Business ETC uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
: °C Sunday 26 May, 2013

Court bans some Samsung and Apple products in South Korea

A court has found that both tech companies infringed on each others patents which means that some of their products including the iPhone and iPad need to come off the shelves.

Image: Lewis Stickley/PA Archive/Press Association Images

A SOUTH KOREAN court has ruled that Apple and Samsung both infringed on each other’s patents, and ordered a partial ban of their products in South Korea.

The court also denied accusations that Samsung copied the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad.

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

The court also denied Apple’s claim that Samsung had illegally copied its design, and that the shape and big display screen existed in products before the iPhone and iPad.

“Based on the similarity in these features, it is not possible to assert that the two designs are similar,” the court said in a ruling issued in Korean that was translated by the AP into English.

But in a twist, the court also ruled that Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung had infringed on one of Apple’s patents related to the screen’s bounce-back feature, which causes the screen to bounce back when a user scrolls to an end image.

The court banned sales of products using the technology, including the Galaxy S2, in South Korea.

Sales of devices recently released by Samsung and Apple — including the iPhone 4S and the Galaxy S3 smartphones — were not affected.

US case

Court spokesman Kim Mun-sung said the court’s ruling was to take effect immediately, although companies often request that sanctions be suspended while they evaluate their legal options.

Nam Ki-young, a spokesman for Samsung, said the company has not decided what its next legal step might be. Apple did not respond to requests for comment.

The court also ordered each company to pay monetary compensation to its competitor. Samsung must pay Apple 25 million won ($22,000) while Apple must pay its rival 40 million won.

Legal experts not directly involved in the case said the ruling was favorable to Samsung since the company had won rare recognition from a court — that Apple infringed its wireless patents, which had been denied by courts in Europe.

Apple is suing Samsung for $2.5 billion and demanding that the court pull its most popular smartphones and computer tablets from the US market, making the case one of the biggest technology disputes in history.

Read: Jurors begin deliberations in Apple/Samsung patent trial

Read: Samsung extends lead over Apple in smartphone market

Read next:

Comments (18 Comments)

  • Its such BS. Whoever grants these patents like ‘a photo bounces back’ such rubbish. Patents should only be granted for substantial design and features. US is the worst they allowed Apple patent a ‘wedge shape’ notebook even though Sony et all had them out before. Apple patent trolling should be stopped

    Reply
    • I don’t understand how that “bounce back” feature can be copyrighted, it’s software. Using that logic you could argue there should only be one computer game per genre. It’s nuts!

      Reply
  • Brilliant! Shame that this couldn’t happen worldwide!
    Force them to sit down and back off with the patent bs!

    Reply
  • I always thought that most TVs look the same. Just as well apple don’t do TVs!

    Reply
  • apple makes me laugh…

    Reply
  • Delighted, like scawbaling spoilt children and now the judge has thrown out both their toys. Bounce back indeed, look the same, DA, their both flat computers. Thank god someone didn’t patent sliced bread.
    The whole international patent operation needs a drastic overhaul, it has become the realm of international conglomerates at the cost of human development.

    Reply
  • But if the iphone 5 is slimmer and longer then it would be similar to the longer and thinner galaxy s3. How could they get away with it.

    Urrrrr mer gherd.

    Reply
  • Can everyone not just get along :)

    Reply
  • Banning them both is the best solution. Hopefully will force them to come to an accommodation.

    Reply
  • I bet everyone scrolled straight to the end to test the “bounce back” feature

    Reply
  • At the risk of attracting the wrath of nearly everyone who has commented thus far I must disagree. The bounce back feature may seem like a very small thing but I would be sure it took someone a long time to come up with the idea and actually get it working. As such I think that the person who did so should be able to protect it. As someone mentioned that all TVs are the same, they are only the same in the fact that they can receive a signal but after that there are different technologies vying to give you the best sound, picture, Internet connectivity, remote controls that do this that and the other. A company must be able to protect its investment or there would be no progress. I agree the whole thing about the general shape of s tablet is a bit daft but it’s a fine line and I’d the design wasn’t so appealing Samsung wouldn’t have copied it. The new iPhone is meant to be taller, if rumours are true. I would say it was a better shape as I find the keyboard takes up too much room so the current format isn’t necessarily the best. If Samsung and others had looked and tried to improve rather than copy we wouldn’t be in this mess. Samsung make great products, I have a galaxy 1 so do apple, I have a 4s but they need to compete with each other not copy each other. That goes for all companies, I still hate megablocks as they are rubbish compared to Lego but maybe there wasn’t a strong enough patent in that case.

    Reply
    • bounce back feature probably took someones time to make it work I’m sure about that. but on the side note, some old phones ( non touch screen) had a feature hidden under # key, just hold it to switch in to silent. don’t know who came up with that idea, but it ended as feature which nearly every phone had and nobody was chasing others for that… apple just goes over the line.

      Reply
    • The difference with the bounce back feature is it’s software, and with software you can only copyright the code itself, you cannot copyright the function of the software itself. Writing software is exactly the same as writing a book. You cannot copyright the concept of a story, only the specific text therein. If Samsung hacked iOS and took the code directly from it then Apple are well within their rights to proceed to court; since Samsung developed their own code to perform similar function Apple should not be able to prevent it.
      Your Lego point isn’t valid here because Lego is a physical thing.

      Reply
  • This seems like the ‘smashing a toy into two pieces threat’ solution you use to punish two squabbling toddlers
    Although with a multimillion dollar legal services bill

    Reply

Add New Comment