Apple loses UK appeal over Samsung tablets, must run apology ads
U.S. courts havent been overly kind to Samsung Electronics Co. in its patent battle with Apple Inc., but the Korean tech company is having better luck across the pond, where a three-judge panel in Londons High Court upheld an earlier judges ruling that its tablet computers do not infringe the...
October 18, 2012 at 07:49 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
U.S. courts haven't been overly kind to Samsung Electronics Co. in its patent battle with Apple Inc., but the Korean tech company is having better luck across the pond, where a three-judge panel in London's High Court upheld an earlier judge's ruling that its tablet computers do not infringe the design of the iPad.
Samsung might not be so pleased with the rationale behind the original ruling, namely that Samsung's Galaxy tablets aren't “cool” enough to be confused with the iPad. But it will likely welcome the judges' order that Apple link to the original ruling on its U.K. website and place advertisements in several U.K. publications to “correct the damaging impression” that Samsung infringed on its product.
“[This case] is not about whether Samsung copied Apple's iPad,” Judge Robin Jacobs, a member of the appeals panel, wrote in his ruling. “Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: The issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law.” The appeals court found that there were several key differences between the two companies' tablets, including the inclusion of a logo on the Galaxy tablet and variations in the devices' sides.
Unless Apple successfully appeals the High Court's ruling, the verdict will apply throughout the European Union. In the past, courts across the continent have issued differing rulings on the case, with a German court granting a Europe-wide injunction against Samsung tablets earlier this summer. Jacob noted these discrepancies in his ruling, saying that “if courts around Europe simply say they do not agree with each other and give inconsistent decisions, Europe will be the poorer.”
Read more at Bloomberg Businessweek and BBC News.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the tech patent wars, see:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250