or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple takes its patent war against Samsung to South Korea
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple takes its patent war against Samsung to South Korea

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 
Apple confirmed Friday that it's bringing its patent litigation against partner and rival Samsung to the electronics maker's home-based of South Korea, the latest move in a high-stakes feud over who copied who in the booming mobile device market.

"We have filed a lawsuit against Samsung with the Seoul Central District Court," Steve Park, a spokesman for Apple Korea, reportedly told Dow Jones Newswires.

"It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging," Apple Korea said in a separate statement issued Friday. "This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas."

For its part, Samsung has vowed to "continue to actively defend and protect" its intellectual property and to ensure its "continued innovation and growth in the mobile communication business."

Specifically, the filing made June 22nd with the Seoul Central District Court alleges that Samsungs Galaxy S smartphone copied the design of Apple's third-generation iPhones.

Allegations in the legal spat between Apple and Samsung have been mounting since Apple
post #2 of 30
Just dump Samsung and make some other Korean company rich or leave South Korea altogether. That will teach them. $5.7 billion is not a little number even for Apple/Samsung if this kind of spat is ongoing.
post #3 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

Just dump Samsung and make some other Korean company rich or leave South Korea altogether. That will teach them. $5.7 billion is not a little number even for Apple/Samsung if this kind of spat is ongoing.

Apple can't remove their dependence on Samsung completely. The A4/5 isn't the only thing Samsung makes for Apple.
post #4 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Hey mister Samsung:

You thought you were being clever and saving money by copying your best customer's best products. But that was just greedy.

You are going to get exactly what you deserve. Before this is done, we are going to make more money every time you sell an infringing phone than you will!!!!!

And that chip business? Forgeddaboutit. You think you are the onloy game in town? You are going DOWN Mr. Samsung. DOWN.

Maybe they were clever. Even if loses big they will have to icur net damages that are more than what they made by staying in this race when they had no viable option. Other things are hard to quantify like the experience gained from coping Apple's HW and OS techniques. IOW, Samsung may have known they couldn't win a lawsuit but their bean counters found that it was the most profitable option in the long run. It's certainly a lot of free advertising for what look like nice anti-iPhone options.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Apple can't remove their dependence on Samsung completely. The A4/5 isn't the only thing Samsung makes for Apple.

Found out from Apple Store Genius that he now starting to see notebook RAM from Samsung.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #5 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Apple can just buy the stuff from the company that Samsung copied. Samsung never innovates. They just copy everything to increase their profits.

Steve shouldn't do any business with them at all.

What nonsense.

Samsung's mobile division has quite blatantly copied Apple in their devices, however, that doesn't mean Samsung as a whole does not do good work. Their component making divisions are top notch.

Btw, with Asian conglomerates, the difference between any 2 divisions can be night and day. They are essentially independently run companies under the same brand name.
post #6 of 30
Ha ha, I hadn't seen the Tab case before. Funny stuff. Like the Galaxy S UI, it doesn't look like there's been much effort made to conceal how much a direct copy it is.

I don't know the ins and outs of patent law, or how this will all end up legally, but it's hard to see how anyone could say this stuff isn't directly copied from Apple.
post #7 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Apple can just buy the stuff from the company that Samsung copied. Samsung never innovates. They just copy everything to increase their profits.

Steve shouldn't do any business with them at all.

I doubt Apple is going to get a fair trial in Korea. Samsung owns Korean government and entire Korea. Samsung is supporting more than 50% of Koreans' livelihood and government's pockets that I won't be surprised that Korean judges are Samsung sympathetics.

For Samsung, copying Apple is not a crime. Koreans are on a national pride ride that they claimed Confucius is Korean. They are rewriting history in their mind and certainly they will rewrite the law to their advantages.

Even with past violations of antitrust law, it coerced other manufacturers to price fixing and then it snitched to US government to claim immunity.

Apple should cut its tie with Samsung. Period!
post #8 of 30
Good luck taking on Samsung, a chaebol, in South Korea... For example, the chairman was convicted of embezzlement and tax evasion, but pardoned because he was deemed too important to the South Korean economy.
post #9 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by epoints View Post

I doubt Apple is going to get a fair trial in Korea. Samsung owns Korean government and entire Korea.

Aside from this being complete nonsense in its own right, Samsung doesn't own an inch of Best Korea.
post #10 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by epoints View Post

I doubt Apple is going to get a fair trial in Korea. Samsung owns Korean government and entire Korea. Samsung is supporting more than 50% of Koreans' livelihood and government's pockets that I won't be surprised that Korean judges are Samsung sympathetics.

For Samsung, copying Apple is not a crime. Koreans are on a national pride ride that they claimed Confucius is Korean. They are rewriting history in their mind and certainly they will rewrite the law to their advantages.

Even with past violations of antitrust law, it coerced other manufacturers to price fixing and then it snitched to US government to claim immunity.

Apple should cut its tie with Samsung. Period!

You are full of bullshit. Samsung doesn't own Korean government or the country. Where did you get that 50% thing from? Samsung contributes about 10% of the GDP of the country, to my knowledge. And who said Confucius is Korean? Actually Koreans were stunned to learn that Chinese media CLAIMED Korean claimed Confucius is Korean. Are you one of those bitter Chinese or his girlfriend?
post #11 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by epoints View Post

I doubt Apple is going to get a fair trial in Korea. Samsung owns Korean government and entire Korea. Samsung is supporting more than 50% of Koreans' livelihood and government's pockets that I won't be surprised that Korean judges are Samsung sympathetics.

For Samsung, copying Apple is not a crime. Koreans are on a national pride ride that they claimed Confucius is Korean. They are rewriting history in their mind and certainly they will rewrite the law to their advantages.

Even with past violations of antitrust law, it coerced other manufacturers to price fixing and then it snitched to US government to claim immunity.

Apple should cut its tie with Samsung. Period!

Apple ultimately needs to prove their damages in order to get anything meaningful from Samsung.
But wait, what damages?

I get it. It was a stupid idea to blatantly copy Apple's design and use it on its products.
But did that really help Samsung, or hurt Apple?
Did customers really got confused between Samsung's and Apple's, and accidentally bought Samsung's when they meant to buy Apple's?

I don't think we, customers, are that stupid.

Also, about generalization of Korean,
trust me, Koreans probably blame Samsung for copying Apple and feel ashamed about its product-line up more than anyone else in the world.

Korean media/government is likely to be influenced by the almighty conglomerate, but that does not represent what most of Koreans believe
- in fact, many are worried about things like what you pointed out.
post #12 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Maybe they were clever. Even if loses big they will have to icur net damages that are more than what they made by staying in this race when they had no viable option. Other things are hard to quantify like the experience gained from coping Apple's HW and OS techniques. IOW, Samsung may have known they couldn't win a lawsuit but their bean counters found that it was the most profitable option in the long run. It's certainly a lot of free advertising for what look like nice anti-iPhone options.

Exactly. Samsung didn't have the time or the skills to produce something that looked distinct, and clearly all their market surveys and focus groups were coming back with 'give us the iphone' - so they did.

If Apple does manage to enforce its design patents and trade dress on Samsung and HTC then Samsung will still have bought itself years in which to produce a compelling product of its own, and it's a lot easier in the handset market to preserve market share than it is to grow it.
post #13 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post

Did customers really got confused between Samsung's and Apple's, and accidentally bought Samsung's when they meant to buy Apple's?

I don't think we, customers, are that stupid.

It's not quite that strict a requirement - for example Apple successfully sued the maker of the eOne for infringing the trade dress of the iMac.

Also in addition to the trade dress claims, Apple is hitting Samsung with Patents and with them infringement alone is enough - there is no need to demonstrate damages.
post #14 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Apple can't remove their dependence on Samsung completely. The A4/5 isn't the only thing Samsung makes for Apple.

Maybe not but over the long term apple can gradually draw down their reliance on them til they're no longer partners
post #15 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

It's not quite that strict a requirement - for example Apple successfully sued the maker of the eOne for infringing the trade dress of the iMac.

Also in addition to the trade dress claims, Apple is hitting Samsung with Patents and with them infringement alone is enough - there is no need to demonstrate damages.

However, the case you cited only granted preliminary injunction against eMachines.
eMachines didn't plead guilt but settled with Apple not to manufacture/distribute iMac-copy. [Source]

What is important in this case is whether Apple can get the injunction against Samsung in right time.
It all depends on when iPhone 5/iPad 3 will debut and how much they resemble their own previous styles.

But at the same time, Samsung can easily change their design for future Galaxy series, making this whole issue somewhat moot.
post #16 of 30
Make that "who copied whom".
post #17 of 30
I predict the courts will tell Samsung to pay Apple $5 billion.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #18 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Apple can't remove their dependence on Samsung completely. The A4/5 isn't the only thing Samsung makes for Apple.

People always seems to leave out batteries.

Yes, Samsung provides the batteries to Apple.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #19 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by epoints View Post

I doubt Apple is going to get a fair trial in Korea. Samsung owns Korean government and entire Korea. Samsung is supporting more than 50% of Koreans' livelihood and government's pockets that I won't be surprised that Korean judges are Samsung sympathetics.

For Samsung, copying Apple is not a crime. Koreans are on a national pride ride that they claimed Confucius is Korean. They are rewriting history in their mind and certainly they will rewrite the law to their advantages.

Even with past violations of antitrust law, it coerced other manufacturers to price fixing and then it snitched to US government to claim immunity.

Apple should cut its tie with Samsung. Period!

You are obviously Chinese and a troll.

If Samsung owns the government, why were they slapped with a fine by the government's courts to pay for the health problems by its former employees?

http://www.techeye.net/business/sams...death-families

And before you start spewing that I'm some nationalistic Korean bent on hating on Apple, I own 2 MBP, 2 iPod touchs and 1 iPad. Also, I hold some shares through a mutual fund in APPL.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

I predict the courts will tell Samsung to pay Apple $5 billion.


Read the lawsuit. Apple is asking for only $92,500

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #20 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Read the lawsuit. Apple is asking for only $92,500

Apple is asking for its actual damages from reduced sales, plus treble Samsung’s infringing devices' profits, plus punitive damages, plus court costs and attorneys’ fees.
post #21 of 30
Hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars have been paid in damages for similar intellectual property infringements. So let's stop talking out of our azzez and look at some actual IP infringement cases, shall we?

Here: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...vice=other&c=y

"1. S. Victor Whitmill v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc." is relevant. Mike Tyson's tattoo artist sued the movie studio for copyright infringement. Warner's settled out-of-court.

"5. Mattel Inc. v. MGA Entertainment Inc." is salient and still ongoing. MGA copied Mattel's Barbie dolls according to the ruling. Good for $100 million. Now MGA is suing Mattel for stealing trade secrets.

"10. Adidas America Inc. v. Payless Shoesource Inc." Adidas successfully sued Payless for copying its internationally famous 3-stripe design. Adidas was awarded $305 million.

So who here thinks that Samsung has copied Apple's designs? Let me see those hands in the air.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #22 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars have been paid in damages for similar intellectual property infringements. So let's stop talking out of our azzez and look at some actual IP infringement cases, shall we?

Here: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...vice=other&c=y

"1. S. Victor Whitmill v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc." is relevant. Mike Tyson's tattoo artist sued the movie studio for copyright infringement. Warner's settled out-of-court.

"5. Mattel Inc. v. MGA Entertainment Inc." is salient and still ongoing. MGA copied Mattel's Barbie dolls according to the ruling. Good for $100 million. Now MGA is suing Mattel for stealing trade secrets.

"10. Adidas America Inc. v. Payless Shoesource Inc." Adidas successfully sued Payless for copying its internationally famous 3-stripe design. Adidas was awarded $305 million.

So who here thinks that Samsung has copied Apple's designs? Let me see those hands in the air.

You say Apple's case has merit and simply cite these 'irrelevant' cases.
The cited cases have distinct facts from current case between Samsung and Apple.

1. ... Prices tattoo is identical to the one Mike Tyson...

5. ...accusing Bratz designer Carter Bryant for having designed the doll while on Mattels payroll...

10. ...But Payless was selling confusingly similar athletic shoes with two and four parallel stripes. The two companies hashed out a settlement, but by 2001, Payless was again selling the look-alikes...

I think case #10 is somewhat applicable in this case but then again, Payless seemingly infringed trademark, not patent or copyright, after it previously settled already.

I don't think these cases are strongly persuasive.
post #23 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by occamsaftershave View Post

apple is asking for its actual damages from reduced sales, plus treble samsung’s infringing devices' profits, plus punitive damages, plus court costs and attorneys’ fees.

again read the complaint filed in korea.

Which is different from the one filed in the us.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #24 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchquarter View Post

You are full of bullshit. Samsung doesn't own Korean government or the country. Where did you get that 50% thing from? Samsung contributes about 10% of the GDP of the country, to my knowledge. And who said Confucius is Korean? Actually Koreans were stunned to learn that Chinese media CLAIMED Korean claimed Confucius is Korean. Are you one of those bitter Chinese or his girlfriend?


There is absolutely no need for personal attacks!
post #25 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by epoints View Post

There is absolutely no need for personal attacks!

You're absolutely right about that.

But so is he. Your points were quite wrong.
post #26 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You are obviously Chinese and a troll.

If Samsung owns the government, why were they slapped with a fine by the government's courts to pay for the health problems by its former employees?

http://www.techeye.net/business/sams...death-families

And before you start spewing that I'm some nationalistic Korean bent on hating on Apple, I own 2 MBP, 2 iPod touchs and 1 iPad. Also, I hold some shares through a mutual fund in APPL.


What you own in Apple doesn't matter here... I own 1 BMP, 3 iphones, 3 ipads, 1 mini, 2 time capsules and own apple stocks (NOT via mutual fund)...

We are talking about a global company who is taking advantage of apple creativity and claiming its own.

This has nothing to do with being patriotic, if you are a Korean or not. Many Asian companies copied and got rimmed, but having audacity to claim originality is something else.

Don't get me wrong.. I have many Samsung products and had many of their SGH phones which I loved dearly... I thought they are very creative in their own right.
post #27 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

What nonsense.

Samsung's mobile division has quite blatantly copied Apple in their devices, however, that doesn't mean Samsung as a whole does not do good work. Their component making divisions are top notch.

Btw, with Asian conglomerates, the difference between any 2 divisions can be night and day. They are essentially independently run companies under the same brand name.

Why do so many people not realize this?
post #28 of 30
I can see an Apple/Samsung deal in the near future where Samsung does not sue Apple for copyrights on televisions since Samsung holds most patents for apps on televisions.
post #29 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccamsAftershave View Post

Apple is asking for its actual damages from reduced sales, plus treble Samsungs infringing devices' profits, plus punitive damages, plus court costs and attorneys fees.

What reduced sales??

They sell everything they can produce from everything I read here.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #30 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoebetech View Post

I can see an Apple/Samsung deal in the near future where Samsung does not sue Apple for copyrights on televisions since Samsung holds most patents for apps on televisions.

I doubt that would be an issue, what is a digital television after all but a computer built into an LCD panel that can stream video. If samsung had anything devestating IP wise there they could sue the iMac.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple takes its patent war against Samsung to South Korea