By:Asher Moses
Source:http://www.smh.com.au
Samsung is suing Apple to stop sales of the iPhone 4S in Australia, just days after the device went on sale around the world.
Both companies are now shelling out millions in legal fees to fight more than 20 patent infringement cases in 10 countries. Samsung recently vowed to shift its strategy from "passive" to being "more aggressive" in targeting Apple for "free riding" on its patents.
Samsung filed a suit seeking a ban on sales of the iPhone 4S in the Federal Court's New South Wales Registry today, and separately lodged an appeal against last week's decision by the court to temporarily ban sales of its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia.
Suits against the iPhone 4S had already been launched in Italy and France but today Samsung filed preliminary injunction motions in Tokyo and Australia. A similar case in the Netherlands was dismissed on Friday.
Apple Australia declined to comment.
It is unclear why Samsung did not file its suit before the device went on sale. Telstra alone has sold tens of thousands of iPhone 4 units in the opening three days - "our highest-selling iPhone launch to date" - according to Telstra's director of mobile, Andrew Volard.
Senior patent lawyer Mark Summerfield, from Watermark in Melbourne, said he believed the delay in filing the suit would make it much harder for Samsung to make a case for pulling the iPhone 4S from shelves. He said Samsung may have been waiting for the Federal Court to hand down its preliminary injunction decision for the Galaxy Tab 10.1, which occurred last Thursday.
"I don't think the chances are very high that it will actually be pulled off the shelves," Summerfield said, adding he believed any resolution would most likely be around the payment of royalties.
Independent intellectual property expert Florian Mueller said he did not believe Samsung would be successful in its bid to block the iPhone 4S as the patents it was relying on were "essential to the 3G telecommunications standard".
Samsung recently surpassed Apple in global smartphone sales for the third quarter.
"Samsung's preliminary injunction request in Australia cites three patent infringements related to wireless telecommunications standards, specifically Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) and HSPA," Samsung said in a statement.
"The injunction request in Japan cites infringements on one High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) standard-related patent and three user interface patents, which seriously violate Samsung's intellectual property.
"In light of these violations, Samsung believes the sale of such Apple devices should be injuncted. Apple has continued to violate our patent rights and free ride on our technology. We will steadfastly protect our intellectual property."
Earlier today it was revealed that despite the injunction on the Galaxy Tab 10.1, many Australians were still ordering the device from online stores.
Samsung has suffered setbacks in court in recent days. In addition to the temporary ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales in Australia, in the US a judge said Samsung infringed Apple's iPad patents while in the Netherlands a court dismissed Samsung's request to block sales of the iPhone and iPad in that country.
Peter Black, an intellectual property law lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology, said it was important to note the difference between an interim injunction and a final injunction. Last week's ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia was an interim injunction until the court can make a final decision on the patent infringement case, which is due next year.
"It is easier to obtain an interim injunction than a final injunction," he said. This was because an interim injunction only required that a court be satisfied that the applicant has a prima facie case, meaning that it is more probable than not that it will succeed at trial.
He questioned whether the patent system in Australia was actually promoting innovation in software and mobile technologies, or whether the patent system and these endless lawsuits were "in fact stifling competition and innovation, with the customer being the ultimate loser".
In seeking to block the sale of the iPhone 4S in Australia, Samsung is relying on the following patents:
Method and apparatus for transmitting/receiving packet data using pre-defined length indicator in a mobile communication system (WCDMA)
Method and apparatus for data transmission in a mobile telecommunication system supporting enhanced uplink service (HSPA)
Method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving data with high reliability in a mobile communication system supporting packet data transmission (HSPA)
Source: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/samsung-sues-to-block-iphone-4s-in-australia-20111017-1lszh.html#ixzz1b1On1HQI
Source:http://www.smh.com.au
Samsung is suing Apple to stop sales of the iPhone 4S in Australia, just days after the device went on sale around the world.
Both companies are now shelling out millions in legal fees to fight more than 20 patent infringement cases in 10 countries. Samsung recently vowed to shift its strategy from "passive" to being "more aggressive" in targeting Apple for "free riding" on its patents.
Samsung filed a suit seeking a ban on sales of the iPhone 4S in the Federal Court's New South Wales Registry today, and separately lodged an appeal against last week's decision by the court to temporarily ban sales of its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia.
Suits against the iPhone 4S had already been launched in Italy and France but today Samsung filed preliminary injunction motions in Tokyo and Australia. A similar case in the Netherlands was dismissed on Friday.
Apple Australia declined to comment.
It is unclear why Samsung did not file its suit before the device went on sale. Telstra alone has sold tens of thousands of iPhone 4 units in the opening three days - "our highest-selling iPhone launch to date" - according to Telstra's director of mobile, Andrew Volard.
Senior patent lawyer Mark Summerfield, from Watermark in Melbourne, said he believed the delay in filing the suit would make it much harder for Samsung to make a case for pulling the iPhone 4S from shelves. He said Samsung may have been waiting for the Federal Court to hand down its preliminary injunction decision for the Galaxy Tab 10.1, which occurred last Thursday.
"I don't think the chances are very high that it will actually be pulled off the shelves," Summerfield said, adding he believed any resolution would most likely be around the payment of royalties.
Independent intellectual property expert Florian Mueller said he did not believe Samsung would be successful in its bid to block the iPhone 4S as the patents it was relying on were "essential to the 3G telecommunications standard".
Samsung recently surpassed Apple in global smartphone sales for the third quarter.
"Samsung's preliminary injunction request in Australia cites three patent infringements related to wireless telecommunications standards, specifically Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) and HSPA," Samsung said in a statement.
"The injunction request in Japan cites infringements on one High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) standard-related patent and three user interface patents, which seriously violate Samsung's intellectual property.
"In light of these violations, Samsung believes the sale of such Apple devices should be injuncted. Apple has continued to violate our patent rights and free ride on our technology. We will steadfastly protect our intellectual property."
Earlier today it was revealed that despite the injunction on the Galaxy Tab 10.1, many Australians were still ordering the device from online stores.
Samsung has suffered setbacks in court in recent days. In addition to the temporary ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales in Australia, in the US a judge said Samsung infringed Apple's iPad patents while in the Netherlands a court dismissed Samsung's request to block sales of the iPhone and iPad in that country.
Peter Black, an intellectual property law lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology, said it was important to note the difference between an interim injunction and a final injunction. Last week's ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia was an interim injunction until the court can make a final decision on the patent infringement case, which is due next year.
"It is easier to obtain an interim injunction than a final injunction," he said. This was because an interim injunction only required that a court be satisfied that the applicant has a prima facie case, meaning that it is more probable than not that it will succeed at trial.
He questioned whether the patent system in Australia was actually promoting innovation in software and mobile technologies, or whether the patent system and these endless lawsuits were "in fact stifling competition and innovation, with the customer being the ultimate loser".
In seeking to block the sale of the iPhone 4S in Australia, Samsung is relying on the following patents:
Method and apparatus for transmitting/receiving packet data using pre-defined length indicator in a mobile communication system (WCDMA)
Method and apparatus for data transmission in a mobile telecommunication system supporting enhanced uplink service (HSPA)
Method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving data with high reliability in a mobile communication system supporting packet data transmission (HSPA)
Source: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/samsung-sues-to-block-iphone-4s-in-australia-20111017-1lszh.html#ixzz1b1On1HQI
