Pakistanis angry over detentions in Times Sq. case Monday, May 24, 2010
ISLAMABAD – Relatives of three men detained by Pakistan for alleged links to the suspect in the attempted Times Square bombing say the men are innocent.
They
AFP - Thursday, August 6TAIPEI (AFP) - - Taiwan's Beijing-friendly government on Wednesday denied boycotting an Australian film festival amid a row over the e
BERLIN (Reuters) - Chancellor Angela Merkel suffered a double blow on Thursday as a senior party ally in east German
Minister seeks closure of anti-Berlusconi websites Wednesday, December 16, 2009
ROME (AFP) - – The Italian government moved Tuesday to close down Internet sites encouraging further violence against Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who
By ELAINE KURTENBACH,AP Business Writer AP - Wednesday, March 18SHANGHAI - Asia's stock market rally seemed to be running out of steam Wednesday, despite an
Edition:
U.S.
Africa
Arabic
Argentina
Brazil
Canada
China
France
Germany
India
Italy
Japan
Latin America
Mexico
Russia
Spain
United Kingdom
Home
Business
Business Home
Economy
Technology
Media
Small Business
Legal
Deals
Earnings
Social Pulse
Business Video
The Freeland File
Aerospace & Defense
Markets
Markets Home
U.S. Markets
European Markets
Asian Markets
Global Market Data
Indices
M&A
Stocks
Bonds
Currencies
Commodities
Futures
Funds
peHUB
World
World Home
U.S.
Brazil
China
Euro Zone
Japan
Mexico
Russia
India Insight
World Video
Reuters Investigates
Decoder
Politics
Politics Home
Election 2012
Campaign Polling
Political Punchlines
Supreme Court
Politics Video
Tech
Technology Home
MediaFile
Science
Tech Video
Tech Tonic
Social Pulse
Opinion
Breakingviews
Money
Money Home
Tax Break
Lipper Awards 2012
Global Investing
MuniLand
Unstructured Finance
Linda Stern
Mark Miller
John Wasik
James Saft
Analyst Research
Alerts
Watchlist
Portfolio
Stock Screener
Fund Screener
Personal Finance Video
Money Clip
Investing 201
Life
Health
Sports
Arts
Faithworld
Business Traveler
Entertainment
Oddly Enough
Lifestyle Video
Pictures
Pictures Home
Reuters Photographers
Video
Reuters TV
Reuters News
Article
Comments (0)
Slideshow
Follow Reuters
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
YouTube
Read
Analysis: How Apple overwhelmed Samsung's patent case tactics
12:45am EDT
Argentine leader's image falls as inflation soars
26 Aug 2012
UPDATE 2-Major quake hits off El Salvador, no damage reported
3:52am EDT
Storm Isaac heads for U.S. Gulf Coast, hurricane warning issued
|
2:24am EDT
Quake of 7.4 magnitude hits off El Salvador coast: USGS
1:23am EDT
Discussed
138
Obama’s lead over Romney grows despite voters’ pessimism
122
Romney to announce vice presidential choice Saturday
94
Analysis: Are Israelis tough enough for a long war with Iran?
Sponsored Links
Analysis: How Apple overwhelmed Samsung's patent case tactics
Tweet
Share this
Email
Print
Related News
Samsung shares drop $12 billion after Apple's court victory
4:02am EDT
Jury didn't want to let Samsung off easy in Apple trial: foreman
Sat, Aug 25 2012
Analysis: Sweeping Apple win, but Samsung set for bounce-back
Sat, Aug 25 2012
Apple triumphs over Samsung in landmark patent case
Fri, Aug 24 2012
Apple triumphs over Samsung, awarded over $1 billion damages
Fri, Aug 24 2012
Analysis & Opinion
New study says SEC revolving door not important. Don’t believe it.
The Stoker verdict and Citi’s settlement with the SEC
Related Topics
Tech »
Media »
South Korea »
iPad »
1 of 7. An employee poses as he holds Apple's iPhone 4s (L) and Samsung's Galaxy S III at a store in Seoul August 24, 2012.
Credit: Reuters/Lee Jae-Won
By Dan Levine and Poornima Gupta
SAN FRANCISCO |
Mon Aug 27, 2012 12:45am EDT
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - In August 2010, just a few months after Samsung Electronics launched its Galaxy smartphone, a team of Apple Inc lawyers flew to South Korea.
Apple's late co-founder, Steve Jobs, had already told Samsung executives at a meeting earlier that summer that he considered the Galaxy S, based on Google's Android operating system, an illegal copy of the iPhone. But given the extensive business ties between the two companies - Samsung is one of Apple's key component suppliers - a negotiated solution seemed most likely.
The Apple attorneys were blunt: "Android is designed to lead companies to imitate the iPhone product design and strategy," read the second slide in their presentation.
But the meeting did not go well, according to a person familiar with the case. Samsung attorneys bristled at being accused of copying, and produced a set of their own patents that they said Apple was using without permission.
The meeting brought to the fore a fundamental disagreement between the two companies, and set the stage for a bitter, multi-country patent dispute that led to Friday's U.S. jury verdict that Samsung had violated Apple's patents. The jury awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages, which could be tripled as the jury found Samsung acted willfully.
Samsung could now face a costly ban on sales of key smartphone and tablet products. Shares in Samsung - the world's biggest technology firm by revenue - tumbled more than 7 percent on Monday, set for its biggest daily percentage drop in nearly four years, wiping $12 billion off its market value.
Samsung says it will seek to overturn the decision, and the worldwide patent battles among tech giants are hardly over. But for now at least the decision in what was widely seen as a critical case promises to re-set the competitive balance in the industry.
The vast majority of patent disputes settle before trial, particularly between competitors. In this case, though, the stakes were just too high - and the two companies ultimately had very different views of the often murky legal issues.
Samsung believed its wireless communications patents were strong and valuable, and would serve as a counter-weight to any Apple showing of infringement, people close to the case say.
The South Korean company also didn't believe Apple could or should be allowed to claim patent protection on design elements like the form of a rectangle, or the front flat surface embodied on the iPhone.
Apple, for its part, considered its feature and design patents to be very high up on the intellectual property food chain - and demonstrating their validity was critical to a much wider war against Android.
The two companies never came close to settling their differences, according to courtroom testimony, trial evidence and interviews with several sources close to the case.
And when it came to the trial, Samsung's lawyers miscalculated in arguing that a verdict for Apple would harm competition in the marketplace. The jurors, led by a foreman who holds his own patent, were more persuaded by Apple's pleas to protect innovation. For them, it ultimately wasn't even a close call.
A spokesman for Samsung in Seoul had no immediate comment.
CORDIAL BUT ADAMANT
Apple launched the iPhone in 2007, revolutionizing the mobile phone market. But later that year Google, then still an ally of Apple's, unveiled the Open Handset Alliance, with the aim of distributing its Android smartphone software to all-comers.
Google's open approach quickly caught on among manufacturers looking to compete with Apple. The strategy infuriated Jobs, and by 2009 relations between the two companies had soured and Google's then-CEO, Eric Schmidt, left Apple's board. Jobs' biographer famously quotes him as accusing Google of "grand theft" and vowing to "go to thermonuclear war" over the issue.
In January 2010, Taiwanese phone manufacturer HTC Corp launched a touch screen, Android-based smartphone that sported features very similar to the iPhone. Apple sued in March of that year, and the Android smartphone patent wars were on.
HTC, though, was a minor player compared with Samsung.
After the cordial but failed August 2010 meeting, attorneys from Apple and Samsung talked in a series of meetings both in South Korea, California and elsewhere in the United States.
Apple's attorneys set to work putting a price tag on a royalty demand. By October 2010, they had concluded that Samsung should pay $24 per smartphone, and $32 per tablet. Based on Samsung's own estimation of its profits, Apple's royalty payments would effectively wipe out more than half of Samsung's margins on any phone priced less than $450.
And, Apple's offer wouldn't have covered the "unique user experience" patents Apple holds dear. "We made that clear," said Apple licensing chief Boris Teksler.
By the end of 2010, the meetings stopped as the two sides were too far apart.
VIEWED AS RIP-OFF
Apple hoped its relationship with Samsung would make filing an actual lawsuit unnecessary. Yet instead of wilting under Apple's pressure, Samsung instead pressed its own patent claims, including a critical one relating to how mobile products send and receive information over wireless networks.
Samsung eventually would request a 2.4 percent royalty on those patents, or $14.40 per device.
But Samsung had committed to license its wireless patents on fair terms to competitors over the years, in exchange for the technology becoming part of the industry standard. Courts have generally been reluctant to bar companies from using such "standards essential" patents, and thus they are often less valuable than other types of intellectual property.
Then, in early 2011, Samsung released the Galaxy Tab 10.1. To Apple, it was a clear rip-off of the iPad, and showed Samsung had no intention of modifying its products.
Apple sued Samsung in a San Jose, California federal court in April 2011, saying the Korean company "slavishly" copied its designs. Samsung quickly counter sued, and the dispute bled into at least 10 courts around the world, including Australia and South Korea.
Over the next year, outside law firms hired by both companies racked up thousands of billable hours around the world, but no decisive rulings threatened either side. Jobs passed away in October 2011, and Cook carried on the litigation, filed "reluctantly," he said.
Until recently it had mostly been a see-saw battle. Apple largely succeeded in thwarting HTC. But earlier this year a federal judge in Chicago threw out a case pitting Apple against Google's Motorola Mobility unit, saying neither side could prove damages.
For Apple, the California lawsuit against Samsung took on even more urgency as it sought to prove the basic validity of its iPhone and iPad patent claims.
It scored its first serious victory in the San Jose court when U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh issued two sales bans: one against the Galaxy Tab 10.1, and the other against the Galaxy Nexus phone. In her ruling on the tablet, Koh said Samsung had the right to compete, "but does not have right to compete unfairly."
Yet Koh repeatedly urged the two sides to settle. Last month, Cook and his Samsung counterpart Choi Gee-sung participated in one last mediation in an attempt to stave off the impending U.S. trial.
They couldn't agree. Besides the dispute over the "standards essential" patents, Samsung believes it has a stronger patent portfolio than Apple when it comes to next-generation technology like 4G. [ID:nL2E8INE3P]
OUT OF TIME
The trial began on July 30. Apple presented top executives who testified in coherent narratives, and revealed damaging internal Samsung documents that showed the company modifying its products to be more like the iPhone.
Samsung's case was far less slick. Koh gave both sides 25 hours of trial time, but Samsung lawyers used up too much time in the beginning and couldn't cross examine some Apple witnesses towards the end. Samsung employees testified through interpreters, or in video depositions that alienated jurors.
"Instead of witnesses, they sent you lawyers," Apple attorney Harold McElhinny said during his closing argument.
And while Samsung's own patents were a major part of behind-the-scenes negotiations, at trial its lawyers struggled to present them on an equal footing with Apple's intuitively comprehensible design and feature patents.
Samsung could have opted for a separate trial on its patents, but declined. Its lawyers may have believed that placing its own allegations in front of the same jury would balance out any toxic impact from breaches of Apple patents.
It didn't work. Samsung violated six of Apple's patents, the jury said. Whether damages will be tripled is a decision for Koh in the coming weeks.
Samsung asked for up to $399 million on its standards patents. It got nothing.
Samsung has vowed to keep fighting. It could get an appeals court to delay any potential sales ban, which would give it time to bring new, modified products to the market.
But barring a reversal on appeal, Apple now has a clear verdict: how it values its intellectual property is more than just a theory.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, is Apple Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al, 11-1846.
(Reporting by Dan Levine and Poornima Gupta; Editing by Jonathan Weber and Ian Geoghegan)
Tech
Media
South Korea
iPad
Related Quotes and News
Company
Price
Related News
Tweet this
Link this
Share this
Digg this
Email
Reprints
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (0)
Be the first to comment on reuters.com.
Add yours using the box above.
Edition:
U.S.
Africa
Arabic
Argentina
Brazil
Canada
China
France
Germany
India
Italy
Japan
Latin America
Mexico
Russia
Spain
United Kingdom
Back to top
Reuters.com
Business
Markets
World
Politics
Technology
Opinion
Money
Pictures
Videos
Site Index
Legal
Bankruptcy Law
California Legal
New York Legal
Securities Law
Support & Contact
Support
Corrections
Connect with Reuters
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
RSS
Podcast
Newsletters
Mobile
About
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
AdChoices
Copyright
Our Flagship financial information platform incorporating Reuters Insider
An ultra-low latency infrastructure for electronic trading and data distribution
A connected approach to governance, risk and compliance
Our next generation legal research platform
Our global tax workstation
Thomsonreuters.com
About Thomson Reuters
Investor Relations
Careers
Contact Us
Thomson Reuters is the world's largest international multimedia news agency, providing investing news, world news, business news, technology news, headline news, small business news, news alerts, personal finance, stock market, and mutual funds information available on Reuters.com, video, mobile, and interactive television platforms. Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
NYSE and AMEX quotes delayed by at least 20 minutes. Nasdaq delayed by at least 15 minutes. For a complete list of exchanges and delays, please click here.