South Korean Court: Both Apple and Samsung are Guilty
August 24, 2012 3:14 PM
comment(s) - last by
A handful of older products are banned, both companies forced to pay the other a small amount of damages
Compete on the market, and stop suing each other.
I. A Tie in South Korea is a Win for Samsung
That seemed to be the sentiment from
a court in South Korea
, home to the world's largest phonemaker Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (
). Locked in an international court battle with the world's second largest smartphone maker, Apple, Inc. (
), the South Korean case was one of the first to wrap up, and comes at a time when the companies are
battling for far greater stakes
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
The South Korean court ruled that Apple had infringed on two Samsung patents, and Samsung had infringed on a single Apple patent. Samsung must pay Apple 25M won ($22,000 USD) and Apple must pay Samsung 40M won ($35,300) (20M won per patent).
The court soundly rejected Apple's lawyers' arguments to
owning the rights to designing rectangular smartphones
with curved edges. Commented the court -- there is "no possibility" that Samsung's and Apple's phones and table PCs could be mistaken for the other company's product.
The South Korean court did not think the iPhone looked much like a Galaxy smartphone.
[Image Source: Snapguide]
The court also noted the fact that Apple did not pay estimated royalties pre-trial, as it did in some other locations as a sign of ill faith. It
, "In disputes regarding patent infringement in Japan, the Netherlands and other nations, Apple deposited estimated royalty rates, or expressed its intention to do so, based on the hypothetical acknowledgment of the validity of Samsung's patents and its infringement of them. It hasn't taken similar measures in South Korea."
Given that other regions like the Netherlands had
absolved Apple entirely
of Samsung's infrigement claims, while ruling exclusively against Samsung, the South Korean's court's "tie" ruling is widely viewed as a victory for Samsung.
The decision can be appealed to the federal appeals court. An appeals decision can only be appealed before the South Korea Supreme Court.
II. FRAND Suits -- Okay?
broke with its foreign peers
, ruling that it was valid for Samsung to sue Apple using
"fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory" (FRAND)
licensed standard patents. The South Korean court argued, again, that Apple wasn't truly cooperative, and only tried to be when it felt it might lose.
Writes the court, '"It seems that Apple has sought to avoid Samsung's application for an injunction against Apple's infringement of the standard Frand patents, rather than engaging in a sincere negotiation for the determination of royalty rates based on the rational evaluation and verification of the standard patents in this case."
Judge Bae Jun-Hyun -- a member of the three judge Seoul Central District Court panel that decided the case -- acknowledged, "In the Netherlands, the same argument [by Samsung] was rejected as abuse of its patent right. But each country has a different legal system and standard."
[Original Image: Cayusa/Flickr; modifications: Jason Mick/DailyTech]
While Apple is hardly a small company, some fear the case could make it easier for large companies like Samsung -- who typically own a number of standards patents -- to demand larger royalties from smaller companies in other cases. On the other hand, with large companies like Apple
already doing that with non-standard patents
, and bullying large FRAND patent holders, this could level the playing field in other cases.
With the South Korean case over, all eyes turn to the U.S., a country where FRAND patents typically are not considered valid fodder for lawsuits. In that sense, Samsung's position in the U.S. is considered far weaker.
Still, Apple has a long ways to go to proving that Samsung's current generation of smartphones/tablets infringes on the iPhone/iPad's technology or look and design. Anything less than
a ban on Samsung's latest products
, though, would be an unsatisfactory outcome for Apple, who has struggled to keep up with Samsung in unit sales.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: Nancy Grace!
8/24/2012 6:11:30 PM
I don't know who's Nancy Grace, and I treasure that ignorance very much after reading your comment. Now I just need to resist the temptation to look up the name on Google.
"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser
Samsung CEO to Call Apple's Cook for One Last Settlement Chance
August 20, 2012, 4:11 PM
Samsung Product Chief Takes Issue With Apple "Owning" the Rectangle
July 31, 2012, 1:03 PM
Apple Plays Wile E. Coyote, Sees Galaxy S III Ban Attempt Foiled
June 13, 2012, 1:43 PM
Analysis: Apple is Seeking 10,000x FRAND Rates in Patent Lawsuits
February 29, 2012, 6:15 AM
EU Nails Samsung With Formal Investigation Over 3G Patent Abuse
January 31, 2012, 9:32 AM
Retiree Sues Apple For $7,500 for Wiping Honeymoon Photos From His iPhone
November 30, 2015, 10:23 AM
iPhone 7 May Pack 3-4 GB Memory, More Storage; 4-Inch Comeback is Rumored
November 20, 2015, 10:12 PM
OnePlus One, OnePlus 2 Will Receive Android Marshmallow in Q1 2016
November 16, 2015, 9:58 AM
Lenovo Whoa: Motorola Droid MAXX 2 and Turbo 2 Break Cover in Leaks
October 26, 2015, 3:12 PM
Leak: Apple Preps for First Real Android App Foray With New Apple Music App
October 24, 2015, 1:59 PM
Pepsi Smartphone? Empty Calories Coming Soon to the Midrange
October 12, 2015, 11:41 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information