• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Karl-Hermann Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Dr. Christoph Hölscher
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Apple and Samsung end 7-year patent feud

28. June 2018

A sensational end to a 7-year patent dispute: the two smartphone manufacturers Apple and Samsung end their seemingly endless legal dispute, which Steve Jobs himself had described as “thermonuclear war”.

Arstechnica today announced the termination of all proceedings and disputes between Apple and Samsung. At first glance, this appears surprising since it was not until late May that the U.S. court in San Jose, California, ruled Apple’s case against Samsung in a lawsuit that ultimately claimed $539 million in damages. However, this judgement unfulfilled expectations of both.

Background to the San Jose US Court ruling

Apple I-PhoneThe US Court of San Jose, California, ruled in late May that Samsung had to pay a good half a billion US dollars for the infringement of iPhone designs and patents ((11-cv-01846, United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division)). This is less than Apple originally demanded, but much more than Samsung expected. Apple demanded $1 billion, of which Samsung only wanted to pay $28 million.

Because the California court now also had to decide whether Apple was entitled to all lost profits from the sale of a device because design patents were infringed – or only part of them. In a landmark ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court in December 2016 on this case, Samsung received support. If design patents are infringed, the final product sold to users does not necessarily have to be used as the basis for calculating the damage, the highest U. S. Court ruled at the time.

Designs and design patents are becoming more and more important

The long case reflects how relatively new fundamental judgements on designs and design patents are. Finally, with the digitalization and the very large market power of modern smartphone manufacturers, the design patent procedures that have not been given priority in legal decisions to date have become explosive. Creative design is the core element of the products in these cases, and it can not only be used for recently unimaginable profits. At the same time, however, design should be able to be used as an instrument to prevent competition in order to do justice to its importance.

All the more significant is today’s announcement that this fundamental patent dispute has been resolved by Samsung and Apple. So far, there is no further information on their agreement. Possible would be a license agreement for mutual respect and regulated payment of the disputed patents that both smartphone manufacturers need for their products.

License agreement may be possible

Licence fees are a common way to use a third party’s patents without getting entangled in lengthy, expensive and open-ended procedures. So-called unit licenses are often agreed, since licenses often refer to the manufacture of a product. A certain percentage of the net sales price per sold piece is then calculated, which depends on the industry and the overall sales situation.

Basically there are different possibilities of licenses:

Exclusive license

  • if the licensee has the sole right to the patent
  • The licensee may also grant sublicenses

Single license

  • The licensor retains the right of use granted by the patent
  • The licensee may only grant a sublicense with the consent of the licensor

There are also various restrictions in the license agreement, for example with regard to duration, time, territory or even production and distribution. Cost sharing in the patent administration, lump-sum agreements or minimum license fees can also be agreed. On the other hand the licensing behaviour, for example delayed tactics in license negotiations, is again and again in the center of in patent proceedings (see Info Blog: Huawei victorious against Samsung)

Patent Sharing or cross-licensing are more likely

For the agreements between Apple and Samsung, however, cross-licensing and dynamic management of the patent portfolio are more likely. Only a few months ago Google surprised with a patent agreement with Tencent in China – we reported (Info-Blog: Patent agreement in trend? Google landed surprising coup with Tencent in China). Patent sharing can also be seen as a trend for patent licenses, from which both licensors and licensees can benefit.

It can therefore be eagerly awaited what kind of agreements have now been concluded between the two smartphone manufacturers and what the details will look like in the agreement.

Do you want to apply for a trademark or a Community design, too?

Please take your chance and contact us. Our lawyers are experienced in trademark and patent law, national and international law.

 

 

 

Sources:

Artechnica 28 June 2018

Picture:

JESHOOTScom / pixabay.com / CC0 License

 

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet 
  • share 

Category iconPatent Law,  Licenses,  Design Law Tag iconpatent license,  Samsung,  U. S. Court,  end of dispute,  end of courts,  agreement,  Apple,  san jose

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Patent Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022
  • EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible 24. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

22. February 2022
PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

17. February 2022
China joins the Hague Agreement

China joins the Hague Agreement

8. February 2022
Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

4. February 2022
Grill bowl design: patent drawings against design

Grill bowl design: patent drawings against design

3. February 2022
PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Torhaus Westhafen
Speicherstrasse 59
D – 60327 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

© Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]