Once again, I'm going to turn your attention to Apple and Samsung; but this time focusing on Apple's challenge of Judge Lucy Koh's decision to allow Samsung to continue selling products that were found to infringe some of Apple's patents. Last class we learned about injunctions, and how if a product were found to infringe a patent, the court could order the violator to stop the shipment, manufacturing, and sale of that particular product. Judge Koh's decision in this particular instance is interesting given that Apple believes that the court did not go far enough. Apple claims that Samsung "deliberately copied" their iphone and ipad products and are simply getting away with it. Overall this is an ongoing debate that becons the questions of how far is too far? Is paying $1 billion in damages enough? What about an injunction? Does that go too far? Although motivations for resorting to patent litigation are often multipronged, it is clear that in this instance, Apple feels incredibly threatened by Samsung's Galaxy and tablet devices, enough to want the court to forcefully stop its production.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/apple-samsung-judge-says-she-may-put-second-patent-case-on-hold/2013/02/15/7bc0f8b2-7730-11e2-b102-948929030e64_story.html?wpisrc=nl_tech
Large corporations are always going to ask for more. It seems only fair out of expected outcome and opportunity costs. Think about it this way: Apple has already caught Samsung in the net, it just wants to hold on to it a bit longer before letting it off the hook.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think?
Great read Aviv. I do agree with you that stricter laws for patent infringement need to occur. Especially since companies are now spending more on lawsuits than research and development
ReplyDelete