Don't cast your axe into the sea
|
|
|
EC investigates Samsung over alleged FRAND patent abuse
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION has launched a preliminary investigation of Samsung over possible FRAND patent abuse against Apple.
A recent court filing by Apple in California revealed the news when it stated, "Samsung's litigation campaign and other conduct related to its Declared-Essential Patents is so egregious that the European Commission recently has opened an investigation to determine whether Samsung's behavior violates EU competition laws."
Samsung told The INQUIRER, "Samsung has at all times remained committed to fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing terms for our wireless standards-related patents."
However, the Korean firm acknowledged, "We have received a request for information from the European Commission and are cooperating fully."
Apple's court filing said, "Samsung's efforts to coerce Apple into tolerating Samsung's imitation have not been limited to the counterclaims here [in California]. Samsung has launched an aggressive, worldwide campaign to enjoin Apple from allegedly practicing Samsung's patents."
It explained, "Samsung has sued Apple for infringement and injunctions in no fewer than eight countries outside the United States. Indeed, Samsung's litigation campaign and other conduct related to its Declared-Essential Patents is so egregious that the European Commission recently has opened an investigation to determine whether Samsung's behavior violates EU competition laws. Apple brings these Counterclaims In Reply to halt Samsung's abuse and protect consumers, the wireless telecommunications industry, and Apple from further injury."
Update
The European Commission has confirmed that it is investigating Apple as well. It said in a statement, "The Commission has indeed sent requests for information to Apple and Samsung concerning the enforcement of standards-essential patents in the mobile telephony sector.
"Such requests for information are standard procedure in antitrust investigations, to allow the Commission to establish the relevant facts in a case. We have no other comments at this stage." µ
Tags: Apple
Share this:
Share
In the US they are called Design Patents, in the EU they are called Community Designs. They describe the physical appearance of a device, not how it functions. Either way they are perfectly valid IP that can be sued over.
Trade dress is a US term that covers things like packaging and appearance. In the UK the closest think we have is the offence of "Passing Off".
Apple's Multi-Touch patents don't claim to have invented the basic technology, but rather to have worked out a way to apply it on mobile devices for things like web browsing. There is nothing in patent law to prevent companies taking one idea and patenting how to apply it in another environment. Both the originator and second company have valid claims if someone copies this method of application.
"Now as Apple aren't suing Samsung over anything standards related (they're using design, trade dress and technical patents for things like multi-touch"
2 of those 3 aren't pattentable. The multi-touch patent is another story as that patent has yet to be tested/scrutinized. At least the multi-touch (unlike design and trade dress) might actually hold some water.
The fact that Apple didn't even invent multi-touch might be a problem though.
When a company takes part in an industry standards body to set a standard like 3G or LTE they MUST declare any patents that they hold that cover all or part of the proposed standard. They trade getting their patents included in the standard (where they will get a guaranteed income stream) for the requirement that the patent be licensed under Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. That means that they must charge everyone the same rates, they can't use the patents to force concessions from their opponents.
Now as Apple aren't suing Samsung over anything standards related (they're using design, trade dress and technical patents for things like multi-touch, non of which have been committed by Apple as FRAND) they can't be said to have left FRAND. The only arguments that Samsung have are whether Apple need to pay for their patents (having already been payed by the chip manufacturer, go look up Patent Exhaustion), and if they have been offering FRAND terms to Apple to use them (i.e. without terms like requiring cross licensing or excessing cost).
Apple has shown by their actions in Australia that they have no interest in licensing their own patents to Samsung after the truce offer from the latter, saying that they prefer to ban sales of Samsung devices rather than license the IP. Thus Apple has withdrawn itself from FRAND, and are now a fair game for any claim that Samsung might have, no matter how far it goes against the FRAND principles and how ridiculous the claim is (although Apple holds the shining beacon of being an unreasonable brat in patent court). FRAND is a two-way street, but Apple only wants it to work for Apple, and throws a tantrum whenever that is not the case.
Hopefully the The European Commission will point out the the basic design for a mobile handheld touch screen ... that Apple has.. should be under a FRAND license.
At the end of the day this will just shut the doors on any future Technology FRAND licenses coming from Samsung which will hamper Apple massively in the future.
in the mobile telephony sector Apple own?
IIRC the 3G patents that Apple have an interest in are via shared ownership in consortia, and non of them have been asserted against Samsung, so my bet is the only questions they are asking Apple are about the terms Samsung were asking for to use them.
According to this
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/04/apple-samsung-eu-idUSL6E7M41U220111104
they are looking at both of them. I really do hope this is the tip of the iceberg and it sets the EU on a course to get rid of the patent abuse that all the big outfits pursue.