyone can think so and recognized in Europe, has designed a round that Samsung copied not not only is America the only crook stand anyone think you can just its design, the $ 300 million that do pay a lot more than money is not a fool who would the results referred to the right result. So another company in which google is a design almost identical to Apple Vegas is're cheats
    Show less
    Reply

  • sung yong lee

    So how to create a rounded edge conceptualizes almost all phones with rounded corners? And do not you guys noticed that watching the triangle then conceptualizes Apple to Heptagon? You're saying outrageous eogeoji

  • KING

    Apple: look at us we made a rectangle, why sue actual iphone ripoff when we can sue a company that has more money than us that made a similar geometric shape?

  • Yumiko

    i love samsung and if this is a violation of more than one of the amendments and they dont even have probable cause so if this is the case we should sue the macaroni company for making a noodle similar to another companies box of noodles, i hope this problem will be resolved.

  • VeryZestyLemon

    for all the people that say At least iPhones don't explode, iPhones has exploded, apple tried to hide it and successfully hid it from most people but Samsung did not hide it and we did take back the phones that didn't explode too and give their a refund at least which Apple did not do but yeah that's my answer for all the people that say at least iPhones don't explode

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *