In Germany, reciprocal patent claims of Apple and Samsung are rejected
It may well be that the patent disputes of the South Korean and American companies are close to completion. At least, the German courts are already beginning to simply reject the patent claims of both companies. Apple sued Samsung for device unlocking technology. The Koreans tried to take over, having sued Apple for certain wireless technologies. German courts rejected both the first and second claims.
The judge explained the refusal by the fact that the technology for unlocking the device is still different, despite external similarity. So, in the description of the principle of operation of the technology specified in the patent, there is a significant difference between what Apple offers and what Samsung offers. It is worth noting that a little earlier the court of the United States (California) still accepted Apple’s lawsuit, and even sided with this company.
In Germany, it seems, everything is different. Here the court retained neutrality, rejecting bids from both companies. As for Samsung, this South Korean manufacturer sued because of the wireless GPRS and 3G technologies used by Apple. According to Samsung, Apple violated the company's patent by illegally using these technologies in their devices. Well, Apple, in turn, expressed dissatisfaction with the requirements of Samsung, refusing to pay for technology.
')
Everything would be fine, but both companies are going to again file counterclaims, considering themselves to be right. It would be nice if all these lawsuits became a stimulus for the revision of modern international patent legislation. Some experts have long been openly saying that the technological copyright protection mechanism, so to speak, has long outlived its usefulness. Previously, this scheme worked successfully, but now patent law has become too cumbersome and in many cases it is more harmful than useful.
Via reuters
The judge explained the refusal by the fact that the technology for unlocking the device is still different, despite external similarity. So, in the description of the principle of operation of the technology specified in the patent, there is a significant difference between what Apple offers and what Samsung offers. It is worth noting that a little earlier the court of the United States (California) still accepted Apple’s lawsuit, and even sided with this company.
In Germany, it seems, everything is different. Here the court retained neutrality, rejecting bids from both companies. As for Samsung, this South Korean manufacturer sued because of the wireless GPRS and 3G technologies used by Apple. According to Samsung, Apple violated the company's patent by illegally using these technologies in their devices. Well, Apple, in turn, expressed dissatisfaction with the requirements of Samsung, refusing to pay for technology.
')
Everything would be fine, but both companies are going to again file counterclaims, considering themselves to be right. It would be nice if all these lawsuits became a stimulus for the revision of modern international patent legislation. Some experts have long been openly saying that the technological copyright protection mechanism, so to speak, has long outlived its usefulness. Previously, this scheme worked successfully, but now patent law has become too cumbersome and in many cases it is more harmful than useful.
Via reuters
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/139395/
All Articles