India follows International Exhaustion - Delhi HC

In a most recent and landmark judgment on the issue of "exhaustion principle" in Indian trademark law, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has held that Indian trademark law follows an “international exhaustion” regime. 

The Bench comprising of Justices Pradeep Nandrajog and Siddharth Mridul partially allowed the appeal filed by Kapil Wadhwa and others (Appellants) against the judgment of Single Judge Justice Manmohan Singh in Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. Kapil Wadhwa & Ors., wherein the Single Judge had held the Appellants guilty of trademark infringement and had ruled that trademark law prohibits the sale of imported genuine products without the authorization of the registered proprietor in India.

 

The appeal was partially allowed by the Division Bench, thereby setting aside the judgment dated February 17, 2012 insofar as the Appellants had been restrained from importing printers, ink cartridges/toners bearing the trade mark Samsung/SAMSUNG and selling the same in India. However, the Appellants have still been injuncted from meta-tagging their website to that of Samsung. 

 

Way back in the single bench judgment of this case, Samsung Electronics Co. and its Indian subsidiary Samsung India had initially filed a suit claiming that the Appellants were selling genuine and unaltered Samsung printers imported directly from foreign markets into India without due authorization.  The Single Judge had held that the Appellants were guilty of trademark violation. It was against this judgment, the Appellants had filed an appeal.

 

Samsung was reprsented by Pravin Anand of Anand & Anand while the Kapil Wadhwa and others were represented Saikrishna Rajagopal on instructions from Shwetasree Majumdar of Fidus Law Chambers.

 

The Court observed that the single judge adopted an “erroneous approach” to conclude that unless goods are imported into India by the consent of the registered proprietor of a trade mark “the act of importation is not permitted” as per sub Section 3 of Section 30 (of the Trademarks Act), which provision provides for “acquisition by consent for the purposes of import”. In the appeal, the Court recognized the the principle of international exhaustion under the Trademarks Act, 1999 and observed that the same was clear from the fact that the term ‘in any geographical area’, in the Statement of Objects and Reasons to the Trade Mark Bill 1999 “clearly envisaged that the legislative intent was to recognize the principle of international exhaustion of rights to control further sale of goods once they were put on the market by the registered proprietor of the trade mark”. 

News Link 

Copy of the Judgment

Samsung fights back

In a move which may give Samsung Electronics, a much needed relief, Samsung  on Tuesday  filed a new lawsuit against Apple in a US court, contending the iPhone 5 has infringed on Samsung's patents. In a statement, Samsung said: "we have little choice but to take the steps necessary to protect our innovations and intellectual property rights."

In another major relief for Samsung on Tuesday, a US court removed a sales ban against Samsung Electronics's Galaxy Tab 10.1 won by Apple Inc in a patent dispute, allowing the South Korean electronics maker to sell the product in the United States.

Injunction had been put in place ahead of a month-long trial that pitted iPhone maker Apple against Samsung in a closely watched legal battle that ended with a resounding victory for Apple on many of its patent violation claims. 

However,  jury found that Samsung had not violated patents that was the basis for the tablet injunction and Samsung argued the sales ban should be lifted. Will Samsung be able to gain some ground, or will it bite the dust for patents infringement? We shall have to wait and watch.

Samsung's victory in Japan

After its defeat in the US market in one of the most bitter patent litigation, Samsung won the patent litigation against Apple as the verdict of a Tokyo court on Friday dismissed Apple Inc's claim that Samsung had infringed on its patent. This verdict is the latest ruling in the global legal battle that surrounds the two smartphone giants in the patent litigation.

"We will continue to offer highly innovative products to consumers, and continue our contributions toward the mobile industry's development," a statement came from the company after the verdict. It is still not clear on the part of the Apple whether it would prefer an appeal against a judgment. The lawsuit was filed by Apple in August last year.

Around the world, Samsung is still party to several patent suits filed by Apple over whether Samsung smartphones, which relies on Google Inc.'s Android technology, illegally used Apple designs, ideas or technology.

This victory came as a good news for Samsung, after its defeat in the similar patent litigation a week before, in which it was decided by a jury in California that Samsung products illegally used such Apple creations as the "bounce-back" feature when a user scrolls to an end image, and the ability to zoom text with a tap of a finger.

Source

Out of the US market soon?

After its victory in the landmark patent litigation $1.05 billion verdict against Samsung Electronics Co., the Apple Inc., on Monday provided a the U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh a list of eight Samsung products it wants to be out of the US market and banned, which also includes the popular Galaxy model smartphones.

The list of the products that Apple wants out are all smartphones: Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S2 AT&T, Galaxy S2, Galaxy S2 T-Mobile, Galaxy S2 Epic 4G, Galaxy S Showcase, Droid Charge and Galaxy Prevail.

Galaxy Tab 10.1 was banned from the U.S. market earlier in the last week of June this year, after it was found to be likely to violate a "design patent." 

Though, the jury found that Samsung computer tablet didn't infringe that particular patent, but it was found that it infringed three Apple's software patents, including the popular "bounce-back" and pinch-to-zoom features. Therefore, Samsung is now asking for that ban to be lifted after this finding.

20th September is the date scheduled for hearing and discussing Apple's demands for the sales bans. 

Source

Apple vs. Samsung: Is the verdict pro-consumer?

The victory of Apple against Samsung in the famous patent case indicates the arrival of hard days for its rivals. Samsung has termed its defeat as loss to consumers; on the contrary, Apple has termed its victory as the gain for the American patent system and innovation. The judgment is symptomatic of the high investment in innovation to be made by Apple’s rivals, which indicates higher costs for everyone.

Though, Samsung will have to pay $1.05 billion to Apple. But ultimately, it is its customers, who will have to pay higher prices as the device manufacturers pay more to Apple for license of the technology they already use. It would result in several Samsung and Android devices going out of the market, whereby the consumer will face shortage of choice.

Following are the devices that will be adversely affected:

1.      Galaxy S,

2.      Galaxy S II,

3.      Nexus S,

4.      Mesmerize,

5.      Vibrant,

6.      Fascinate,

7.      Skyrocket,

8.      Continuum,

9.      Prevail,

10.  Infuse,

11.  Gem,

12.  Mesmerize,

13.  Indulge,

14.  Replenish,

15.  Epic 4G Touch,

16.  Droid Charge,

17.  Nexus S smart-phones

18.  Galaxy Tab and

19.  Galaxy Tab 10.1

The verdict may result in a gain for Apple in terms of market share and profits in the form of sharp rise in its share prices after the verdict. But the verdict does not lie in the favour of consumers for many reasons.

Choice and competition must prevail in the market, which is not going to be the aftermath of the decision. This may make the losers unite to take revenge from Apple to often beat Apple in whichever way they can.

Further, as observed by Judge Richard Posner in an earlier Apple versus Motorola case, Apple often adopts patent litigation as a tool not for safeguarding breakthrough innovation, but to stall and delay competitors. 

Conclusively, there is an open question. Does the verdict favour the market and consumers of smart-phones?

Apple vs. Samsung: remarkable day for Apple

In a much awaited judgment that has been a landmark one in the IP realm, to be precise, patent realm, the US court jury has ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1.05 billion. There is a room for appeal against the judgment.

Giving brief insights of the case, Apple Inc. filed its patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co., in April 2011, claiming $2.5 billion. Samsung Electronics Co. fired back with its own lawsuit seeking $399 million.

In its verdict, the US court jury in California rejected all Samsung's claims against Apple. However, the jurors also decided against some of Apple's claims involving the two dozen Samsung devices at issue, declining to award the full $2.5 billion Apple demanded.

The U.S. trial was the latest skirmish between the two tech giants as they have filed similar lawsuits in eight other countries, including South Korea, Germany, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, Britain, France and Australia.

In the home court ruling, Samsung won global patent battle against Apple as judges in a Seoul court held that Samsung didn't copy the look and feel of the iPhone and ruled that Apple infringed on Samsung's wireless technology. But they also held that Samsung had violated Apple's technology behind the feature that causes a screen to bounce back when a user scrolls to an end image. Both sides were ordered to pay limited damages.

Before the US Court's verdict against it, Samsung had also lost previously in European court, where judges ruled that Samsung patents were part of industry standards that must be licensed under fair terms to competitors.

News Source

Apple vs. Samsung: Trial to be over soon.

The most popular and most complex patent lawsuit between two giants, is about to be over. Apple and Samsung both have finished presenting evidence in the patent infringement trial, involving the technology in each company’s smart-phones and tablet computers.

Both sides seem to be submitting closing arguments on 21^st August, before the jury in U.S. District Court in San Jose begins its deliberations the next day. On 17^th of this month, which was the last day of testimony, both sides presented rebuttal witnesses to reinforce their sides. 

News Source 

Trial Day: Apple alleges that Samsung copied the icons of iPhone

According to sources, in the yesterday’s court proceedings, the Apple Inc. alleged that Samsung Electronics Co. changed the design of its smart-phone icons in order give it resemblance to the icons on the iPhone. In the support of its claim, it presented an internal Samsung document to a jury in California.

In the excerpts of a 2010 internal Samsung report, which was presented by the Apple Inc., the Samsung did a side-by- side comparison of its icon designs next to those of the iPhone. As per the recommendations of the report, Samsung altered icons that weren’t as user-friendly as those on Apple’s devices.

Susan Kare, a former Apple graphics designer said in the court that the icons for the companies’ current competing products are “confusingly similar”, both being square with round edges and displayed on the device in rows of four. She also told the jury that while visiting the office of Apple’s lawyers, she mistook a Samsung smart-phone for an iPhone.
Source

Apple v. Samsung: Early Days of iPhone in the Courtroom

In the famous multibillion-dollar patent showdown, Apple Inc, on Friday, deployed two of its executives as ammunition, including a software chief who assembled the design team for the original iPhone. 

In the court room, the Apple Software Chief Scott Forstall narrated the early days of iPhone development. According to the testimony the secret design work was codenamed as the “Purple Project”. He further added that he pinned a note on the door of the dorm, “Fight Club,” a reference to the movie’s screed to ensure what happened behind closed doors remained there.

The entire aim of the testimony was strengthening Apple’s legal argument and to prove that it was too much involved to develop products such as the iPhone and iPad, which have been “slavishly copied” by rival Samsung. Forstall further added that there was need of secrecy as Apple was making a new phone “out of whole cloth.”

Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller, used a video slide showing that Apple spent more than $1 billion on U.S. advertising on the iPhone and iPad between 2008 and 2011 and told the jury how Samsung’s copying has fostered consumer confusion and made it harder to market Apple products.

Facing the questions from the rival as to whether the iPhone 5, (set to be released in September), would have a different design than the iPhone 4S, Schiller declined to discuss the design, saying it was confidential.

The trial continued on Friday after the U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh rejected Apple’s bid to end the case immediately with a judgment in its favor.

Koh also condemned Samsung’s legal team for its “theatrics” and “sideshow,” but refused to stop the trial. The trial resumes Monday morning with the testimony of another Samsung executive and several Apple experts.

Source

Smartphone Patent War: Apple versus Samsung

On 15^th April, 2011, Apple sued Samsung, alleging that the later copied the look and feel of its iPhone and iPad in its product Galaxy S line. Apple said “Rather than innovate and develop its own technology and a unique Samsung style for its smart phone products and computer tablets, Samsung chose to copy Apple's technology, user interface and innovative style in these infringing products,” according to the Wall Street Journal

This suit was later expanded to include 13 more products, including the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Nexus S 4G, and the Droid Charge.

Samsung filed a countersuit, targeting Apple for infringing on five patents relating to wireless networking technology (though it later dropped one countersuit that was filed in a U.S. federal court to simplify its proceedings).
In 2010 Apple had also dragged HTC (for 20 instances of patent infringement) and Motorola (alleging that its multi-touch smart-phones use Apple-owned intellectual property) in the patent battle. By August, 2011, there were 19 ongoing lawsuits (at present the number of lawsuits is more than 50) in 12 courts in nine countries on four continents.
Judgment of Various Courts across the Globe.

Country	Judgment	At present
Germany	Court blocked the sale of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, with the exception of the Netherlands. Later the court tightened its ruling and only applied the ban to sales within Germany	Appeal by Samsung
Australia	Samsung agreed not to sell the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia until it settles an ongoing patent dispute with Apple.
Netherlands	A Dutch court in The Hague, imposed a ban on the Galaxy smart-phones but not the tablets, at the request of Apple.

Apart from the abovementioned courts, the parties are also fighting in France, Japan, USA, International Trade Commission (ITC), United Kingdom, Italy and South Korea.

Current Status.

In the lawsuit pending before a US District Court, on 1^st August, 2012, Apple said in its filing with U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh that a July 31 statement from Samsung’s lawyer, (wherein Samsung intended to convey to jurors, through the media, arguments contesting Apple’s central allegations that Samsung copied the iPhone and iPad) was “bad faith litigation misconduct”, which was meant to prejudice the jury. Hence, it requested the court to issue sanctions granting judgment that Apple’s asserted phone-design patent claims are valid and infringed by Samsung.

Samsung, in an 2^nd August filing, countered that Apple’s request should be rejected because Samsung’s statement was protected free speech.

The court dismissed Apple’s request for a judge to punish its lawyer’s public disclosure of evidence excluded from trial

The case is Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., 11- cv-01846, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).