Post 19: Apple vs. Samsung: loss at both sides cannot do better than shaking hands

On March 26, Administrative Law Judge, Tomas B. Pender of the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) made an initial determination on demand in the investigation of Apple’s complaint against Samsung. ITC published such information on the official website, but did not open a preliminary detail of the award. However, some people said Judge Pender reaffirmed the original position in the preliminary decision that Samsung violated Apple’s 4 patents. Judge Pender has made the preliminary ruling last October, found that Samsung GALAXY S, GALAXY S II, GALAXY Nexus, GALAXY Tab, Smartphone and Tablet PC products violated Apple’s 3 common patent and 1 design patent. However, in January this year, ITC accepted Samsung’s request to reopen the case. The initial verdict had been scheduled for April 1, but it come out 6 days earlier than originally planned. The final judgment is scheduled for August 1. According to the United States Tariff Act No. 337, ITC can advise the President against importing allegedly infringing products. After the ITC makes its final decision, the President has to decide if he wants to accept the verdict within 60 days. If it is ultimately ruled that Samsung violated Apple’s patents, and the President accepted the result, part of Samsung products cannot enter U.S. market. Since Samsung’s latest products are not involved in this case, and the infringing products can avoid to be banned by developing other technologies, which around Apple technology patents. Thus, it is expected that Samsung’s U.S portfolio will not be affected too much.

In addition, ITC will make the final judgment on the case that Samsung sued Apple infringed it patent on May 31. ITC made an announcement on 13^th of this month postponed the date of the final judgment. It said that it was necessary to learn how much it was going to influence if the allegedly infringing Apple products were banned to the U.S. market. The above statement seems implies that ITC preliminary decision Apple did exist violations; outcome is expected to be conducive to Samsung.

It seems like Samsung will lose the most recent ITC lawsuit. However, patents provide Samsung with a high degree of brand visibility and reputation. In the recent market share, Samsung exceeds 30%, which is on the global top spot, while Apple is only about 14%. Samsung lose the case, but win the market. How can you tell who the winner is? It seems like Apple hopes to against Samsung’s intentions through patent warfare fell, then why Apple initiates the patent war?  Can patent war really play a role against the competitor? I doubt it. I do agree that patent warfare would be a good weapon as long as finding the right target. However, we all know that patent litigation is a long and protracted war. It may last for months or even years which caused immeasurable losses to the parties.  Apple and Samsung’s century patent was lasted form April 2011 till now, complicated protracted litigation is not only affecting the progress of both product development and marketing, but also damage both parties’ corporate image at various degrees. It is worth to notice that although Samsung has won the market share, but lose the lawsuit and pay compensation to Apple; Apple won lawsuits to obtain compensation, but its market share has been left far behind by Samsung. I think patent litigation is more like a double-edged sword, which can effectively protect their own innovation, but the complexity of patent litigation would hinder the pace of innovation in a certain extent. In general, patent wars are unable to separate the real winner, most patent fight lost at both sides. Apparently, it could not be implemented to fight against rivals through patent warfare because it takes a lot of resources, and might not get the ideal result. Thus, instead of losing on both sides, why not shake hands and achieve the win-win situation together. 

Post 18: Apple’s Siri got into Trouble in China

The news from cnet titled “Apple lands in Chinese court to battle Siri patent suit”.  The pretrial was held on Wednesday of this week (PST). The case pits Apple against Zhizhen Network Technology, which claims a patent for the voice-recognition software used by Siri. Zhizhen Network Technology’s claim is related to the patent number ZL200410053749.9 for a chat Robot. The chat robots can receive user statement and give intelligent answers through artificial intelligence server and database. Zhizhen Network believed that, by comparison, Siri on iPhone4S used Zhizhen’s patented network technology illegally, and its implementations fell into the scope of protection of a patent, ZL200410053749.9, for invention. According to Xinhua, Zhizhen Netwrok had sent a letter to Apple trading company and Apple, and tried to resolve this dispute through consultations, but they did not reply. Later on, Zhizhen sued to court, requested Apple immediately stop manufacturing, selling and using any products that infringed patent number ZL200410053749.9.

At the same time, Apple defensed that Zhizhen Network did not clearly descript its patent protection range, which led its franchise protection range undetermined, yet Zhizhen did not provide full effective evidence that proved Siri in iPhone4S fell into its patent right requirements of protection range. Thus, Apple thought two technology features were different and Siri application did not constitute infringement. Apple has mad invalid declaration request, but the Court has not given the permit yet.

I find this case is interesting because this is the first time the “littlee secretary”, Siri, encounter the patent infringement disputes. However, Sir is an essential feature for smartphone, which allows the phone turned into a “talking cellphone”. After Apple’s launch, Siri has become one of Apple’s key product research and development in the future. Siri has been used in many Apple’s new products, such as iPhone5, iPadmini. However, Zhizhen claimed that they committed to the development and application of this technology as early as 2003 and the patented technology has been widely used in Microsoft’s MSN robot, Expo Haibao robot and so on. Actually, Zhizhen started the lawsuit proceeding 3 days after the sale of Apple iPhone 4S; however, since the case involve U.S company, which has to serve through diplomacy. Thus, the case is officially put on schedule recent days.

So far, what seems to be he biggest issue of the case?

I think technical plan comparison will be the big argument between these tow companies. It is said that Siri technology has gotten the international patens, while Zhizhen has applied for patents in China. Since the court is held in China, I think it is really worth to see how the Court judges the case, and which patent law the Court will use. Surprisingly, the plaintiff’s petition did not involve compensation. After reading the whole story, I think compare to infringement, it most likely that these two companies start the voice software invention independently, but they released the technology at different time and location. I believe it did happen to some companies. That’s why I want to share this case. I think the case might become an example for the future similar cases. 

Post 17: Dispute Occurred Once Again – Some News about Nokia

On Tuesday of this week, Nokia won a German patent injunction against HTC. According to FOSSPATENT’s author, Florian Mueller, Mannhein local court found HTC had violated Nokia’s power saving patent, which saves battery life when connected to a network. Nokia could also enforce a sales ban by posting a $6.5 million bond and possess the right to claim damages. At the same time, Nokia said it had asserted the power saving patent against HTC in the UK and the U.S International Trade Commission, with a hearing in the U.S to start in two months.

It seems like the competition between Nokia and HTC escalates. Nokia has collected about 40 HTC’s patent about mobile communication, and claimed that HTC violated Nokia’s intellectual property rights. Earlier this month, the Court has dismissed Nokia’s claim to HTC. Although it seems like Nokia has won this round, it is still hard to tell how much this ruling can change Germany mobile market. Plus, it is still an argument about whether this ruling is a major victory between Nokia and HTC. In HTC’s statement, they claimed the ruling only affected three devices, Wildfire S, Desire S and Rhyme, which were no longer put in the Germany market. HTC also stressed that their Germany business would not be affected by the ruling. At the same time, Nokia has hailed the victory, saying, “HTC must now respect our intellectual property rights and use their own innovation competition.” Mueller believed HTC’s statement was only partially right, and he claimed the infringement relating to these devices is “classic”, but not only these three devices.

I’m not sure if Nokia’s cheer is really about the “respect” they have about intellectual property, or the benefit the intellectual property can bring. I remember earlier this month Nokia filed brief to support Apple’s request to block sale of Samsung products. The reason Nokia gave was that once the precedent had been started, patent holders’ right to request to ban the sale of infringing products would be weakened. Interestingly, Nokia and Apple had a patent dispute in 2011. Nokia ended to pay royalties to Apple. It seems like there is no enemy forever. The companies are willing to corporate in order to maximum the profit. Nevertheless, I think Nokia is overacting on protecting their own patent as Apple. I just feel like Nokia has put too much time concentrate on their patent protection, but ignoring their innovation and advertisement. Comparing to Apple and Samsung, when is your last time to hear any new and excited products from Nokia? Several months ago, a year ago, or maybe longer. Honestly, I can’t remember it myself. It’s true that Nokia holds a lot of good patents, but how long can they live depend on their patent alone. According to the patent law, the patent term is only 20 years from the filing date of the earliest U.S application to which priority is claimed. How many of their patents will be expired in the next few years? I do agree that they should learn from Apple, but not only the way how Apple protect their intellectual properties, but also the way how they invite new devices and advertise to attract costumers.

(Nokia posted this cartoon on Twitter, named "Guess who's who" on the day when Samsung released Galaxy S4)

Nokia, remember you are a big company, but not the king of the market. Please don’t do this kindergarten thing again.  

Post 16: Huaiwei & ZTE European Patent War

After nearly two years, the patent litigation case between Huawei and ZTE has the latest developments this week. German Mannheim District Court recently ruled against ZTE, saying its long-term evolution (LTE) 4G technology infringes on one of Huawei’s patents. The court also granted Huawei’s request for a ban on the sales of ZTE’s stations employing the LTE network in Germany. A representative from ZTE said the company would appeal against the ruling later. Florian Mueller, consultant of Microsoft and Oracle, mentioned that the lawsuit between Huawei and ZTE may have unprecedented impact on all standard-essential patent (SEP) enforcement in the European Union.

In April 2011, Huawei filed lawsuits against ZTE in Germany, France and Hungary, saying that ZTE infringe its patent and trademark rights. The patent involved in this litigations is “key derivation function” EP2273818, the basic patent of 4G LTE mobile communication standards.

It seems like the competition between Huawei and LTE is nor going to end soon. Behind the patent disputes, the competition heated on both sides. After viewing so many patent lawsuits, I think patent lawsuit have become an important weapon for international competition, it seems like no companies can avoid it. As China’s two largest telecommunications hardware makers, the fighting between Huawei and ZTE is expected to happen sooner or later because these tow companies are so similar on their products and services. LTE, a new technology, seems to be the focus of their competition. There is no doubt that LTE network will bring new opportunities to the global operations. It is believed that the market value of this new technology worth up to billions of dollars. The question is if a single company can take the big “cake”. Apparently the answer is no. In fact, Huawei and ZTE are two excellent telecommunication companies in China. As Chinese, I hope to see these two companies to corporate instead of fighting with each other. On the other hand, the patent war might not be totally a bad thing for those companies. The patent wars help to enhance the visibility of both companies at the international level. Thus, these international patent lawsuits are like extremely expensive advertisement for these two companies. However, is it worth to spend the huge amount of money on the ongoing patent lawsuit? Is it really good to be famous by doing so? I think those are good questions that worth companies to think about , not only for Huawei and ZTE, but also other companies.

Post 15: Apple vs Samsung on ITC stage

On Wednesday of this week, ITC delayed its final ruling on Samsung’s complaint against Apple case. It said the new final ruling would not start until May 31. Florian Mueller wrote in his blog, FOSS Patents:”ITC asked the parties with respect to the FRAND licensing issues relevant to the only Samsung patent the ITC appears to be inclined to find indringed. In the proceedings, Samsung noted that Apple’s iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch violates the FRAND patent. Once they found infringement of Apple, iOS devices could be banned. It would be a huge impact to the Apple users. I think this is one of the important reasons why TC postponed the final date to May 31. In Mueller’s blog, he thought it was a good sign for Apple since at least ITC Committee considered FRAND licensing issues, and this decision was one take before.

In addition, even though Apple suffered the banning issue, it probably would not affect the company’s latest iPhone and iPad sales since it has been translated into the other baseband chip supplier. I am kind of agreeing with Mueller that it sounds good for Apple, not about the licensing, but the changes Apple made about the chips. I think Samsung’s lawsuit is disguised motivation for Apple. After Apple realizing the crisis, it has to make the change and improvement. I think as time goes, iBuilding may not be a dream. I am looking forward to see it @ 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA in the future.

Post 14: Tela Innovations’ Patent War

On Tuesday this week, the U.S. Iternational Trade Commission voted to investing allegations that LG, Nokia and others were importing smartphones that infringe integrated circuit patents held by Tela Innovations Inc. ITC also said it would investigate Google, Motorola, HTC and Pantech to see if these companies violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by importing phones that copy seven of Tela’s patents.

Many large mobile phone and tablet companies, such as Apple, Samsung, Nokia have been involved in a large number of patent disputes. Tela’s actions remind us how easily those electronics device manufacturers can be sued by the components of the technology patent developer or supporters. I remembered on Monday’s lecture, Dr. Well mentioned that there were more than 250,000 active patents relevant to today’s smartphone. Thus, it’s quite difficult for the smartphone companies to check every single patent before release their new products, which also caused a relatively large number of smartphone related lawsuit.

California-based Tela sued those companies in both ITC and Delaware federal court last month. In Delaware’s court, Tela requested for permanent banning and compensation. In ITC, Tela proposed the prohibition of infringing devices into the U.S. market. I think that is another big headache or nightmare for those companies. ITC has the similar right as the court, once it has been hearing and found that certain types of imports into the U.S violates U.S intellectual property, ITC has the right to issue an order prohibiting the import of such goods to the U.S. More and more companies choose to sue other companies due to the following reasons: the investigation process of ITC is faster than the court; ways of finding evidences are loose; ITC can effective banned the import of oversea products into the U.S. market; judges in ITC have more experience in patent litigation.

In my opinion, it seems like Tela would not like to negation with any of these companies. Tela was founded in 2005. If I were Tela, I would discuss with those companies about licensing issue rather than sue them through ITC. As a young and starting company, I think it might be good to make friends than making enemies. Meanwhile, as an electronic technology company, it will have connections with other technique companies. I don’t doubt the profit Tela can get whether it can win or lose the case; however, unless it is big enough as Samsung, which is strong enough to fight with other big companies. Otherwise, it might be a huge obstacle for Tela to develop in the future.