Friday, August 31, 2012

Snippet: Tokyo Court Dismisses Apple's Patent Claims against Samsung

Last week, I blogged on the decision of the Northern District Court of California awarding USD 1.05 Billion in damages to Apple against Samsung. Today, the Times of India has reported that the Tokyo District Court has dismissed Apple's claims of patent infringement by Samsung. I will share more details of the decision as and when I have them.


  1. Isn't this smart phone war getting out of hand. Don't you think that Reasonable and Non Discriminatory (RAND)licensing commitment and compulsory licensing is going to be a reality as far as smart phone patents are concerned?

  2. Dear Vika,
    I agree, mutual licenses could be prove to be more efficacious. But I am just wondering if we can address the issue at a more fundamental level- grant of patents. Is the process of patent examination losing its rigour even in advanced IP regimes? Are these regimes paying attention to this issue? For me, examination of a patent application represents the first and the more critical line of defense in securing both private and public interests. It has a direct bearing on the realm available for other players in the field and on quality of patent enforcement. What are your thoughts on these issues?

    Best Regards,

  3. While reading on the Apple- Samsung case, i read somewhere that the men who filed these patents are clueless about what their patent is for! Do we even need these in the first place? In the early 20th Century, getting patents on aeronautical stuff was banned for sometime. The Wright Brothers lamented that the time they spent on filing patents could be used for doing more useful things! At times, reading the FERs I feel the examiners were high while making the responses! Or maybe it is some internal politics between all the parties ( The Registry and the law firms) Three years at law school and all this brouhaha makes me wonder at the futility of all these.

  4. I have been going through the articles and blogposts on the decision, and I am not sure how many of these articles are actually based on first-hand reading of the decision. In a few days, I will be putting up posts based on the actual decisions, and not on secondary propositions. Until then, I dont think I have enough information to comment on any party's strategy or blunder. As for quality of FERs, I am totally with you. Very rarely do FERs require you to actually apply your mind to the objections, most of them are bald giving one the impression that there is probably an internal template in the Patent Office even for objections. Neither does the system of grant have a semblance of predictability, nor does the system for enforcement.It does force conscientious practitioners to ask once in a while if all of this is worth the inventor's time and money.

  5. Looking forward to your take on the subject :)