Less than two weeks ago, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd agreed in a US district court to pay Apple Inc US$548 million in damages, as their years-long legal conflict appeared to be tapering off to a ceasefire.
However, the clash is not yet over.
On Monday, Samsung filed an appeal with the US Supreme Court, arguing that the legal framework for design patents — at the center of the suits between the companies — is outdated for the modern digital world. Samsung says the issue at stake extends well beyond the courtroom skirmishes of the two large corporations.
The case, if heard, could have far-reaching implications for design patents, which cover how a product looks, and the sort of financial penalties allowed under the law. Design patents are far less common than utility patents, which cover how a product functions.
The legal framework for design patents, according to Samsung, some other major technology companies and legal experts, is largely shaped by a 19th-century law intended to protect the designs of carpets, fireplace grates and ornamental spoons.
Back then, the design was the heart of such products, so seizing most or all of the gains of a copycat — known as the “total profit rule” — was justified.
However, a complex product today like a modern smartphone is a dense bundle of intellectual property with more than 100,000 patents conceivably laying claim to some small aspect of the device.
Apple declined to comment publicly about the appeal, but it has argued in the past that the three design patents Samsung is challenging represent the essence of the iPhone — the look of its user interface, its rectangular display and its rounded shape and flat front. A jury agreed with Apple, as did the federal appeals court that specializes in patent cases.
In its appeal on Monday, Samsung declared that the sweeping ruling against it, if left in place, would set a precedent “to reward design patents far beyond the value of any inventive contribution.”
In a supporting brief filed with the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, eight technology companies including Google Inc, Facebook Inc and eBay Inc and the former Hewlett-Packard Co said the ruling on design patents against Samsung, if left to stand, would “lead to absurd results and have a devastating impact on companies.”
Several of the companies joining that brief in support of Samsung compete with Apple in one market or another. Most prominent among them is Google, whose Android mobile operating system runs most of the smartphones produced by Samsung, Apple’s leading rival, and other smartphone makers.
“The law was written for a time long before the smartphone was invented,” said Mark Lemley, a law professor and director of the Stanford University program in law, science and technology, who has previously filed a brief in support of Samsung.
Lemley’s argument in support of Samsung, filed in the appeals court, was signed by more than two dozen law professors.
Stylish design defines Apple’s products and its corporate reputation. On two of the three patents in dispute, the named inventors include the two people most identified with Apple design, Steve Jobs, the company’s cofounder, and Jonathan Ive, its chief design officer.
In the jury trial, Apple submitted an internal Samsung memo saying the iPhone showed that Samsung faced a “crisis of design.” Apple’s evidence included a series of photographs of Samsung smartphones before and after the iPhone was introduced in 2007, and the models increasingly came to resemble Apple’s design.
Samsung, according to Apple, made a “deliberate and conscious” decision to copy the iPhone.
Early this month, when Samsung agreed to pay Apple US$548 million damages, it said it reserved the right to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. Last year, the companies agreed to drop all patent litigation outside the US.
In the US, the legal standard for infringement of a design patent centers on the “ordinary observer” test, and whether that observer “would be deceived into thinking that the accused design was the same as the patented design.”
So while there are fundamental questions about the reach of design patents on modern high-tech products, and large damage awards, legal experts say the Supreme Court could well decide that this is not the case that cleanly presents the larger issues.
The Supreme Court is not expected to decide whether to take up the Samsung appeal until February next year at the earliest. And no matter what happens in the legal arena, the smartphone market has moved on, with generations of new models coming to market since Apple filed suit in 2011.
Stephen Garrett, a 27-year-old graduate student, always thought he would study in China, but first the country’s restrictive COVID-19 policies made it nearly impossible and now he has other concerns. The cost is one deterrent, but Garrett is more worried about restrictions on academic freedom and the personal risk of being stranded in China. He is not alone. Only about 700 American students are studying at Chinese universities, down from a peak of nearly 25,000 a decade ago, while there are nearly 300,000 Chinese students at US schools. Some young Americans are discouraged from investing their time in China by what they see
MAJOR DROP: CEO Tim Cook, who is visiting Hanoi, pledged the firm was committed to Vietnam after its smartphone shipments declined 9.6% annually in the first quarter Apple Inc yesterday said it would increase spending on suppliers in Vietnam, a key production hub, as CEO Tim Cook arrived in the country for a two-day visit. The iPhone maker announced the news in a statement on its Web site, but gave no details of how much it would spend or where the money would go. Cook is expected to meet programmers, content creators and students during his visit, online newspaper VnExpress reported. The visit comes as US President Joe Biden’s administration seeks to ramp up Vietnam’s role in the global tech supply chain to reduce the US’ dependence on China. Images on
New apartments in Taiwan’s major cities are getting smaller, while old apartments are increasingly occupied by older people, many of whom live alone, government data showed. The phenomenon has to do with sharpening unaffordable property prices and an aging population, property brokers said. Apartments with one bedroom that are two years old or older have gained a noticeable presence in the nation’s six special municipalities as well as Hsinchu county and city in the past five years, Evertrust Rehouse Co (永慶房產集團) found, citing data from the government’s real-price transaction platform. In Taipei, apartments with one bedroom accounted for 19 percent of deals last
US CONSCULTANT: The US Department of Commerce’s Ursula Burns is a rarely seen US government consultant to be put forward to sit on the board, nominated as an independent director Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電), the world’s largest contract chipmaker, yesterday nominated 10 candidates for its new board of directors, including Ursula Burns from the US Department of Commerce. It is rare that TSMC has nominated a US government consultant to sit on its board. Burns was nominated as one of seven independent directors. She is vice chair of the department’s Advisory Council on Supply Chain Competitiveness. Burns is to stand for election at TSMC’s annual shareholders’ meeting on June 4 along with the rest of the candidates. TSMC chairman Mark Liu (劉德音) was not on the list after in December last