The war has raged across three continentswith each company accusing the other ofpatent violations to retain their dominance inthe $219 billion global Smartphone marketSamsung and Apple have been at war sinceApril 2011, when Apple filed a suit in the US-san Jose California court accusing the SouthKorean company of slavishly copying theiphone and ipads patented technologies
• Apple tried to use Samsung documents to show its rival knowingly violated the iPhone makers intellectual property rights, while Samsung argues Apple is trying to stifle competition to maintain exorbitant profit, according to court• Samsung, in this case, responded that Apple had used its patented technology for 3G wireless connectivity without permission, and that it used some of its patented methods, such as sending photos from a camera-equipped phone• Samsung had denied the charges by apple claiming that it developed its devices independently, seeking $422million for infringement on its wireless patents
Samsungs counterattack against Apple using some of its patents, went nowhere. The jury found that Samsungs patents werent infringed, and Samsung wont get any of the $422 million it was asking for. An area of relief for Samsung was that the jury decided its Galaxy tablets did not look so much like an iPad as to breach "trade dress". But they had to hit with damages for infringing Apples "utility" patents
Apple reported that Samsung user interfaces mimicked its "trade dress", the general cosmetic appearance of its iPhone in a way that could confuse potential customers, document translation, scaling and rotation on a touch screen display," Jury also found Samsung infringing utility patents on iPhones “bounce back effect” such as List scrolling when it comes to scrolling a long list of items “onscreen navigations”, “tap to zoom in $ out” and design patents that covers iPhones features such as the “home button, rounded corners, tapered edges and onscreen icons.
On 24th August 2012, the Jury was led by U.S judge Lucy HKoch in San Jose federal court room, California awarded Applemore than $1.05bn in damages after they found that Samsungsmart phones and tablets infringed the iphone’s trade dress,utility and design patents
The Seoul central district court ordered Apple to remove the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad 1 and iPad 2 from shelves in South Korea, citing they infringed Samsungs telecommunications patents. The court also ruled that Samsung ripped off their patents and banned sales of the Galaxy S2 in South Korea. Sales of devices recently released by Samsung and Apple including the iPhone 4S and the Galaxy S3 smart phones were not affected. In a court filing, Judge Lucy Koh has denied Apples request for a permanent sales ban on 26 Samsung products found to have infringed its patents in a jury verdict . Writing that "this Court had already performed significant irreparable harm analysis in this case“ Koh concluded that Apple didnt establish the case for a permanent injunction on Samsungs products. Apple needed to prove that the infringing features were what that were directly driving "consumer demand for the accused product" in order to obtain the ban.
Despite being a driving force in phone development since the iPhone was launched in 2007, Apple has only 19 percent share of the worldwide Smartphone market, according to IDC. Mainly the high price of the iPhone keeps it out of the reach of many consumers. Samsung surpassed Apple as worlds largest vendor of smart phones in 2012, and now has 30 percent of the global share.
Will the aftermath negatively affect the consumer’s directly? Consumers have the right to choice and they know what are they buying when it comes to Samsung products Thus, Samsung is taking all necessary measures to ensure the availability of their products and they continue to innovate and offer choices for the potential consumers
Samsung should keep a tap on the patented models and features of other company before designing or adding feature to its own model Whenever the company designs some new models, it should get its patent claimed in the lawsuit as further delay could lead to violation of patents against other company It should always try to redesign and come out with its new technologies