LTN Law Technology News
  • Home
  • News
  • Reviews
  • Commentary
  • Surveys
  • Events
  • LegalTech® Directory
  • About LTN
  • Register
  • Topics:
  • E-Discovery & Compliance
  • Litigation Support
  • Practice Management
  • Office Tech
  • Mobile Lawyer
  • Research & Libraries
  • Tech Law

Home > South Korean Court Rules Samsung Didn't Copy iPhone

Font Size: increase font decrease font

South Korean Court Rules Samsung Didn't Copy iPhone

By Youkyung Lee All Articles 

The Associated Press

August 24, 2012

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Image: Clipart.com

South Korea's Samsung won a home court ruling in its global smartphone battle against Apple on Friday when judges in Seoul said the company didn't copy the look and feel of the U.S. company's iPhone, and that Apple infringed on Samsung's wireless technology.

However, in a split decision on patents, the panel also said Samsung violated Apple technology behind the bounce-back feature when scrolling on touch screens, and ordered both sides to pay limited damages.

The Seoul Central District Court ruling called for a partial ban on sales of products including iPads and smartphones from both companies, though the verdict did not affect the latest-generation phones —- Apple's iPhone 4S or Samsung's Galaxy S3.

The ruling affects only the South Korean market, and is part of a larger, epic struggle over patents and innovation unfolding in nine countries. The biggest stakes are in the U.S., where Apple is suing Samsung for $2.5 billion over allegations it has created illegal knockoffs of iPhones and iPads.

The Seoul ruling was a rare victory for Samsung in its arguments that Apple has infringed on its wireless technology patents, which previously have been shot down by courts in Europe where judges have ruled that they are part of industry standards that must be licensed under fair terms to competitors.

"This is basically Samsung's victory on its home territory," said patent attorney Jeong Woo-sung. "Out of nine countries, Samsung got the ruling that it wanted for the first time in South Korea."

The ruling ordered Apple to remove the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad 1 and iPad 2 from store shelves in South Korea, saying that the products infringed on two of Samsung's five disputed patents, including those for telecommunications technology.

The court also denied Apple's claim that Samsung had illegally copied its design, ruling that big rectangular screens in cases with rounded corners had existed in products before the iPhone and iPad.

"It is not possible to assert that these two designs are similar based only on the similarity of those features," the court said in a ruling issued in Korean that was translated into English by The Associated Press. It also said individual icons in the Samsung products do not appear similar to the icons Apple used in the iPhone.

But the court ruled that Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung had infringed on one of Apple's patents on the feature that causes a screen to bounce back when a user scrolls to an end image. The court banned sales of Samsung products using the technology, including the Galaxy S2, in South Korea.

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • IDC
  • Apple 25
  • Associated Press
  • Samsung Inc.
  • Ogilvy
  • Seoul Central District Court

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Big Law Whipped for Poor Tech Training
    •      
  2. 10 Devices You Should Never Take Along on a Business Trip
    •      
  3. Is Stanford Law the New Vortex of Legal Technology?
    •      
  4. Using Computer Forensics to Investigate IP Theft
    •      
  5. How the Predictive Coding Process Will Affect Paralegals
    •      
  6. CEIC: the Destination for Digital Investigation
    •      
  7. Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks
    •      
  8. ILTA Study to Gauge New Technologies' Impact on Law Practice
    •      
  9. 3-D Printing: The Next Big Thing in IP Law?
    •      
  10. Cisco E-Book Delivers Ethics on the Go
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

EEOC Gets Tough With Companies on Genetic Privacy

Retailers Facing Employment Law Vulnerabilities

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Cisco E-Book Delivers Ethics on the Go

Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Loaner Judges Helping Essex Cope With Persistent Vacancies
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Surrogate Faces Suspension for Political Activity, Drunken Driving
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Circuit Reinstates Lawsuit by Inmate Over Cell Conditions
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Custody Ruling in Bitter Fight May Turn on 11-Year-Old's Wish
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Filing Blunder To Cost $142,600
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court: Injured College Student Can't Sue State
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About LTN   |
  • Contact LTN   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media