Legal Aspects of Business

Submitted to Prof. Sudhir Kulkarni

Topic:- Intellectual Property Rights Apple v/s Samsung 

Group-10
Sr Name PRN
No Roll No

1 Dhyaan Kanakia 44171 21020141071

2 Shubham Mhatre 44231 21020141131
3 Raunak Mandal 44271 21020141171
4 Sansriti Shukla 44294 21020141194
5 Sourabh Malviya 44322 21020141222
6 Vikaskumar Thakur 44329 21020141229
 A HISTORY OF
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS
 PATENT THE
DEFINITION
A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state 
to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of
time(usually 20 years), in  exchange for the public disclosure of
the invention.

...is a form of intellectual property.

...application must include PATEN ...term of protection available

one or more claims that should be a minimum of 20 years.
define the invention. T
 THE PATENT HISTORY

THE FIRST PATENT AGREEMENT WAS IN

500BC,IN THE GREEK CITY OF SYBARIS.

1790 • in the U.S. the first Congress adopted a Patent Act.

• Statue of Monopolies, which declared that patents could only be

1624 granted for “...projects of new invention”.

1474 • patents in the modern sense originated.

1449 • King Henry VI granted the first English patent with a license of 20
years

1421 • a florence architect received a three year patent.

• the profits were secured to the inventor by patent for the space of a
500 BC year.
 THE PATENT LAWS BY COUNTRIES AND
REGIONS

Australian Law
member state of the
standard patent innovation patent with faster
World Intellectual
with a term of 20 approval process, lower fees
Property Organization
years. and a maximum term of 8
(WIPO). years.
Canadian Law
the granting of Canadian patents is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Canadian federal
government.

South African Law

a patent provides legal protection for a new and industrially applicable invention.

European Law
patents having effect in European states may be obtained either nationally or at the European
Patent Office (EPO).

shaped by international agreements such as TRIPs Agreement and the Patent Law Treaty(PLT).
 UNITED STATES PATENT LAW WAS
ESTABLISHED TO PROMOTE THE PROGRESS
OF SCIENCE AND USEFUL ARTS.

Companies have used patents to obtain monopoly rights in certain inventions.

The importance of granting monopolies for new inventions has been recognized in the U.S. since the adoption of the U.S.
Constitution.

The term of patent is 20 years from the earliest claimed filling date (can be extended).

Section 101 of the U.S. Patent Act.

Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or
any new and useful improvements thereof, may obtain a patent, subject to the conditions and
requirements of this title.
 FOR AN INVENTION TO BE
PATENTABLE THERE MUST BE
FOUR REQUIREMENTS.
Statutory Requirement
U.S. Patent Statute states that processes, machines, articles of
manufacture and compositions of matter are patentable.

Novelty Requirement
This novelty requirement states that an invention cannot
be patented if certain public disclosures of the invention
have been made.

Useful Requirement
Term useful refers to the condition that the subject matter has
a useful purpose and also include operativeness.

Non-Obviousness Requirement
An invention to be patentable, it must not only be novel, but
it must also be a non-obvious improvement over the prior art.
 A U.S. PATENT APPLICATION MUST BE
MADE IN WRITING BY THE INDIVIDUAL
INVENTOR(S).
Only the inventor may apply for a patent with certain exceptions.

If an inventor is employed as an inventor, the employer will usually be the owner of any patent or
invention made by the inventor.

The specification portion of a patent application is a written description of the invention and also
explains how to make and use the invention.

The two primary requirements of the specification is that it must be “enabling” and it must describe
the “best mode” of the invention.

The patent application must include one or more claims, which form the heart of any patent. Claims
are brief descriptions of the subject matter of the invention.

The examiner of a patent application uses the claims to compare the application with the prior art.

The patent application include one or more drawings of the invention, whenever is required. Most
applications, for software patents include a drawing to describe the crucial features of the
invention.
The inventor must make an oath or declaration that she/he believes herself/himself to be the
original and first inventor of the subject matter of the application.
 A NOTICE O F ALLOWANC E W IL L B E
SENT TO THE A PPL I C A N T ’ S PATENT
ATTORNEY, WHEN A PATENT
APPLICATIO N MET THE R EQUIREMENTS .
Applicant need only be
The rights granted by a patent...
concerned about...

are the rights to exclude others from

commercial exploitation.
payment of the issue fee.
3 months will be given for the fee the patent holder is the one who make, use, or
to be paid. sell the invention.

others may do so with the authorization of

patent marking. the patent holder.

the word patent and the number

are very different than rights granted under
of the patent.
copyright law.

maintenance fees.

failure to pay may result in

expiration of the patent.
 IS THE
UNAUTHORIZED
MAKING,U S ING, OR S EL L ING OF
THE PATENTED INVENTION .
The Government may use any patented invention without permission.

The patent holder may sue in the appropriate Federal court.

The patent holder may ask for an injunction to prevent the continued infringement.

Ask the court for an award of damages.

Suits for infringement of patents follow the rules of procedure of the Federal courts.
APPLE VS SAMSUNG:
THE CONTEXT
 PATENTLY
APPLE
Individual technologies stands out as key indicators of what the future of
smartphone design may hold.
Noteworthy Patents

Since 2007 Fuel Cell System to Power a

Portable Computing
Device.

Apple has filed more than Assist Features for Content

1300 mobile patents. Display Device.

Apple has entered into 479

lawsuits to protect the
intellectual property behind
the technology.
 IN 2010 APPLE HAD THE MOST
POWERFUL PATENT PORTFOLIO IN
CONSUMER ELECTRONICS.
How does Apple’s comparatively small portfolio come out on top?

2010
70% cited as “prior art” more frequently than average
(Pipeline Impact).

37 % more generally applicable than average (Pipeline

Generality).

Quality not quantity counts when it comes to patent portfolios.

Pipeline Impact Pipeline Generality Pipeline Originality

This metric is based Measures the variety of

Measures the variety of
on citations both from technologies upon which
technologies that build
the organization an organization’s patent
upon an
itself and from other build, based on the
organization’s patents.
organizations. concept and inventions.
 APPLE’S PATENT
PORTFOLIO SHOWING
ITS STRATEGY.
Since 2000, Apple has filed
Apple has the most powerful
1298 patents addressing hand
patent portfolio in consumer
held mobile radio telephone
technologies.
2007
2000
Vast majority of patents have
been filled following the
launch of the iPhone.
Apple’s Virtual
electronics. University patent
known as iTunes U.
Apple Patents Point
iPhone’s 5 integrated
to Advancing the
Touch Technology is
Quality of iDevices
granted a Patent.
cameras.
201 23 April 2013
1
2010 2013
As part of a consortium, Apple Apple Granted a Whopping
participated in the acquisition
54 Patents Covering smart
of Nortel’s patent portfolio.
Apple contributed $2.6 billion instruments, smart business
from $4.5 billion. cards, magnetic port covers
& more.
PATENT WAR: A NEW AGE O F
COMPETITION.
Past

Timeline
THE Apple vs. Samsung: Two Technology Giants Fight Over Design Patents. For many
years, Apple had conquered and dominated the smartphone market until
Samsung's newly launched smartphone series known as ‘Galaxy’ was launched in
2013 and became a huge challenger for the global smartphone market share..
WA Samsung's strong marketing, paired with Android's unique features, allowed the
Galaxy to surpass the iPhone as the most popular smartphone brand on the planet.
This sparked a furious competition between the two technology behemoths, with
never-ending legal fights as a result. 
R   
The Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Lawsuit was the starting of several
continuing lawsuits between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics over smartphone
and tablet design; as of July 2012, the two companies were responsible for more
HA than half of all smartphones sold globally. Apple's international struggle for
technological patents in the "smartphone patent wars" became recognised as
significant litigation in a highly competitive global market for consumer mobile
communications. 

S
Apple's focus on Samsung is severe and repeated, despite the fact that bringing lawsuits is a frequent strategy for
the firm. Apple went after Samsung for tablet and smartphone concepts in 2011, while it was already locked in a
legal battle with Motorola. The first lawsuit was filed in April, and Apple and Samsung had filed 19 lawsuits in nine
countries by August 2011. By July 2012, the two firms had been named in over 50 cases around the world, with
billions of dollars in damages sought. 
  
On January 4, 2007, four days before the iPhone was presented to the world, Apple had filed a set of 4 patents
related to design covering the iPhone's core structure. Apple filed a massive colour design patent in June of that
year, which contained 193 images of various iPhone GUIs. GUIs are shrot for graphical user interface.  These
filings were utilised to choose which intellectual property to enforce against Samsung. 
  
Apple filed a 38-page federal complaint in the Northern District of California on April 15, 2011, accusing that many
Samsung Android devices, including the Nexus S, Epic 4G, Galaxy S 4G, and Galaxy Tab, violated Apple's intellectual
property, including patents, trademarks, user interface, and style. Apple is suing for multiple cases of patent
infringement, fraudulent identification of origin, unfair business practices, and trademark infringement on the
federal level, and market manipulation, legal system trademark law, and punitive damages on the state level. 
Apple compared photos of the iPhone 3GS and the Samsung Galaxy S in court to prove how similar their packaging
and app icons appear. After it was discovered that the images had been altered to make the two products appear
more similar than they are, Samsung's lawyer accused Apple of submitting false evidence to the court. 
  
Samsung launched a counterclaim to Apple in federal district court in South Korea, Japan, and Germany, on April
22, 2011, claiming that Apple violated on Samsung's smartphone patents. By the summer, Samsung had filed
lawsuits against Iphone in the Britain's High Court and the United States District Courts for the Districts of
Delaware. 

Each company won repeated victories against the other between 2012 and 2015, with courts in Germany, the
United States, Japan, South Korea, Italy, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Australia continually
giving opposing verdicts. In a dispute involving more than a dozen Samsung phones, Apple obtained an early
decision in 2012. Appeals and countersuits continued until 2014, when nearly all of the target models were phased
out of production. As a result, the whole expense of the damage was borne by the two companies' exorbitant legal
fees, not the production line. 
  
However, there have been some victories in terms of manufacturing and distribution. A German court, for
example, imposed an EU-wide injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 in August 2011 for infringing on
Apple's interface patent. Despite Samsung's defense and the injunction's limitation to German markets, Apple had
won a substantial victory. 
IN APRIL
2 0 11
APPLE
FILED
FORM
PATENT
INFRING
EMENT,
CLAIMIN
G THAT
SAMSUN How Evolution
G
COPIED becomes A
ITS
IPHONE
War
AND
IPAD
DESIGNS
.
KEY FACTS OF THE LAWSUIT WHICH
BEGAN IN APRIL 2 0 11

In the original lawsuit Apple stated that the South-Korean firm had ripped off the design and technology
of Apple products.

The actual terms that used: Apple alleges that Samsung “slavishly” copied its designs.

In response, Samsung counter-sued, saying that Apple had infringed a number of patents to do with 3G.

Apple pushed on, stating Samsung copied the “look and feel” of the Apple IOS range of devices, namely
the Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets.

The lawsuit had spread to over 30 courts across four continents, and after negotiations failed, landed in
front of a judge for the true showdown in July 2012.

Apple is seeking $2.5 billion in damages, and Samsung is also seeking financial restitution.
 THE TIMELINE OF THE
TRIAL
OF THE CENTURY.
July 2011 August 2011 September 2011
Apple sued Samsung for patent
infringement and named Samsung galaxy Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablet was
put on hold in Apple says Samsung's tablet infringes
tab 10.1 . design patents, and Samsung says that
Samsung says that the iPhone 4, 4s and Australia.
iPhones and iPads infringe 3G patents.
iPad 2 infringe 3G patents. Apple won a victory in a German court,
for a preliminary injunction against
the sale of the Galaxy Tab
10.1.

October 2011 November 2011

December 2011
Australian ban on Galaxy Samsung’s victory against Apple
Tab continues. in Australia is announced.
However the physical design of Apple’s legal requests to block
the tablet changed. Samsung from selling certain 4G-
enabled products to consumers
based in the U.S. failed.

May 2012
March April 2012
Apple didn’t succeed to ban

2012 U.S. District Judge Lucy

Koh, orders the two
Galaxy Tab in the U.S.
until a trial held.

Original agreement between sides to talk.

Samsung and Apple
concerning the handover of
mobile device models
 24 AUGUST
2012 THE
VERDICT
The nine jurors decided

Samsung infringed
Apple had not
had on
committed a single
Apple’s and should
property intellectual
pay
count of infringement.
at least $1.049 billion
in damages.

Utility Patents Infringed Design Patents Infringed

Bounce back patent Yes D‘677 patent Yes
Covering scrolling patent Yes D‘087 patent Yes

Two finger gestures patent Yes D‘880 patent Yes

Tap-to-zoom patents Yes iPad patents Yes

 THE VERDICT: WHAT IT
REALLY MEANS?
• Definite Victory for
Apple.
• Infringements were “willful”.
• UI behaviors across Android will change.

• A lot of litigations will follow between Apple and other

Android phone makers.

• Maybe this case will force Google to sign a blanket

license for Android.
 WHO WINS AND WHO
LOSES
FROM THE DECISION?
Dealing a billion dollar (chopped to $598 million) from Samsung.

Infringements will disrupt Samsung’s manufacturing and supply chain.

Other manufacturers of Android devices.

Telecommunications companies that sell mobile plans.

(Apple has enormous leverage in its negotiations with operators.)

Customers.

Microsoft.
Its Windows Phone operating system hasn’t
gained traction in the marketplace.
Some group of stakeholders to turn away from Android.

Too few users to make it attractive for developers.

Nokia.
Microsoft’s key partner on Windows Phone is a double winner.
Boost of the Windows ecosystem-Owns a lot of potentially relevant patents.
 THE
APPLE VS SAMSUNG
CASE.
Develop products and services in this space that focus on the total user experience.

Create clusters of IP protection that capture the total user experience.

Develop a robust interactive brand that supports your overall TUX strategy.

Practice tighter integration between legal and development teams.

Focus on “mobile-first” design strategy.

Do not rely on specific software operating systems or platforms for user experience design IP innovations.

To the extent possible secure trade dress rights through litigation.

Use design patents to secure visual design protection on UX design solutions.

 Video 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1tFtMjFmYA

• The patent war between Samsung and Apple is

Fact Check officially over after seven years.

• The Jury decided that Samsung should pay Apple $

533,316,606

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1tFtMjFmYA

• The Judge dismissed the order with prejudice, and

Fact Check no case details were revealed immediately at
California district court.

• Apple claimed that Samsung copied their designs.

Shubham Mhatre
Fact Check

Based on the secondary research, the statements made

in this video are true

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

Apple claimed that Samsung

copied iPhone and iPad in April
2011

Fact Check
Samsung violated Apple's four
patents, which include look and
design and three utility functions
like bounce-back function, tap to
zoom and gestures motion.

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

20 Samsung devices copied Apple,

including Samsung Galaxy S and
Galaxy Tab.

Fact Check
In June 2011, Samsung counter
attached apple by claiming apple
had disobeyed Samsung's wireless
communication technology and
camera patents. 

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

Judge asked both the parties to settle the

issue before the court decided. But in
August 2011, Samsung's lawyer informed
the court that both the companies had
talked but could not arrive at a common
conclusion. 
Fact Check
Apple demanded $2.525 billions 

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

Samsung demanded 2.4% of the

apple products sold, $400 million.

Fact Check
The Jury selected for the hearing
consisted of 10 members who
once refused to join, and hence
the final committee was of 7 men
and two women.

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

The jury awarded Apple $1.05

billion, saying 26 Samsung
products copied Apple. 
Fact Check
In March 2013, Judge stated that
Jury's decision was incorrect and
asked apple to repay $450
million and asked for a retrial.

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

Apple claimed $379.8 million in addition

to what it paid earlier while Samsung
stated that amount should be $52 million,
but the court ordered Samsung to pay
$290 million so that the total amount will
be $929million 
Fact Check
 Some people claimed that this amount
was paid in the form of coins, but it
turned out to be a rumour. 

Shubham Mhatre
 Video 2:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6IcJGF0QdM 

Fact Check

Based on the secondary research, the statements

made in this video are true
Shubham Mhatre
 DISPUTE TIMELINE AND DETAILS

01 Since 2011, when Apple launched a lawsuit saying that Samsung's tablets and the smartphones
unquestioningly copied its products, the world's leading smartphone competitors were in court over patents.

02
In 2011, a jury in the United States decided that Samsung must pay Apple $539
million in damages for copying copyrighted smartphone functionality. 

Apple's patents 7,469,381 (Patent '381), 7,844,915 (Patent '915), and 7,864,163
03 (Patent '163) were tentatively rejected by the US Patent and Trademark Office in 2012.

04 In a 2012 trial, Samsung was found guilty, but a disagreement over the amount to
be paid led to the current retrial over damages, which finished on May 18.

Samsung previously compensated Apple for infringement of several of the

05 patents at issue in the dispute with a payment of $399 million

06 The jury awarded Apple $533.3 million for Samsung's breach of the so-called
design patents and $5.3 million for violating the utility patents in the fresh
judgment, which came after a trial in San Jose, California.
Sansriti Shukla
 DISPUTE TIMELINE AND DETAILS

Apple told jurors that it was entitled to $1 billion in earnings from Samsung's infringing phone
07 sales, claiming that the iPhone's design was critical to their success.

Samsung argued that it should only pay for earnings connected to the
08 components of its phones that infringed on Apple patents, limiting penalties
to around $28 million.

In December 2015, Samsung paid Apple $548 million, including $399 million
09 for patent infringement on some of the patents at issue in this week's trial.

"They have agreed to drop and settle their remaining claims and
10 counterclaims in this suit," the two phone behemoths told a district court
in San Jose, California, on 27th June 2018

The Supreme Court agreed in 2016, a unanimous decision, awarding Samsung a victory
11 in a unanimous verdict. However, the justices did not rule on the patents, instead
deferring to a lower court.

Sansriti Shukla
 DISPUTE TIMELINE AND DETAILS

Apple and Samsung’s long-running patent infringement battle saw its last trail in May in San Jose, California

In May, the case proceeded to trial, and Samsung lost, despite the fact that it claimed it
12 owed only $28 million. Instead, the jury decided on a $539 million award, which is
nearly $140 million higher than the amount that had been appealed

The order was ordered by Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California,
13 dismissing all lawsuits with prejudice, which means no further lawsuits can be
brought on the same claim.
Sansriti Shukla
 STATEMENTS

Sansriti Shukla
 THE TECHNOLOGY
Apple’s Patent
The iPhone's scroll-back and bounce design, which functions like spring-back behaviour when a user hits the edge of a
document, is protected by Utility Patent '381.

When an electronic document reaches its conclusion while being translated in one way by touch input, a region beyond
the electronic document's edge is displayed, and the touch input is released, the electronic document is translated in a
second direction

However, in May 2012, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) sought an ex parte examination, with the first office
action identifying two incidents of previous art against the patent.

The aspect known as "pinch-to-zoom" is covered by Utility Patent '915, which covers the ability to discriminate between
one-finger scrolling and two-finger actions like pinch-to-zoom on a touch-screen to activate particular operations.

"Determining whether the event object invokes a scroll or gesture operation by distinguishing between a single input
point applied to the touch-sensitive display that is viewed as the scroll procedure and multiple input points applicable to
the touch-sensitive screen that are viewed as the gesture operation," according to the claim at issue in Patent '915

Patent claims in patent '915 have been rejected by the USPTO because they were either anticipated by previous
inventions or were unpatentable

Sansriti Shukla
THE TECHNOLOGY
Apple’s Patent

Because it covers zoom display systems using gesture input on an electronic device, Utility Patent '163 has been dubbed
the "touch-to-zoom" patent.

The display of an electronic document having numerous boxes of content open and the ability to move through the
boxes using touch is claimed in this invention.

Sansriti Shukla
Apple’s design patents cover the following
•D618,677 - Electronic Devices 
As shown, the decorative design of an electronic equipment. - the display

•D593,087 - Electronic Devices 

The exterior section of an electrical device's aesthetic design, substantially as
depicted and described.

•D604,305 - A graphical user interface (GUI) for a display screen or a piece

of one
As shown and described, an ornamental design for a graphical user
interface for a display screen or portion thereof. - the display itself

•D504,889 - Electronic Devices

We claim the decorative design for an electronic device
in substantially the same form and manner as shown
and described. - It appears to be the very exterior

Sansriti Shukla
THE TECHNOLOGY
SAMSUNG’S PATENTS
Some of Samsung's patents were standard essential patents, which meant that they were patents that were used in a
standard.

These standards are critical in the field of technology, where there are numerous patents, each covering a distinct aspect
of, say, a phone, resulting in a complex patent licensing dilemma

Patent '941 (Utility Patent 7,675,941) is a 3GPP standard essential patent that covers communication technologies
required to comply with the Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) standard

MP3 playback technology on a mobile device is covered by Utility Patent 7,698,711 (Patent '711). This patent pertains to
MP3 playback on a mobile device.

Utility Patent 7,577,460 (Patent '460) describes a method for sending emails that include a message or an image
recorded in camera mode. This invention claims that sending a first message in a first email transmission mode, and then
sending a second message in a second email transmission mode

Switching between photo and image display modes is covered by Utility Patent 7,456,893 (Patent '893)

Sansriti Shukla
 SAMSUNG’S PATENTS

Another standard essential invention, Utility Patent 7,447,516 (Patent '516), provides two radio channels for
transmitting data with a fixed quantity of power, one that does not allow a Hybrid Automatic Retransmission Request
(HARQ) and the other that does

Playing music in an MP3 mode in response to a user input with respect to an interface, switching the MP3 mode to a
standby mode while playing the music, performing at least one function while playing the music in the standby mode,
and displaying an indication that the music is being played are all claims made in this patent

Utility Patent 7,577,460 (Patent '460) describes a method for sending emails that include a message or an image
recorded in camera mode. This invention claims that sending a first message in a first email transmission mode, and then
sending a second message in a second email transmission mode

The most recent image viewed before the mode switch is displayed when the user returns to display mode

Displaying a single image file in reproduction mode, moving from reproduction mode to photographing mode, saving a
newly photographed image, switching from photographing mode to reproduction mode, and displaying the single image
file again are all claimed in this invention

Sansriti Shukla
THE VALUE OF DESIGN PATENTS
At a patent infringement damages trail in
May in San Jose California, Apple’s vice
president of product marketing, answers
questions from Apple attorney Bill Lee
about Apple’s history of product design
Sansriti Shukla
Instead of going through several rounds of appeals, Apple and Samsung have
reached an agreement to put the dispute behind them.
However, it does not answer an issue that has far-reaching repercussions for the
whole tech industry: What is the value of a design patent?
The Supreme Court judgement stated that the damages may be narrowed, but it
did not provide any specific boundaries. It came down to the district court in the
end.
In the most recent trial, Samsung had intended to pay less for design patent
infringement. However, the jury's award of $539 million was much higher than
the original damages figure of $399 million
Samsung, predictably, filed an appeal, asking the court to overturn the decision
or order a new trial. The verdict, according to the corporation, was "excessive"
and unsupported by the facts.
That claim will never be brought to court, at least not by Samsung, as a result of
the deal. For the time being, design patents are likely to be viewed as a serious
threat to competitors