Tech group files with court to support Samsung

Home > Business > Industry

print dictionary print

Tech group files with court to support Samsung

A technology advocacy group has filed an amicus curiae brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in support of Samsung Electronics’ effort to reduce its damage payments to Apple resulting from its first trial in California.

According to fosspatents.com, a blog run by German intellectual property expert Florian Mueller, the U.S.-based Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) recently requested that the appeals court nullify the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to award Apple $929 million for Samsung Electronics’ patent infringement on its electronic devices.

The CCIA represents more than 20 companies in the computer, Internet, information technology and telecommunications industries. Samsung is a member of the CCIA.

The group claimed that the term “article of manufacture” used in Section 289 by the district court should be interpreted differently. According to the CCIA, the term “must refer to the article in the design patent itself, not a larger device that incorporates the article as one of its components.”

The group explained that Apple’s D’087 and D’677 design patents “are directed to an outer shell of an unspecified electronic device,” while D’305 “is directed to a display screen for a graphical user interface for an unspecified device.”

The CCIA added, “The ’087 and ’677 patents both expressly acknowledge that the device inside the patented case is irrelevant. ... If the type of device is irrelevant, the article of manufacture in the ’087 and ’677 patents must be the outer case of the device.”

Mueller wrote that the claim was an “extreme position” and that he isn’t sure that “the commercial value of the outer case alone is the proper damages base here.”

The filing follows a petition from 27 U.S. law professors last month supporting Samsung. They claimed that the appeals court “should require proof of some connection between the patented design and the defendant’s profits.”

BY JOO KYUNG-DON [kjoo@joongang.co.kr]




More in Industry

Volvo XC60 ranks No. 1 for residual value in Encar study

Binggrae to scoop up ice cream competitor after FTC approves merger

LG accepting orders for rollable, $85K television

Shinsegae Group chair passes down shares to children

This Chuseok, the gift sets are meaty, boozy and pricey

Log in to Twitter or Facebook account to connect
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
help-image Social comment?
lock icon

To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.

Standards Board Policy (0/250자)

What’s Popular Now