Sam Oliver
A Japanese court has rejected two patent infringement claims lodged by Samsung against Apple, marking yet another country where Apple has found courtroom success against its rival.
Intellectual property expert Florian Mueller said with Apple's latest victories in Japan, it's just another example of how "Apple is on the winning track" worldwide against Samsung. He noted that outside of Korea, the only case that Samsung has won on the offensive came in the Netherlands, and even that wasn't a major victory.
"Samsung's problem is not that there were two non-wins in Japan," Mueller wrote on Monday. "Samsung's problem is that Apple has won a variety of rulings (even if none of them had or has the potential to force Samsung out of a major market) while Samsung hasn't won anything meaningful outside of Korea, and nothing anywhere in the world over a non-standard-essential patent."
The Tokyo District Court made two rulings over the past two months in Apple's favor. One Sept. 14 decision found that Apple did not infringe on a Samsung patent related to application downloads, while an Oct. 11 ruling said Apple did not violate a Samsung patent related to airplane mode on mobile devices.
Monitoring lawsuits is difficult in Japan, which is why the rulings had not come to light before a story published over the weekend by The Asahi Shimbun. For now, it is believed that Samsung has one more patent infringement claim against Apple in Japan related to the utilization of home screen space.
Though it wasn't on the offensive, Samsung did secure a win in the Tokyo District Court in August, when it was found that the Korean electronics giant did not infringe on certain utility patents owned by Apple. The iPhone maker has since appealed that decision.
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
AppleInsider Staff
Chip Loder
Malcolm Owen
10 Comments
Take that Sammy. :)
K.
Is it just me, or does all of this not matter nearly as much as it did a year ago?
I still find it hilarious that Samsung is suing Apple for anything.
Let me get this right. You began to blatently copy your BIGGEST customer, copying everything from their hardware to their software to their accessories to even their store chain. The CEO of that company warns you over and over again about copying their products, but you continue. The CEO goes on record saying "And boy have we patented it" when formally introducing their most valuable product to the world.. yet you still went on to blatently copy. And when the lawsuits started coming in from the company you copied. Your defense is to say.. well they copied this from us too.
..wait
LMAO!!!
And now that this whole fiasco is playing out and you are losing the lawsuit battle. You currently have a $1Billion dollar judgement against you from US courts, your copycat products are banned in some countries, you've pretty much lost every court battle outside your home country of Korea, while losing these battles your legal fees are piling up & now your BIGGEST customer is steadily withdrawing $billions of dollars in contracts away from you and making new business deals with your regular competitors. You really have to wonder.. what the fukk was Samsung thinking?
The saddest part is Samsung makes pretty decent stuff. There was never a need to copy Apple's most popular designs in the first place. While Im a pretty hardcore Apple advocate.. a Samsung flat screen TV & front load washer/dryer are still pretty high on my wish list.
So Japan and the USA find that US company X was hurt by Korean company Y. Why does this sound like not-so-surprising? Oh, because the USA court is from the USA, and the Japanese court is from Japan. I understand this blog is shamelessly dedicated to Apple's stock value, but still, it could help a bit to not show this bias so much.
So Japan and the USA find that US company X was hurt by Korean company Y.
Why does this sound like not-so-surprising? Oh, because the USA court is from the USA, and the Japanese court is from Japan.
I understand this blog is shamelessly dedicated to Apple's stock value, but still, it could help a bit to not show this bias so much.
What on earth are you trying to say?