The epic legal battle pitting Apple Inc against its bitter rival Samsung Electronics Co over the design of the iPhone was due to reach a new level yesterday when it headed to the US Supreme Court.
The high court was set to hear arguments over financial damages the South Korean smartphone giant owes Apple for allegedly violating design patents by producing copycats of its groundbreaking smartphone.
Observers are watching the case closely to see how the court — which has not taken up a design patent case in more than a century — tips the balance between technological innovation and protecting intellectual property.
Photo: Reuters
A ruling is expected in several months.
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a US$400 million verdict — part of a nearly billion-dollar award in Apple’s favor later reduced to US$548 million — that found Samsung had copied the iPhone’s distinctive front screen and graphical touchscreen user interface.
California-based Apple had protected those features with US design patents that concern the way items look.
Samsung is challenging the verdict, disputing how damages are calculated in design patent cases. Such awards are currently determined by devices’ “total profit,” in accordance with a statute first adopted in 1887 and readopted in 1952.
Samsung argues it should be held liable only for some portion of the profit tied to patented design aspects, given the many innovative components that go into the making of smartphones.
Apple interprets the statute more narrowly, saying it is entitled to all profits from Samsung’s phones.
The legal battle, which began more than five years ago, could have major repercussions in a tech industry where design and innovation play key roles in distinguishing one device from another.
However, a major debate is underway on just how much protection should be granted for visual design.
In preparation for its arguments before the Supreme Court, Samsung obtained the support of major Silicon Valley and other information-technology giants, including Google, Facebook, Dell and Hewlett-Packard, as well as a group of law professors.
Apple got backing from big names in fashion and manufacturing, such as Calvin Klein and Adidas and the American Intellectual Property Law Association, whose members — largely lawyers — represent owners and users of intellectual property.
Apple’s supporters argue that Samsung’s argument would hurt the tech industry by weakening the patent system.
“A strong patent system will force technology companies to actually innovate, not mimic. That is how patent systems are designed to work all over the world,” said Matthew Siegal, an intellectual property lawyer from the New-York based firm Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP.
“The differences in Samsung and Apple smartphones are marginal because of copying, not innovating,” he added. “A strong patent system will lead to the next-generation phone based on actual innovation.”
BYPASSING CHINA TARIFFS: In the first five months of this year, Foxconn sent US$4.4bn of iPhones to the US from India, compared with US$3.7bn in the whole of last year Nearly all the iPhones exported by Foxconn Technology Group (富士康科技集團) from India went to the US between March and last month, customs data showed, far above last year’s average of 50 percent and a clear sign of Apple Inc’s efforts to bypass high US tariffs imposed on China. The numbers, being reported by Reuters for the first time, show that Apple has realigned its India exports to almost exclusively serve the US market, when previously the devices were more widely distributed to nations including the Netherlands and the Czech Republic. During March to last month, Foxconn, known as Hon Hai Precision Industry
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電) and the University of Tokyo (UTokyo) yesterday announced the launch of the TSMC-UTokyo Lab to promote advanced semiconductor research, education and talent development. The lab is TSMC’s first laboratory collaboration with a university outside Taiwan, the company said in a statement. The lab would leverage “the extensive knowledge, experience, and creativity” of both institutions, the company said. It is located in the Asano Section of UTokyo’s Hongo, Tokyo, campus and would be managed by UTokyo faculty, guided by directors from UTokyo and TSMC, the company said. TSMC began working with UTokyo in 2019, resulting in 21 research projects,
Ashton Hall’s morning routine involves dunking his head in iced Saratoga Spring Water. For the company that sells the bottled water — Hall’s brand of choice for drinking, brushing his teeth and submerging himself — that is fantastic news. “We’re so thankful to this incredible fitness influencer called Ashton Hall,” Saratoga owner Primo Brands Corp’s CEO Robbert Rietbroek said on an earnings call after Hall’s morning routine video went viral. “He really helped put our brand on the map.” Primo Brands, which was not affiliated with Hall when he made his video, is among the increasing number of companies benefiting from influencer
Quanta Computer Inc (廣達) chairman Barry Lam (林百里) yesterday expressed a downbeat view about the prospects of humanoid robots, given high manufacturing costs and a lack of target customers. Despite rising demand and high expectations for humanoid robots, high research-and-development costs and uncertain profitability remain major concerns, Lam told reporters following the company’s annual shareholders’ meeting in Taoyuan. “Since it seems a bit unworthy to use such high-cost robots to do household chores, I believe robots designed for specific purposes would be more valuable and present a better business opportunity,” Lam said Instead of investing in humanoid robots, Quanta has opted to invest
RSS