Japanese court rules Samsung abused FRAND patents against Apple

Posted:
in iPhone edited May 2014
Apple made legal progress in its battle with Samsung over patents in Japan this week when the Tokyo District Court ruled that Samsung had indeed illegally abused its Standards Essential Patents to demand a sales ban and excessive royalties against the iPhone maker.

Samsung copies


Samsung had sought to use its patents related to the 3GPP mobile standard to win significant royalties against Apple, in addition to an injunction against sales of iPhone 4, in a Japanese case similar to the one the South Korean firm brought against Apple via the U.S. International Trade Commission (a case that was vetoed by the Obama Administration).

In Europe, Samsung was similarly blocked from seeking sales bans against competitors in cases that involved a Standards Essential Patent (SEP) following an E.U. investigation into the company's behavior.

In Japan, Samsung's parallel efforts to leverage a patent obtained during the development of open standards and then weaponize it against its competitors has now been shot down in a major policy ruling on the abuse of SEPs in that country.

Samsung's anticompetitive patent abuse, in three ways

Last year, Japanese courts found Samsung had abused SEPs in three ways. First, by failing to honor its duty under Japanese Civil Code to negotiate with licensees in good faith, given that its SEPs were created under a commitment to offer other firms licensing under Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory (FRAND) terms.

Second, the court determined that Samsung had declared its "E-bit patent" to be essential to practicing the 3GPP mobile standard, but then subsequently attempted to win a preliminary sales injunction against Apple with that patent. Courts worldwide have recognized that sales bans are in inappropriate remedy in SEP cases where the two parties are simply negotiating a FRAND license.

Third, the court found that Samsung did not disclose its E-bit patent to the ETSI standards body until about two years after its 3GPP working group adopted the "invention" claimed by Samsung in its patent as part of its standard that any phone manufacturer would have to license in order to make a functional device.

Apple wins again in landmark Japanese decision

Following the original decision, Japan's court of appeals convened a "Grand Panel" to hear the case, which involved two hearings and called for public comment. A total of 58 amicus briefs were submitted for the court to consider, which the court described as "valuable and informative" in making its ruling.

The court agreed that Samsung had no right to demand a sales injunction, and struck down company's efforts to win "excess royalty" against Apple, ruling instead to cap Samsung's licensing demand to 9.9 million Yen ($95,000 U.S.) for the patent, which is inline with what Apple had expected to pay as a FRAND licensee."Samsung has recklessly ignored intellectual property rights around the world" - Apple

Apple's Japanese subsidiary released a comment on the ruling, which stated (via machine translation):

'We offer high praise that the court took the corresponding actions [against] Samsung [and] was resolute to try to protect the integrity of the international patent system. In an attempt to convince the court that the patent is not an issue, Samsung has recklessly ignored intellectual property rights around the world.'

Outside of the U.S., E.U. and Japan, Samsung has been successfully backed by one country's antitrust authority in its practice of leveraging SEPs against competitors: the South Korea Fair Trade Commission, which issued a ruling in February that protected Samsung from a complaint filed by Apple.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 41
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member

    YES.

  • Reply 2 of 41
    stargazerctstargazerct Posts: 227member
    I hope Sammy enjoyed their ride%u2026because they're finally being exposed for the Scumsung that they are.
  • Reply 3 of 41
    ryannejryannej Posts: 15member
    YES.
    Hear hear! *clinks glass*
  • Reply 4 of 41
    heliahelia Posts: 170member
    Quote:


    South Korea Fair Trade Commission, which issued a ruling in February that protected Samsung from a complaint filed by Apple. 


     

    Why aren't I surprised?

  • Reply 5 of 41
    davesmalldavesmall Posts: 118member
    It is a 'no brainer' to realize that Samsung ripped off Apple and created iPhone and iPad knock-offs. They were aided and abetted by fellow criminal conspirator Google.
  • Reply 6 of 41
    ruddyruddy Posts: 94member

    There are still legions in denial believing that Motorola and Samsung are going to win cases and set precedents via FRAND abuse. For that matter they deny any abuse to start with. 

  • Reply 7 of 41
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,779member
    Why doesn't Samsung just give up and cut it's losses? They haven't really won anything to date. At some point they'd have to realize they're never going to win no matter where they are.
  • Reply 8 of 41
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,088member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post



    Why doesn't Samsung just give up and cut it's losses? They haven't really won anything to date. At some point they'd have to realize they're never going to win no matter where they are.



    So long as Samsung is making tens of billions of dollars infringing on the IP of others, and knowing they will get fined what?  A billion dollars??  That's just an expense on their P&L.  The cost of doing business.



    There was an article posted from Vanity Fair not too long about detailing how Samsung's corporate atmosphere is based off of ripping people off and dealing with it later... if at all.  Shameful company, with a convict as the chairman, bribing the SK government.  Shameful.



    http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-patent-war

  • Reply 9 of 41
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,819member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post



    Why doesn't Samsung just give up and cut it's losses? They haven't really won anything to date. At some point they'd have to realize they're never going to win no matter where they are.

     

    It seems that winning in court was never their goal. That Vanity Fair article that someone posted a link to a few threads back did a good job explaining their strategy. The lawsuits and appeals process takes so long, and Samsung is so deep pocketed, that they're basically telling Apple, sue us; even if you win, we still got away with it, and all you can ask for is damages in arrears, and even then we can whittle that down in appeals. The one thing civil juries cannot do is tack on a sufficiently high punitive component to the amount owed to discourage recidivism. So Samsung is getting away with it, in the end; it just cost them a little more than zero dollars to copy.

  • Reply 10 of 41
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    macxpress wrote: »
    Why doesn't Samsung just give up and cut it's losses?

    What do you mean? Where has Samsung has been the plaintiff? As the defendant it behooves them to fight back and to continue to profit off the IP of others.
  • Reply 11 of 41
    dequardodequardo Posts: 29member
    Wake me up if DED ever writes a balanced article.
  • Reply 12 of 41
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,088member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dequardo View Post



    Wake me up if DED ever writes a balanced article.



    Don't bother waking up since it's obvious that reality is too much for you to handle.

  • Reply 13 of 41
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    dequardo wrote: »
    Wake me up if DED ever writes a balanced article.

    ...This is NOT an article. It's news.

    Or is reality too unbalanced for you?
  • Reply 14 of 41
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,697member
    YES.

    But wait, you have yet to have Gatorguy educate you on why this is an incorrect ruling.
  • Reply 15 of 41
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

     



    Don't bother waking up since it's obvious that reality is too much for you to handle.




    Looking at his short post history, he seems to have a hate boner for DED.

  • Reply 16 of 41
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    Another country says "frak you" to Sammy. There has to be some real and meaningful punishment for Sammy's actions.
  • Reply 17 of 41
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    sflocal wrote: »

    Don't forget the article from Mic Wright (kernelmag.com) "Samsung: power, corruption and lies", posted here by [@]Steve Constance[/@] who started a thread but didn't get any reactions on it. Since the Kernel is in makeover mode, I posted the article there, if that's ok with AI(?)
  • Reply 18 of 41
    wonkothesanewonkothesane Posts: 1,715member
    sflocal wrote: »

    Wow. I always read bits and pieces and have some opinion about Samsung's business ethics, but reading this article takes this to a new level. Thanks for the link.

    So long as Samsung is making tens of billions of dollars infringing on the IP of others, and knowing they will get fined what?  A billion dollars??  That's just an expense on their P&L.  The cost of doing business.


    There was an article posted from Vanity Fair not too long about detailing how Samsung's corporate atmosphere is based off of ripping people off and dealing with it later... if at all.  Shameful company, with a convict as the chairman, bribing the SK government.  Shameful.

    http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-patent-war
  • Reply 19 of 41
    zabazaba Posts: 226member
    Confused, as I understand from this Apple didn't pay the FRAND licensing fee. Shame on you Apple!
  • Reply 20 of 41
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    zaba wrote: »
    Confused, as I understand from this Apple didn't pay the FRAND licensing fee. Shame on you Apple!
    The article isn't particularly clear about why this is, but since Apple won the case the suggestion is that Samsung were trying to leverage the SEP to get a higher royalty rate from Apple, which would violate the "non-discriminatory" part of FRAND.
Sign In or Register to comment.