An ITC Judge said that Samsung infringed an important piece of an Apple patent by including a text-selection feature in its smartphones and tablets. If this decision is upheld, a decision that is expected in August, the ITC can order any infringing device to be barred from importation into the United States. Apple had claimed that that the Samsung Galaxy, Nexus, and Transform devices are all made with the infringing technology. Applie filed a complaint in mid-2011, accusing Samsung of infringing its patents when manufacturing many of their smartphone and tablet devices. ITC Judge Thomas Pender said in a discussion in October, that Samsung infringed 4 of Apple's patents but did not infringe 2 others listed in the complaint. The full commission said it wanted the judge to take another look at the portions of two patents where he initially found that Samsung infringed.
Apple is also waging an offensive war on several fronts against Google, whose Android software powers many Samsung devices. The legal battles between Samsung and Apple have now taken place in over 10 countries as they fight for market share in the mobile industry. Google's Android software has become the world's number 1 smartphone operating system. Apple's battle against the software has dragged to hardware vendors that use it, including HTC and Samsung.
Samsung also supplies parts to Apple, producing multiprocessing chips, flat screens, and memory chips for the iPhone, iPad, and iPod. Apple has reduced orders from Samsung for chips and screens.
It is interesting to consider how this litigation will play out and whether or not Apple will decide to continue this process and sacrifice relations with Samsung as a supplier. Perhaps they're not mutually exclusive, but it's hard to imagine high profile patent litigation cases while also wanting cooperation on the business side of things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FzRefGDPgk
Saturday, April 6, 2013
Samsung affirms that import bans on iPhones and iPads would only affect older models #19
A ruling is due on May 31 by the ITC to make a final decision on the Samsung and Apple case to determine whether or not Apple infringed on one or more claims of Samsung's patents. In March they asked questions to define the scope of an import ban on Apple related products, should one be ordered. Since the case dealt with third and fourth generation Apple products that operate on AT&T networks, the Commission is wondering if an import ban would apply to Apple products that operate on other wireless networks and later generation Apple products. In the proceedings, Samsung accused Apple products of infringement, only for AT&T models of the iPhone 4 (not the 4S or 5), 3GS and 3, and for the iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G.
Apple responded by saying that Samsung couldn't enforce an exclusion order against newer Apple products since those don't infringe because they use Qualcomm baseband chips which are licensed. The ITC staff agreed with Apple and acknowledged that there is no evidence in the record concerning other networks or newer Apple products.
Samsung has finally admitted that the newer Apple products which incorporate Qualcomm chips should not apply to this ban (if granted) but still contend that other carriers outside of AT&T should also be considered as infringing. That being said, the past where Samsung confirms that Applie products with Qualcomm baseband chips are fine is much more important that the other carrier claim. Should there be an import ban of older iPhones and iPads, Apple will only be affected at the low end and in the repair business. In the meantime, a new generation of Apple products will come to market thus making the older models even more irrelevant to their revenue streams. Even if the ITC does ban any Apple products, which it is unlikely to do because regulators have concluded that Samsung failed to comply with its FRAND licensing obligations, its impact will be very miniscule.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5jJXisLRSU
Apple responded by saying that Samsung couldn't enforce an exclusion order against newer Apple products since those don't infringe because they use Qualcomm baseband chips which are licensed. The ITC staff agreed with Apple and acknowledged that there is no evidence in the record concerning other networks or newer Apple products.
Samsung has finally admitted that the newer Apple products which incorporate Qualcomm chips should not apply to this ban (if granted) but still contend that other carriers outside of AT&T should also be considered as infringing. That being said, the past where Samsung confirms that Applie products with Qualcomm baseband chips are fine is much more important that the other carrier claim. Should there be an import ban of older iPhones and iPads, Apple will only be affected at the low end and in the repair business. In the meantime, a new generation of Apple products will come to market thus making the older models even more irrelevant to their revenue streams. Even if the ITC does ban any Apple products, which it is unlikely to do because regulators have concluded that Samsung failed to comply with its FRAND licensing obligations, its impact will be very miniscule.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5jJXisLRSU
Monday, April 1, 2013
Increase in Mobile-Related Patents #18
-->
A new report from an analyst at Chetan Sharma Consulting predicts that one fourth of all patents granted this year will be mobile related with Samsung and IBM leading the way. Many observers believe that the increasing volume in patent applications is a sign that the global mobile patent war is just beginning. The number of mobile related patents granted by the USPTO and the European Patent Office increased significantly over the past decade; the US market saw a 591 percent increase while the European market experienced a 76 percent increase in mobile related patent grants. Authors of the report stipulate that the increasing numbers in mobile patents is not surprising since smartphones and tablets have become the center of the knowledge economy. These products give companies a lot more incentive to patent innovations both to maximize their returns on R&D and to prevent potential suits from patent trolls, among other reasons.
With all these statistics about increasing filing rates and patent grants, we must ask what it all means? While it may be a good sign that the mobile industry is alive and well, it may also be a bad sign. Perhaps many of the patents this year were ill conceived, overly broad, or simply stupid. We've talked a lot about how the patent system is broken and needs reform; an increase in patent volume cannot make matters any better before real change can influence the patent system. For many people, the fact that our patent system is alive and well is precisely the problem.
A new report from an analyst at Chetan Sharma Consulting predicts that one fourth of all patents granted this year will be mobile related with Samsung and IBM leading the way. Many observers believe that the increasing volume in patent applications is a sign that the global mobile patent war is just beginning. The number of mobile related patents granted by the USPTO and the European Patent Office increased significantly over the past decade; the US market saw a 591 percent increase while the European market experienced a 76 percent increase in mobile related patent grants. Authors of the report stipulate that the increasing numbers in mobile patents is not surprising since smartphones and tablets have become the center of the knowledge economy. These products give companies a lot more incentive to patent innovations both to maximize their returns on R&D and to prevent potential suits from patent trolls, among other reasons.
With all these statistics about increasing filing rates and patent grants, we must ask what it all means? While it may be a good sign that the mobile industry is alive and well, it may also be a bad sign. Perhaps many of the patents this year were ill conceived, overly broad, or simply stupid. We've talked a lot about how the patent system is broken and needs reform; an increase in patent volume cannot make matters any better before real change can influence the patent system. For many people, the fact that our patent system is alive and well is precisely the problem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)