Apple loses patent lawsuit in Japan

Apple loses patent lawsuit in Japan

Summary: A Tokyo judge finds Samsung Electronics innocent of infringing on Apple's patent relating to the synchronizing of music and video data in devices to servers.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Patents, Apple, Legal, Samsung
40

Apple has lost the latest round in its series of worldwide patent disputes with South Korean rival Samsung Electronics, after a Japanese court ruled that the latter did not infringe on Cupertino's media transfer technology.

According to Bloomberg's report on Friday, Tokyo District Judge Tamotsu Shoji cleared Samsung's Galaxy smartphones and the Galaxy Tab of having violating Apple's patent on synchronizing music and video data in mobile devices to backend servers.

Cupertino had sought 100 million yen (US$1.27 million) in damages, the report noted.

The ruling is the latest of several patent lawsuits involving both companies, with courts in South Korea and the United States issuing verdicts on different patent disputes earlier in August.

The Korean court found that both companies had infringed on each other's patents, with Samsung having to pay 25 million won (US$22,000) for violating one patent and Apple penalized 20 million won (US$17,649) for each of the two Samsung patents it violated.

The verdict issued by the U.S. court was more clear-cut after a jury found Samsung to have willfully and knowingly infringed on Apple's patents regarding bounceback and tap-to-zoom technologies, among others. As a result, Samsung has to pay US$1.05 billion to Apple while the latter has filed to ban sales of eight of the Korean phonemaker's smartphones in the United States in addition to the existing ban on the Galaxy 10.1 tablet.

Topics: Patents, Apple, Legal, Samsung

Kevin Kwang

About Kevin Kwang

A Singapore-based freelance IT writer, Kevin made the move from custom publishing focusing on travel and lifestyle to the ever-changing, jargon-filled world of IT and biz tech reporting, and considered this somewhat a leap of faith. Since then, he has covered a myriad of beats including security, mobile communications, and cloud computing.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

40 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Really? But those 9 stupid jury in California said Samsung did infringe.

    California based company Apple Bribed Californian Jury. The Court is 10 miles away from the Headquater of Apple. This trial which happened in California is totally set up right from the beginning.
    patrick987890790
    • After this court's

      decision, the one in the U.K. and others, those infamous jurors do look stupid. As does American judicial systems. Judge Koh, you look smart, bias and corrupt, actually.
      eulampius
      • how so?

        Korean court even found that they infringed... makes courts that say they didn't look more corrupt or stupid.

        but in reality.. it comes down to... different countries have different laws! Yes its perfectly possible to have infringement in one country and not in another for the same thing, as not everyone sees eye to eye.
        doh123
      • iHater troll

        It sucks that you cannot accept the fact that your precious Samsung was found guilty sucks for you anyhow. However unless you can come up with any proof to your allegations of Judge Koh being corrupt I suggest you accept the fact that Samsung was found guilty of infringement and move on. This denial is not only getting old but makes you look misinformed. Thanks.
        athynz
        • I agree

          for now. Let's wait for the appeal shall we before we become to fixated on this win. I presume you have read the jury interview transcripts about prior art and punitive damages?

          All those itards were right, this verdict has benefited the public at large, well at least the one's reading about the jury decisions. Some of the interviews are priceless and highlight just how wrong the basis, for some of the key decisions, actually was. So enjoy it while you can itards.
          Little Old Man
        • I am a freedom troll

          My little Apple troll, I have not bought anything from Samsung. Have only one A10 android device and installed Debian on it (sd card). I would be more interested in a MeeGo device, than Android, however, Android is mostly free, that's why it is so good. The Apple's assault is an attempt to take the freedom away and stifle the competition. Translate this into the language of those who don't give a damn... Innovation is a synonym of freedom. Say, Apple would be nowhere without FreeBSD, GNU Bash, CUPS and more.
          USA is the only country where cases like these are decided by juries. Read this http://www.zdnet.com/patents-shouldnt-apply-to-the-obvious-7000003547/
          eulampius
          • Eulo

            LOL!!!
            do u know that the Japanese suit is based on different set of claims which are different from the ones in the california's court?

            Further the japs pity Sammy as iPhone is the top seller in Japan while Sammy is like 5th place. Sammy doesn't even wish to disclose its sales figures in Japan do u know why? Go
            Figure it out.

            One more thing : u said we should ban all IT patents : ok! Please tell Sammy to drop its patents on 4G coz it's STUPID to patent a so called technology that everyone will be using or will use just like some of u clowns who said that patenting design (rectangular corners) is absurd. Well u can make your phone beveled not rectangular, but can u patent 4G when everyone will be using it? Or let me rephrase this question : if apple today patents 4G technology and sue Sammy, will u say ok to it? of course not coz apple is the evil empire.

            But we know that Sammy not only patents 4G, but it intends to sue apple if the company sells iPhone with 4G technology.

            So please don't be double standard!!!
            rloke01
          • Apple sued

            not Sammy, didn't you forget. 4G technology vs. "rectangle with a rounded corners" and "square icons" technologies? With those Sammy's patents being exhausted, according to the jury? Some companies use patents as a protective measure not an assault (as the naive Sammy did) . Apple, Microsoft and Oracle are evil enough to choose the latter course of the patent trolls. They will drive us back to the Stone Age if not checked soon!
            eulampius
          • Sammy sues

            Yes of course is Sammy!
            They have 12% patent of the 4G technology and why do they patent it? coz they wish to corner the market with it. Thats why.

            NOw that Apple is introducing its new Iphone, Sammy will use the litigation approach (just as some clowns accuse apple of being lame using litigation) to derail Apples new iphone. The pot calling the kettle black isnt it???

            Sammy is enjoying every bit of it, why? coz theres clowns out there who hates apple for no reason or reasons that sammy also commits. Sammy loves that apply fights with google coz sammy will be the ultimate winner.

            Cheers!!
            rloke01
          • Hmmm

            Our point of view, that Apple and the court were unrighteous seems to be more popular among the zdnet readers.... according to the upvotes. What would that mean???
            eulampius
          • yeah hmm?

            The point of apple being "unrighteous" seems to draw attention from readers, its like reading gutter news on a sunday afternoon on some politican having an affair.

            What would that mean?

            Well... It means humans have weaknesses such as having nothing else to do, or plain old jealousy..and they are ready to debase anyone who does very well in business or in sports.
            rloke01
    • Bribery is a serious allegation

      Do you have any evidence? It's one thing to question the correctness of the verdict and whether the jury followed the instructions provided; it's quite another to accuse them of corruption.
      John L. Ries
      • Who will sure first

        Judge Koh for slander/defamation or apple because they patented the written word?
        Little Old Man
      • Does Judge Koh

        have any idevices? Corruption of the mind (and soul) is more pronounced than the pollution of the wallet. Incompetence, a plague of our society.... Google was lucky to get a competent judge Alsup, otherwise it could have also ended not very well. Poor Samsung was not.

        Most importantly, these case should not exist in the first place, IT patents must be abolished!
        eulampius
  • Apparently sheep don't read instructions - they just make up their own laws

    Didn't that jury foreman admit to a conflict of interest? Apparently the sheep didn't bother reading the instructions either. Why read 109 boring pages of real law when you can just nullify it and make up your own. Oh yeah, look for a few mortgages to get mysteriously paid off over the next year.
    Samuel Clemens
    • The appeal should be interesting...

      It is blatantly clear that this jury did not even read their instructions, let alone follow them:
      http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120828225612963
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425051
      Zogg
      • It's blatantly obvious

        That you are grasping at straws here. It's crystal clear the jury read, understood, and followed their instructions and found the proper party guilty. This alone makes that quite clear:

        "As I have told others that have interviewed me, for me one of the most decisive pieces of evidence was reading the minutes for myself of a meeting that was held at a very high level between Google executives and Samsung executives, where it was for a tablet and Google was concerned that for the sake of their operating system that the look and feel and the methodology that they [Samsung] were using to create their tablet was getting too close to what Apple was doing.

        And in the memo themselves - remember this was minutes - they stated that Google demanded that they back away from that design. And later there was a follow-up memo among themselves, these executives, and in black and white it says: we elect to not pass this information down to the divisions that were actually involved in the design."
        athynz
        • You lie

          The jury admitted that they did not read the instructions and did not consider prior art. I call you a liar.
          kirovs@...
          • @Kirov...clearly uninformed...looking foolish

            Before the judge let the jury leave the court to start deliberations...before the closing argument...the judge read every single page of those instructions out loud to the jury...every single word. The jury then had the written instructions in the jury room to refer to if they needed to...but they had already heard every word; they knew their instructions.

            Please do your homework before making uninformed, iHating comments. You just make yourself and the argument you try to make look foolish
            UGottaBKidding
          • Here is what Gizmodo said

            "The foreman told a court representative that the jurors had reached a decision without needing the instructions."
            http://gizmodo.com/5938219/why-the-apple-v-samsung-ruling-may-not-hold-up
            They explicitly violated the instructions by awarding punitive damages, which is not within their duty and is underscored in the instructions.
            kirovs@...